For a while now I’ve been watching the stats for a guy who’s been pretty friendly with me and has given me access to his Google Analytics reports. His business model is one that at least some of you would have problems with… He runs a blog that consists solely of embedded videos from sources like ning and xtube. He’s not uploading them or hosting them, but he is facilitating the viewing of them by using the embed codes and he’s undoubtedly sending traffic to the “problem” ning sites as well…
I’m not a content producer, so I don’t have strong feelings on the subject of piracy. I see the situation as something similar to what the record industry has faced and research there says the people who pirate the most also buy the most and a heavy-handed approach isn’t always best, so I’m generally pretty ambivalent.
What I’d like to know is how far you think an affiliate can go with an embedded video blog without 1) clearly crossing the line to illegal activity that’s likely to draw a lawsuit or 2) pissing off one’s sponsors to the point that it creates problems working with them (worst case scenario is getting dropped).
I’m a New Yorker, and NY is big on taking advantages business opportunities - especially ones involving shifts in the market place. Hell, my neighborhood is surrounded by an ethnic neighborhood which was the drug capital of NY in the '80s because the ethnic group saw drug dealing as a perfectly acceptable entrepreneurial activity. I’d like to pursue what I’ve learned from watching the blogger who’s been friendly with me - I think I can improve on his business model and made it more profitable. But I also don’t want it to go so far that I get sued or have significant relationship problems with sponsors.
So what’s likely to be “low risk”?
Obviously hosted videos from sponsors are completely OK - but I'm pretty sure there aren't enough of them in the niche I want to go after to keep the site active enough that people would keep coming back.
Clips off tube sites with good reputations (e.g. RocketTube) should be considered OK...
XTube has been pretty "clean" lately (there are people who seem to challenge everything - forcing it through a review process) - I'm thinking that's a decent source, though there is a problem with the embed codes going bad.
How about promo clips off things like ning sites? Those should be OK since they were put out for public consumption to start with.
Clips from ning sites where you know who the producer is and have a call to action directing views to the pay site or VOD site with the legit (high res) version?
Short clips off ning sites that are about the length of promo clips but where you don't know the sponsor?
I know some of those won't be liked by some of you... Just trying to test the limits a bit... :D
Please don’t feel like I’m some huge pirate for testing the waters on this. If I were a big pirate I wouldn’t be asking these questions - I’d just do whatever I felt like doing…
I’ve already talked to one of you as well as a rep at an affiliate program. Just trying to get a broader perspective…
They all sound okay by me EXCEPT the last one. I don’t believe there is implied consent on that one at all. But if it is a true NICHE-niche then the community may be small enough to easily determine the source of content your final question refers to.
They all sound okay by me EXCEPT the last one. I don’t believe there is implied consent on that one at all. But if it is a true NICHE-niche then the community may be small enough to easily determine the source of content your final question refers to.[/QUOTE]
Thanks… Looks like I should have put them in an ordered list so we could talk about them in terms of numbers…
It sounds like you’re OK with it as long as the source is given credit. But what if (on the next to last one) the video in question is a full scene from a DVD? The argument for it being OK is that these things are almost always low res and you can do an upsell of “View the high res version of this scene at SponsorSite.com”. If that’s not OK, what length is OK?
Content should not be used by any blogger without the permission of the content owner. (Of course, if the content owner in his/her TOS says that promo clips can be freely distributed, it’s a different story.)
And I think the argument that the content is embedded and therefore the blogger isn’t responsible would probably not last very long in a legal proceeding. To the average Joe who visits a blog site and sees videos there, he doesn’t know or care if the videos are actually hosted somewhere else. But he will keep coming back to that blog to see the free content. The blogger is therefore getting value, be that page views, “stickiness”, visibility, sales to whatever affiliate programs they are members of, notariety, or whatever else, as a result of somebody else’s copyrighted work being effectively displayed on their site.
If the blogger is in touch with the content producer and the content is being used to directly promote the site or DVDs the content producer offers for sale, that’s a different story. Otherwise, absent permission granted in the producer’s TOS to use promotional content for any purpose, the blogger is likely in copyright violation.
