Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Only a "moron" would buy YouTube, say Mark Cuban

Expand Messages
  • Heath
    ... Well I have a 52 widescreen and a 5.1 surround system (as some have seen on my vlog) and yes I do like it very much but no, I don t have a lot of
    Message 1 of 15 , Oct 2, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Joshua Kinberg" <jkinberg@...>
      wrote:
      >
      > Well, if you are advertising on HDTV, then you're pretty much
      > guaranteed an audience of HDTV viewers -- which means they are
      >people
      > who own expensive television equipment, likely high end home theater
      > gear. These are people who have a lot of disposable capital to spend
      > on high end entertainment and electronics, and who very much care
      > about a high quality experience.

      Well I have a 52" widescreen and a 5.1 surround system (as some have
      seen on my vlog) and yes I do like it very much but no, I don't
      have "a lot" of disposable income. I save, watch sales, look for
      intrest free financeing over a year (and actually make monthy
      payments so I don't have to pay the intrest)and generally try to live
      below my means but yes I do like a high quality experience and even
      though I have a HD box to watch HD TV, it's usually "regular" TV and
      sports, when I watch movies, it's DVD's.....

      So I really don't know where I fit in as far as "advertisers" go,
      since I rely on my own research, user feedback and my own good commen
      sense to purchase items......

      > Can't necessarily say the same for YouTube viewers. Quite clearly
      >they
      > are willing to put up with low resolution and lesser quality
      > experiences. They also likely do not want to pay for it.
      >
      > -Josh

      I agree, that they are likey not to want to pay for it and neither
      would I to be honest.....

      Heath
      http://batmangeek7.blogspot.com

      >
      >
      > On 10/2/06, Adam Quirk <bullemhead@...> wrote:
      > > Also, his crap about HDTV being a better value than Net for ad
      buys is
      > > ridiculous.
      > > He's just shilling for his HDNet.
      > > The targetting online is a shitload better than on TV. That's
      why the $ is
      > > trending towards it, and has been for years.
      > > Doubleclick and Nielsen are working on ways to easily track
      online video
      > > habits too, so the "untrackable" argument will soon be out the
      window. I
      > > just hope their tracking system doesn't include some kind of DRM,
      which I've
      > > read they're considering.
      > >
      > > AQ
    • Heath
      ... Actually you can get a very good LCD, DLP, or rear projection for under a grand, and if you do some shopping probably under 700 bucks or less depending on
      Message 2 of 15 , Oct 2, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, sull <sulleleven@...> wrote:


        > also, if i bought a $3k HD TV, i wouldnt be able/allowed to buy
        >much else
        > for the year ;-)
        >

        Actually you can get a very good LCD, DLP, or rear projection for
        under a grand, and if you do some shopping probably under 700 bucks
        or less depending on the size..... ;)

