[videoblogging] Veoh's next step
Jay dedman
> I don't agree that adding obvious linkback is a solution because Veoh is a
> social site with memberships, ratings, profiles, friends, etc. I do not like
> the implication that I am a member of a community because my stuff was
> spidered into it. Linking back may give a means to finding my site from
> within the Veoh community but it does not remove that implication.
>
> The answer, to me, is to stop spidering and remove any and all unclaimed
> feeds. And to not do it again.
> If people want to become a member of the Veoh community, they can choose to.
undertsood.
so i will be interested in seeing what Veoh wil do next.
lets just make sure we dont become mobrule here.
has Dmitry said they would take down everything they have currently spidered?
is there any precedent for a service grabbing videos?
Jay
--
Adventures in Videoblogging
<http://www.momentshowing.net>
<http://FireAnt.tv>
<http://node101.org>
Cell: 917 371 6790
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videobloggin...@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
WWWhatsup
>
My guess is that Dmitry didn't say anything about spidering for precisely
one reason, VEOH does not actually do any spidering.
What they do is allow anyone to sign up and submit any RSS feed they
fancy to their network, which will then proceed to distribute
that to them, and to any other members of their network via P2P,
to be played back in the VEOH viewer.
Kind of like a networked aggregator if you will.
I don't think they are 'grabbing' videos any more than say, fireant, is
via its cumulative user base. The difference is that they actually
help distro the vids.
So, unlike fireant, say, one can ramp up one's viewership without
taking a bandwidth hit.
A pretty good wheeze and a valuable one to the vidcasting community.
Their latest innovation is to supply partial flv previews on their site.
That's the only transcoding going on, the files distributed via P2P are those
from the RSS enclosures.
The thing is still very much beta, and a lot of loose ends, social and
technical, remain to be tied up.
They are investing money and effort in our medium, and I think their support
should be graciously accepted, and problems dealt with by communication
not castigation.
joly
>> The answer, to me, is to stop spidering and remove any and all unclaimed
>> feeds. And to not do it again.
>> If people want to become a member of the Veoh community, they can choose to.
>
>undertsood.
>so i will be interested in seeing what Veoh wil do next.
>lets just make sure we dont become mobrule here.
>has Dmitry said they would take down everything they have currently spidered?
>is there any precedent for a service grabbing videos?
>
>Jay
>
>
>
>
>--
>Adventures in Videoblogging
><http://www.momentshowing.net>
><http://FireAnt.tv>
><http://node101.org>
>Cell: 917 371 6790
>
---------------------------------------------------------------
WWWhatsup NYC
http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com
---------------------------------------------------------------
Barry Bowen
that could be applied to video. Perfect 10 sued Google for copyright
infringement. According to the AP:
Judge Matz ordered both sides to craft a narrow preliminary injunction
that would respect Perfect 10's copyrights but not curtail Google's
broader right to catalog and display online images
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11488787/
Here are three possible things we can do to protect our content:
1) Develop a code to be displayed in RSS feeds for opting out of
web-based commercial aggregators or requiring attribution. I would call
this an "aggregator rules" namespace. (The RSS 2.0 spec can only be
modified by using namespaces)
2) Identify the spiders scraping our content and and exclude them from
our websites with a robots.txt file ... this will be harder for people
that use Feedburner.
3) establish an organization to defend our rights ... the VRC ...
Vloggers Rights Coalition :-)
Andreas Haugstrup
> My guess is that Dmitry didn't say anything about spidering for precisely
> one reason, VEOH does not actually do any spidering.
>
> What they do is allow anyone to sign up and submit any RSS feed they
> fancy to their network, which will then proceed to distribute
> that to them, and to any other members of their network via P2P,
> to be played back in the VEOH viewer.
Or that's what they want you to think. Plausible denial... Just like Nixon.
--
Andreas Haugstrup Pedersen
<URL: http://www.solitude.dk/ >
Commentary on media, communication, culture and technology.
Josh Wolf
episode that transpired a few months ago. This is quite the
reactionary group, and history has demonstrated that when this group
is united around a particular, results are definitely within the
realm of possibility. Now, the power of people in numbers is
something I'm certainly down with, but let's attempt to look at this
from Veoh's perspective as well.
Veoh needs content so they've decided to utilize a spider to do so, I
don't know whether this spider results in pulling the video's from
the HTML or if it's spidering RSS feeds. Assuming that it's spidering
RSS feeds, it seems to me that they should set up a sort of moderated
spider. Each feed that they've discovered and want to add should have
a website instantiated for it with as much information as can be
automatically filled in from the feed along with an activation link.
Then, a staff member at Veoh can go through this list of pending
feeds and reference the contact info on each of these sources and
then send him or her an invitation which contains a link so that the
user has a 1-click opt-in process available for them along with a
personal (stock) invitation to participate in their network.
As Veoh is a for-profit service with terms of service associated with
it, I don't believe that they can really get away with transcoding
and re-hosting CC videos either. Further, let's be clear on one
factor here -- they are not even allowing non-registered visitors to
see the entire video, which means that Veoh is forcing viewers who
stumble onto my, or any other videobloggers video, through their
website to register on the site to even see the video which they are
using without my permission in the first place.
Josh
____________________________________________
"Don't hate the media, become the media."- Jello Biafra
Charles HOPE
WWWhatsup wrote:
>
My guess is that Dmitry didn't say anything about spidering for precisely
one reason, VEOH does not actually do any spidering.