Wow - that’s prohibitively restrictive - it may not provide enough content to run a viable blog (depending on the niche focus of the site)… If I understand you correctly you’re ruling out content from Tube sites as well - you’re saying you have to get the content directly from the source. But then there are sites like RocketTube where the sponsors upload the content to the Tube site… And what you’re saying rules out nearly all amateur content since that’s uploaded to places like XTube. In that case XTube is their distribution channel and they have the option to allow or disallow viewing via embed codes… So maybe that’s OK?
Wouldn’t the content owner have to show they were damaged in some way if it went to court? In the case of a promo clip that’s directing people to purchase memberships at their site, it seems that would be somewhat difficult. They could make the argument that it caused them to be overexposed, but if they made money off it, it weakens their case.
Of course, they could use it as a reason to drop the affiliate - that’s their prerogative - that may or may not be a good business decision…
I was really speaking strictly from a copyright rights owner’s standpoint.
if the content is promotional content that was uploaded by an affiliate (or by the sponsor) to a tube site, and (presumably) is watermarked, then the sponsor benefits by having the blogger post it on his/her site, so that’s not really an issue. But again, it would depend on the license that the sponsor grants to affiliates for use of the content.
The other thing here is… the affiliate ends up getting ripped off if the blogger takes sponsor content from a tube site and uploads it, because the affiliate’s link isn’t present in an embedded video (at least, not till tube sites get more sophisticated with in-video linking.) If the affiliate has put his own domain watermark on the content (with permission of the content owner) then that’s workable, but that’s iffy for the copyright holder.
Amateur content is sort of in a different league; generally the tube sites TOS say that if you are uploading amateur content, you’re giving the tube site permission to use it. But an affiliate uploading sponsor content can’t grant those rights to the tube site because the affiliate has no rights in the content.
As far as damages… if the copyright for the content is registered (as it should be for all studios, but most of them don’t bother), then there’s a statutory fine for use of the content without express written permission. I believe it is $25,000 per infringement. The rights owner doesn’t have to show actual damages or loss. If the copyright is not registered within x months (I think 12) of publication, then the copyright holder can only claim actual damages, which obviously is a much higher standard and typically yields a lot less money for the rightsholder.
Do you know how many times we have found our pirated content watermarked with someone elseâs url?? You cannot trust a watermark as a sign that the content is legit.
We also currently have a case where the person embedded one of our clips in his page from a pirate tube site. Guess what? Heâs liable for it and he ending up having to pay us for it. He had âeditorial controlâ over the choice of the content, embedded the clip into his site, and profited from advertising banners surrounding the pirated file. This is also especially true for clips from Ning sitesâ¦.they are almost all pirated clips!
It usually comes down to common senseâ¦.if you donât know where the content is coming from, then donât use it. If you have any questions then ask the site operators for a more specific definition of where the content is coming from. Itâs really that easyâ¦ask first!.
Interesting, that just proves the point that its not “safe” to use videos from Tube sites on your own site. If the clips are stolen you end up being liable, if I understand you right?
[quote=Titanmen;20886]Do you know how many times we have found our pirated content watermarked with someone elseâs url?? You cannot trust a watermark as a sign that the content is legit.
We also currently have a case where the person embedded one of our clips in his page from a pirate tube site. Guess what? Heâs liable for it and he ending up having to pay us for it. He had âeditorial controlâ over the choice of the content, embedded the clip into his site, and profited from advertising banners surrounding the pirated file. This is also especially true for clips from Ning sitesâ¦.they are almost all pirated clips!
It usually comes down to common senseâ¦.if you donât know where the content is coming from, then donât use it. If you have any questions then ask the site operators for a more specific definition of where the content is coming from. Itâs really that easyâ¦ask first!.[/quote]
Thanks for your comments. Not really what I wanted to hear, but what I needed to hear. I’ll stick to sponsor content, and amateur stuff from tube sites known for genuine amateur videos and/or tube sites with really good reputations for keeping things legal.
I’ll always tell you what you need to hear, not always what you want to hear.