        Heath
        http://batmangeek7.blogspot.com

        > On 10/2/06, Joshua Kinberg <jkinberg@...> wrote:
        > >
        > > Well, if you are advertising on HDTV, then you're pretty much
        > > guaranteed an audience of HDTV viewers -- which means they are
        people
        > > who own expensive television equipment, likely high end home
        theater
        > > gear. These are people who have a lot of disposable capital to
        spend
        > > on high end entertainment and electronics, and who very much care
        > > about a high quality experience.
        > >
        > > Can't necessarily say the same for YouTube viewers. Quite clearly
        they
        > > are willing to put up with low resolution and lesser quality
        > > experiences. They also likely do not want to pay for it.
        > >
        > > -Josh
        > >
        > >
        > > On 10/2/06, Adam Quirk <bullemhead@... <bullemhead%40gmail.com>>
        > > wrote:
        > > > Also, his crap about HDTV being a better value than Net for ad
        buys is
        > > > ridiculous.
        > > > He's just shilling for his HDNet.
        > > > The targetting online is a shitload better than on TV. That's
        why the $
        > > is
        > > > trending towards it, and has been for years.
        > > > Doubleclick and Nielsen are working on ways to easily track
        online video
        > > > habits too, so the "untrackable" argument will soon be out the
        window. I
        > > > just hope their tracking system doesn't include some kind of
        DRM, which
        > > I've
        > > > read they're considering.
        > > >
        > > > AQ
        > > >
        > > > On 10/2/06, Kent Nichols <digitalfilmmaker@...<digitalfilmmaker%
        40gmail.com>>
        > > wrote:
        > > > >
        > > > > These are the same companies that sued Napster into the
        ground.
        > > > >
        > > > > They learned a valuable lesson from that experience. Even
        though you
        > > > > take down the leading site, it doesn't mean that the illegal
        sharing
        > > > > will go away.
        > > > >
        > > > > Now music sharing has become hubless, with the fans being the
        only
        > > > > ones left to sue.
        > > > >
        > > > > YouTube certainly is ripe for litigation. But it's also ripe
        for
        > > > > negotiation -- meaning if the major labels can contain it to
        only
        > > > > YouTube and then make deals to share in the profits from the
        site then
        > > > > it will be able to stick around.
        > > > >
        > > > > -K
        > > > >
        > > > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com <videoblogging%
        40yahoogroups.com><videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com>,
        > > > > sull <sulleleven@> wrote:
        > > > > >
        > > > > > that's right mike.
        > > > > >
        > > > > > and if their is a high profile copyright legal case against
        youtube,
        > > > > it will
        > > > > > be strategically timed based on some potential scenarios
        that may
        > > > > play out
        > > > > > first. sit back and watch, wait, strike. or not.
        > > > > >
        > > > > > if not, that could mean a deeper realization to the key
        points you
        > > > > make here
        > > > > > and the legal hounds are forced to back off. it's all about
        numbers
        > > and
        > > > > > since crunching them all to attain an accurate value
        measure of
        > > social
        > > > > > media... against the value of legal pursuit.... is not an
        exact
        > > > > science and
        > > > > > so moronic decisions are just as likely... more likely....
        than
        > > logical
        > > > > > progression in this new era.
        > > > > >
        > > > > > we shall see who the fools and kings are.
        > > > > >
        > > > > > sull
        > > > > >
        > > > > > On 10/1/06, groups-yahoo-com@ <groups-yahoo-com@>
        > > > >
        > > > > > wrote:
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > I think it's a more subtle and complex issue than Mark
        Cuban
        > > thinks.
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > Why?
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > Because these media companies WANT access to this huge
        market on
        > > > > > > youtube. They're not just going to sue youtube because
        youtube is
        > > > > > > actually giving them VALUE! And there-in is the key, the
        bottom
        > > line
        > > > > > > to all open access media... despite a few extreme
        instances of
        > > > > > > copyright violation youtube is providing tremendous value.
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > This is a core thesis / theory of my thoughts on
        filesharing. When
        > > > > > > intellectual property are shared openly (not on some
        darknet
        > > > > > > filesharing network)... as long as there is not excessive
        > > copyright
        > > > > > > infringement.. (ie. a whole 196bit album or whole 1080p
        movie)
        > > there
        > > > > > > can be tremendous value created for the owner of the IP.
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > In my opinion, one day EVERYTHING will be traded freely
        *on some
        > > > > > > level* just because of the intrensic value to EVERYONE,
        including
        > > the
        > > > > > > media owner.
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > The key is finding what *level*.
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > For mp3's I think that might be complete artists libraries
        > > available
        > > > > > > for free on their websites for sampling and listening at
        perhaps
        > > 64
        > > > > > > bit... or some lower quality. This would allow widespread
        sampling
        > > > > > > and listening and sharing and online playlisting (ie.
        webjay)
        > > which
        > > > > > > will act as an "open access marketing model" meanwhile
        holding
        > > > > > > SIGNIFICANT value in reserve for sale. Ultimately over
        the slow
        > > > > > > process of time and market forces and experimentation I
        think
        > > we'll
        > > > > > > one day arive at this balance of openess, aka "freeness"
        in the
        > > > > > > marketplace.
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > Another example... one day even hollywood movies may be
