Were you one of the many who back in 2006 wondered why on earth Google was paying $1.65 billion for YouTube, a site with no revenue and a ton of problems? Then you weren’t alone because even Google CEO Eric Schmidt thought it was overpriced.

YouTube Is Go

In February of 2005, a site popped up on the Internet that would cause a massive shift in how video is served on the Web. It would ease the process, and provide a platform for video of all kinds, mostly user-generated content.

Its name, if you hadn’t already guessed, was YouTube. And it has grown in the last four years to become one of the biggest and most popular sites on the Web, with millions of people from all corners of the world visiting and using the site on a daily basis.

Continue Reading…

Mission Hill Synopsis

Created by The Simpsons writers Bill Oakley and Josh Weinstein, Mission Hill follows the lives of urban slackers.

The main characters are 24-year-old slacker Andy French and his 17-year-old bookworm brother Kevin.

Andy and Kevin live with the mellow advertising agent Jim and the nervous flower child Posey, not to mention their dog Stogie.

Watch Mission Hill online

• Search for Mission Hill episodes
• Find Mission Hill torrents

Continue Reading…

As a trial begins in Italy against Google employees over an offensive user-uploaded video, the question of who is responsible for user-generated content has to be asked. Is it the user or is it the Web site that has to morally and legally take the blame for what is uploaded?

Online Video Wild West

In 2006, before Google had bought YouTube, Google Video was its entry into the online video market. Looking back now, both Google Video and YouTube were pretty lawless back then, with few of the checks and balances on content being uploaded to the sites.

This lawlessness lead to Viacom suing YouTube for $1 billion over the copyrighted clips it claims were allowed on the site. But it also lead to another lawsuit, smaller, and less publicized, but still important.

Continue Reading…

Although the case isn’t technically over yet, the fact that the judge in Universal Music Group’s copyright case against Veoh has stated the video site qualifies for protection from DMCA’s safe harbor provision leaves little to litigate over. So what effect does this decision have on Viacom’s case against YouTube on similar charges?

DMCA Safe Harbor Provision

All online video sharing sites, and sites which accept other forms of media, which allow users to upload content, run the risk of copyrighted material making its way onto their servers. Whether that in effect means the site itself is infringing on copyright law is open to interpretation.

The safe harbor provision of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, otherwise known as the Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act (OCILLA) is designed to end this debate by exempting Web sites and hosts as long as they follow certain rules.

Continue Reading…

Ustream is being sued by Square Ring, a company owned by boxer Roy Jones Jr. over the alleged streaming of a fight between him and Omar Sheika in March. Is Ustream protected by law or is this a case that could prove instrumental in changing the way live streaming services operate?

Live Streaming Video Sites

Live streaming services such as Ustream, Justin.tv, and Livestream are quickly growing in popularity. They allow anyone who wants to to stream video of whatever they want to. It really is that varied and unencumbered.

So long, of course, as the content being streamed is legally available for broadcast.

However, as they grow bigger there is one thing likely to start affecting them more and more: copyright infringements and getting sued for those alleged offenses. Because alongside the people lifecasting or covering social events, there are people streaming copyrighted video content using the services.

Continue Reading…

YouTube was once an open playground where people could happily upload copyrighted content without fear of a takedown or reprisals. But no longer. However, maybe things have gone a little too far when an artist sees his own original music video removed after a wholly unnecessary copyright claim.

From Lawless To Law Abiding

Gone are the days when YouTube was a virtually lawless place with copyrighted video clips being uploaded all over the place. YouTube got away with those days in the main by having a 10-minute length limit, which meant the only thing that could really be shown in full were television adverts and music videos.

That 10-minute length limit still exists for average users, but the rules and regulations regarding what can be uploaded to the site have been tightened up substantially. Although the Google-owned site still operates a non-moderated system of uploads, the tools and methods content copyright owners have for locating infringing clips and then having them removed from the site are a lot more stringent.

Continue Reading…

Since paying the GDP of a small country for YouTube, Google has turned the site into a more legitimate, more stable, more popular proposition. Unfortunately, it still doesn’t make any money from it. It could do so quite easily, but it would mean changing a key tenet of the site, and risk the wrath of its loyal user base.

The YouTube Money Pit

There is an ongoing debate amongst analysts and industry watchers over how much profit or loss Google brings in from YouTube. Credit Suisse and RampRate both agree that YouTube is bringing in a tidy amount of revenue. And both agree that the operating costs of running the site, and hosting all those millions of videos, totals more than the current revenue.

The debate concerns how much Google is losing from YouTube on an annual basis, and what Google can do to counter the problem. YouTube has already had a wealth of monetization solutions thrown at it, and the UGC (User Generated Content) is slowly but surely being replaced with more professional, long-form content. Unfortunately, this hasn’t yet cured the money woes.

Continue Reading…