Forum Moderators: open
YouTube, in its quest to make nice with copyright holders, has partnered with Nexicon, a Malibu-based digital rights management provider.Under their arrangement, Nexicon will monitor YouTube for copyrighted material. When Nexicon identifies videos that violate a copyright, it will give the copyright owner the option to have the videos removed from the site or to leave them up and monetize them.
[blog.wired.com...]
(It seems this is just an eye catcher subject or I miss something?)
...they are suggesting that a link directly to the file will never be provided...
Where?
The article doesn't talk nor suggest nothing about the direct link (or I'm missing someting).
Well... I think the journalist was writing another article and mixed the headlines.
Know what else would make users happy? If videos on YouTube could be downloaded. It's not impossible -- anyone could probably figure out how to do it. But given the fact that YouTube technically could track videos offline (for advertising purposes) with available software, and given the fact that users want the option to download videos, why isn't it officially possible?..........
Followed by:
But it will never happen on YouTube, says Forrester analyst James McQuivey."I don't think YouTube has any incentive to create that experience," says McQuivey.
In other words you can download if you jump through a few hoops but you're not going to see a link to the content to "legally" download them. I'd imagine somewhere in the fine print of the user agreement is line a that says something about storing the files. It's not such a stretch, when you tape something on VHS you are legally entitled to watch it once. You can't amass a collection of video. It's supposed be used as temporary storage. See: betamax case
I don't want to start an useless dispute but they are talking about advertising in downloaded videos ("that experience") and there's nothing about the direct link or the ability to download videos.
Anyway, anyone is free to understand anything else.
there's nothing about the direct link or the ability to download videos.
I seriously question if you are reading the same article I am, nearly the entire piece is about why youtube would not provide a direct link (download) to the video. I cannot fathom how you could interpret it otherwise.