        available
        > > > > > > completely for free on the web. Their trailers are now
        widely
        > > > > > > available... what if the whole movie was available at a
        por
        > > quality...
        > > > > > > say 320x240... it would be referenceable, previewable,
        > > discussable,
        > > > > > > clips could be taken by users for reference... in short
        it would
        > > > > > > allow, even spur tremendous discussion.
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > I call this theory "resolution value theoery" / "open
        access
        > > > > > > marketing" / "open access business models" / "freedoom
        value
        > > theory".
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > It's been something on my mind for litterally 5 years
        since we
        > > first
        > > > > > > saw that napster was not ALL evil... that it did provide
        some
        > > value.
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > The key is in widespread experimentation to best
        capitalize on the
        > > > > > > value of "social media" while minimizing the downsides.
        There is
        > > no
        > > > > > > one right answer... such openess is different from a major
        > > hollywood
        > > > > > > movie, or recording artist, then for an independant film
        maker or
        > > > > > > musician.
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > it's only through widespread experimentation we're getting
        > > > > there... and we
        > > > > > > ARE.
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > The podsafe music phenom is a great example of this in
        action...
        > > by
        > > > > > > becoming freely shareable the music potentially gains
        tremendous
        > > value
        > > > > > > potentially in promotion.
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > Videoblogging and podcasting are ALSO huge advantages of
        this.
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > There are already getting to be podsafe music charts,
        video
        > > podcast
        > > > > > > top show charts, and of course top audio podcast charts.
        These
        > > imply
        > > > > > > there is TREMENDOUS value in these open access media
        business
        > > > > > > models... monetization of these models will of course
        happen in a
        > > big
        > > > > > > way... it's inevitable... it's just coming slowly.
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > Another point of comparison can be drawn to open source
        business
        > > > > > > models... which is the heritage of open access media. But
        it's a
        > > > > > > slightly different beast... not all rules apply 1 to 1.
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > -Mike
        > > > > > > mmeiser.com/blog
        > > > > > > mefeedia.com
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > On 10/1/06, mcmpress <mcmpress@ <mcmpress%40yahoo.com>>
        wrote:
        > > > > > > > I disagree. You won't see trials but you'll see
        settlements and
        > > lots
        > > > > > > > off them. Copyright violation is a no brainer for big
        media.
        > > Easy to
        > > > > > > > prove, easy to win. Though, culturally, it might be bad
        PR for
        > > media
        > > > > > > > to enforce it, as You Tube is so wildly popular. I love
        my old
        > > > > "Facts
        > > > > > > > of Life" clips as much as the next gal.
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > Mary
        > > > > > > > videopancakes.blogspot.com
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com<videoblogging%
        40yahoogroups.com>
        > > <videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com>
        > > > > <videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com>,
        > > > > > > "Robyn" <robyn@> wrote:
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > I actually posted on this late last night. These were
        the same
        > > > > > > > > statements said about MySpace right before Murdoch
        bought it
        > > > > last year
        > > > > > > > > (and they've not been 'sued into oblivion' from
        parents whose
        > > > > kids who
        > > > > > > > > were victimized or by artists whose music has been
        stolen).
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > You see the odd lawsuit here and there, but they're
        not
        > > > > hurting from
        > > > > > > > > legal fees (and they could be). And, I know that the
        big media
        > > has
        > > > > > > > > more resources, but class action suits and sorrowful
        parents
        > > > > stand a
        > > > > > > > > bigger chance of winning $.
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > Robyn Tippins
        > > > > > > > > sleepyblogger.com
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com<videoblogging%
        40yahoogroups.com>
        > > <videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com>
        > > > > <videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com>,
        > > > > > > "Mike Meiser"
        > > > > > > > > <groups-yahoo-com@> wrote:
        > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > Spotted this on another mailing list I'm on.
        Thought you all
        > > > > might
        > > > > > > > > find it
        > > > > > > > > > interesting.
        > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > Can't escape the youtube issues. :)
        > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > -Mike
        > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > From:
        > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?
        type=internetNews&storyid=2006-09-
        28T210712Z_01_N28230044_RTRUKOC_0_US-MEDIA-YOUTUBE.xml&src=rss&rpc=22
        > > > > > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/ed2zx
        > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > Only a "moron" would buy YouTube, says Cuban
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > By Paul Thomasch
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > NEW YORK (Reuters) - Billionaire investor and dot-
        com
        > > > > veteran Mark
        > > > > > > > > > > Cuban had harsh words on Thursday for YouTube,
        the online
        > > site
        > > > > > > that
        > > > > > > > > > > lets people share video clips, saying only
        a "moron" would
        > > > > > > purchase
        > > > > > > > > > > the wildly popular start-up.