Are you saying that somebody sat down and entered in all the zillions of feeds that they have listed here? I think it's pretty clear that they are using some sort of spidered automation.
A pretty good wheeze and a valuable one to the vidcasting community.
Judging from the community's reaction, I'd question the value of the service. Wouldn't you?
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
- Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web.
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videobloggin...@yahoogroups.com
Anne Walk
if you upload a feed to Veoh, it is my understanding that the feed will fall under the name of the user submitting the feed. it will be "claimed" by them. unclaimed feeds have gotten into the system through means of automation. that's why they are not affiliated with any Veoh user. instead of a user name, you see the name of the vlog (eg: kitykity's vlog) or hosting service the feed was taken from. i doubt there is a user on Veoh called blip.tv.
i like the idea of being able to make and distribute large files via a service like Veoh. that's great. i don't like the unclaimed feed "feature".
- Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web.
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
videobloggin...@yahoogroups.com
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Steve Watkins
> So, unlike fireant, say, one can ramp up one's viewership without
> taking a bandwidth hit.
>
> A pretty good wheeze and a valuable one to the vidcasting community.
>
But its not necessarily valuable to everyone, so it shouldnt be done
to peopels content without thier permission.
I seriously question whether in 2006 a service can hope to justify its
behaviour by making noble claims about saving people bandwidth.
Bandwidth is an issue, but its become less and less of an issue as
hundreds of video hosting services have appeared.
Because so many services have offered free video hosting, bandwidth is
not a scarce commodity at the moment. I would suggest that many of the
sites are more desperate for viewers/users/videos than video creators
are desperate for their bandwidth/distribution services.
Some companies are going to take ethical risks in this environment,
even if they dont realise they are doing it at the time.
The internet in general is the enabler of phenomenon like
videoblogging and alternative distribution. We do need companies to
provide services for us, but Ive seen too many companies that think
they are central to making the revolution happen, and thinking this
will mean users cut them some slack. No, to me half the point of the
new freedoms that internet ditribution, is that content creators dont
have to put up with unreasonable terms & behaviour from networks and
distributors anymore.
If video hosting/redistribution networks engage in a content race with
eachother that involves scraping as much content as possible from
everyone else, then I fear this is going to erode the potential value
of the videos themselves, to the detriment of everyone in the
longterm. A race to the bottom, wheras although I an not a fan of Adam
Curry, at least some of his ventures are about trying to build up
podcasts, talk up their percieved & potential value, hopefully to the
mutual benefit of the creators, distributors, promotors.
So enough with the idea that the video is only of value to the creator
and the viewers, and that the middle men are all saintly facilitators,
who bear the burden of the distribution as a service to humankind.
Without the video the distributors dont exist either, so dont go
pretending the videos arent an asset you are exploiting. Some people
will go for that, if your service adds value for them and you, and you
are upfront about it, then groovy. But you cant make assumptions, the
creators of video have the right to decide who they partner with for
distribution and promotion etc.
Steve of Elbows
WWWhatsup
If you look, f'rinstance, at Ryanne's thing on http://veoh.com/videoDetails.html?v=e55696wg9YwjDy
you'll see he has 1 subscriber.
That would be the person who submitted the feed, so that their VEOH client would automatically
download it as and when the RSS updates..
Only Ryanne has the option to add an identifier to his feed and thus claim ownership
of the feed and customize it as he sees fit, deleting episodes, or, I presume,
blocking it entirely, if he should wish to.
I think the omission of permalink URL's etc is more likely down to VEOH focusing on
the video and P2P distro aspects. In most TV applications the video content
speaks for itself. They do give the associated text. I am sure they'll fix this.
I took the trouble to claim my feed. You'll notice looking at the details
http://veoh.com/seriesDetails.html?s=s2644
that it links to my info, another page that has my URL etc. And that also I take the trouble
to include the permalinks in the associated text.
I think the 'unclaimed feature' is intrinsic to the secondary VEOH concept of
an aggregator that enables P2P propagation, but since that arrived after their
primary concept of direct video publishing via P2P, they haven't thought
through all the issues, perhaps. Adding the ability for users to subscribe to 3rd party
RSS feeds was an afterthought..
Then, with the rise of YouTube etc, they have scrambled to provide similar flv
functionality for their publishers.
joly
At 04:46 PM 4/8/2006, you wrote:
>hi joly,
>
>if you upload a feed to Veoh, it is my understanding that the feed will fall under the name of the user submitting the feed. it will be "claimed" by them. unclaimed feeds have gotten into the system through means of automation. that's why they are not affiliated with any Veoh user. instead of a user name, you see the name of the vlog (eg: kitykity's vlog) or hosting service the feed was taken from. i doubt there is a user on Veoh called <http://blip.tv>blip.tv.
>
>i like the idea of being able to make and distribute large files via a service like Veoh. that's great. i don't like the unclaimed feed "feature".
>
>----------
mikehudack
get there?
--- In videob...@yahoogroups.com, WWWhatsup <joly@...> wrote:
>
David Howell
A room full of monkeys manually searched the internet for videos.
</sarcasm>
David
http://www.davidhowellstudios.com
--- In videob...@yahoogroups.com, "mikehudack" <mike@...> wrote:
>
> There are numerous feeds in Veoh with no subscribers. How did they
> get there?
>
Josh Wolf
William Shakespeare in the third quarter this year...
Josh
____________________________________________
"Don't hate the media, become the media."- Jello Biafra