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > Cuban, co-founder of HDNet and owner of the NBA's
        Dallas
        > > > > > > Mavericks,
        > > > > > > > > > > also said YouTube would eventually be "sued into
        oblivion"
        > > > > > > > because of
        > > > > > > > > > > copyright violations.
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > "They are just breaking the law," Cuban told a
        group of
        > > > > > > > advertisers in
        > > > > > > > > > > New York. "The only reason it hasn't been sued
        yet is
        > > because
        > > > > > > > there is
        > > > > > > > > > > nobody with big money to sue."
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > YouTube, based in San Mateo, California,
        specializes in
        > > > > serving up
        > > > > > > > > > > short videos created by everyday people. Its
        popularity,
        > > > > with more
        > > > > > > > > > > than 100 million video showings daily, has spurred
        > > > > speculation the
        > > > > > > > > > > firm will be sold or taken public.
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > But YouTube has also come under scrutiny because
        users
        > > > > often post
        > > > > > > > > > > copyrighted material, including music videos
        produced by
        > > > > > > > > > > well-established artists.
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > YouTube company representatives were not
        immediately
        > > > > available to
        > > > > > > > > > > respond to Cuban's comments.
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > Cuban said "anyone who buys that (YouTube) is a
        moron"
        > > > > because of
        > > > > > > > > > > potential lawsuits from copyright violations.
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > 'GOING TO BE TOASTED'
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > "There is a reason they haven't yet gone public,
        they
        > > haven't
        > > > > > > sold.
        > > > > > > > > > > It's because they are going to be toasted," said
        Cuban,
        > > > > who has
        > > > > > > sold
        > > > > > > > > > > start-ups to Yahoo Inc. and CompuServe.
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > YouTube, which has nearly one-third of the U.S.
        Web video
        > > > > > > audience,
        > > > > > > > > > > three times that of Google Inc., or twice that of
        News
        > > Corp's
        > > > > > > > MySpace,
        > > > > > > > > > > has been working on signing licensing deals with
        music
        > > > > companies
        > > > > > > and
        > > > > > > > > > > TV networks to ensure they are paid when users
        view their
        > > > > content.
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > This month YouTube unveiled its first deal to
        distribute
        > > music
        > > > > > > > videos
        > > > > > > > > > > legally from a major music company by agreeing a
        deal with
        > > > > Warner
        > > > > > > > > > > Music Group, home to pop stars James Blunt and
        Madonna.
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > In other remarks, meanwhile, the often-
        controversial Cuban
        > > > > also
        > > > > > > told
        > > > > > > > > > > advertisers that the reach of YouTube is limited,
        > > particularly
        > > > > > > > when it
        > > > > > > > > > > comes to user-generated videos.
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > "User-generated content is not going away," he
        said. "But
        > > > > do you
        > > > > > > > want
        > > > > > > > > > > your advertising dollars spent on a video of Aunt
        Jenny
        > > > > watching
        > > > > > > her
        > > > > > > > > > > niece tap dance?"
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > "Somebody puts up something really good and you
        get, what,
        > > > > 60,000
        > > > > > > > > > > viewers?" Cuban added during the event at
        Advertising Week
        > > > > in New
        > > > > > > > > > > York.
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > YouTube now offers advertising through banner ads,
        > > > > promotions and
        > > > > > > > > > > sponsorships. It has said it plans to roll out a
        range of
        > > > > > > different
        > > > > > > > > > > advertising options over the coming year.
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > Cuban cautioned advertisers against investing
        heavily in
        > > > > so-called
        > > > > > > > > > > viral campaigns that are spread by users beyond
        their
        > > initial
        > > > > > > > point of
        > > > > > > > > > > distribution on YouTube or other video sharing
        sites. But
        > > he
        > > > > > > touted
        > > > > > > > > > > opportunities to run commercials on high-
        definition
        > > television
        > > > > > > > such as
        > > > > > > > > > > his HDNet network.
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > "What makes viral so special is it's so hard to
        do. It's
        > > > > so hard
        > > > > > > to
        > > > > > > > > > > plan. It's hard to stand out," he said,
        describing 99
        > > > > percent of
        > > > > > > > money
        > > > > > > > > > > advertisers spend on viral campaigns as "wasted."
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > "You guys love to be the trailing edge," he said.
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been
        removed]
        > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > > --
        > > > > > Sull
        > > > > > http://vlogdir.com (a project)
        > > > > > http://SpreadTheMedia.org (my blog)
        > > > > > http://interdigitate.com (otherly)
        > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        > > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        >
        >
        >
        > --
        > Sull
        > http://vlogdir.com (a project)
        > http://SpreadTheMedia.org (my blog)
        > http://interdigitate.com (otherly)
        >
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
      • groups-yahoo-com@mmeiser.com
        Yeah, So umm... I mentioned this before, and will again, but we need to get together a group of core vloggers and businesses in this space and create a
        Message 3 of 15 , Oct 2, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          Yeah,

          So umm... I mentioned this before, and will again, but we need to get
          together a group of core vloggers and businesses in this space and
          create a independant ratings and verification body. Our own nielson's
          ratings of the video podcasting space. To create standards for
          tracking and promoting the progress of the blogosphere. Already
          spoken to a few people like Ze Frank and few other core people. I hear
          that Jeff Pulver has some interest in the matter. Basically it will
          promote, define and give legitimacy to the videoblogging space and
          independant vloggers wishing to pursue commercial revenue streams,
          aka. advertising dollars. Without it we'll continue to be on cruise
          control going wherever the market takes us.

          This sector is going to become and industry with or without us taking
          and active roll.

          Time to take charge.

          -Mike

          On 10/2/06, Heath <heathparks@...> wrote:
          > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, sull <sulleleven@...> wrote:
          >
          >
          > > also, if i bought a $3k HD TV, i wouldnt be able/allowed to buy
          > >much else
          > > for the year ;-)
          > >
          >
          > Actually you can get a very good LCD, DLP, or rear projection for
          > under a grand, and if you do some shopping probably under 700 bucks
          > or less depending on the size..... ;)
          >
          > Heath
          > http://batmangeek7.blogspot.com
          >
          > > On 10/2/06, Joshua Kinberg <jkinberg@...> wrote:
          > > >
          > > > Well, if you are advertising on HDTV, then you're pretty much
          > > > guaranteed an audience of HDTV viewers -- which means they are
          > people
          > > > who own expensive television equipment, likely high end home
          > theater
          > > > gear. These are people who have a lot of disposable capital to
          > spend
          > > > on high end entertainment and electronics, and who very much care
          > > > about a high quality experience.
          > > >
          > > > Can't necessarily say the same for YouTube viewers. Quite clearly
          > they
          > > > are willing to put up with low resolution and lesser quality
          > > > experiences. They also likely do not want to pay for it.
          > > >
          > > > -Josh
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > On 10/2/06, Adam Quirk <bullemhead@... <bullemhead%40gmail.com>>
          > > > wrote:
          > > > > Also, his crap about HDTV being a better value than Net for ad
          > buys is
          > > > > ridiculous.
          > > > > He's just shilling for his HDNet.
          > > > > The targetting online is a shitload better than on TV. That's
          > why the $
          > > > is
          > > > > trending towards it, and has been for years.
          > > > > Doubleclick and Nielsen are working on ways to easily track
          > online video
          > > > > habits too, so the "untrackable" argument will soon be out the
          > window. I
          > > > > just hope their tracking system doesn't include some kind of
          > DRM, which
          > > > I've
          > > > > read they're considering.
          > > > >
          > > > > AQ
          > > > >
          > > > > On 10/2/06, Kent Nichols <digitalfilmmaker@...<digitalfilmmaker%
          > 40gmail.com>>
          > > > wrote:
          > > > > >
          > > > > > These are the same companies that sued Napster into the
          > ground.
          > > > > >
          > > > > > They learned a valuable lesson from that experience. Even
          > though you
          > > > > > take down the leading site, it doesn't mean that the illegal
          > sharing
          > > > > > will go away.
          > > > > >
          > > > > > Now music sharing has become hubless, with the fans being the
          > only
          > > > > > ones left to sue.
          > > > > >
          > > > > > YouTube certainly is ripe for litigation. But it's also ripe
          > for
          > > > > > negotiation -- meaning if the major labels can contain it to
          > only
          > > > > > YouTube and then make deals to share in the profits from the
          > site then
          > > > > > it will be able to stick around.
          > > > > >
          > > > > > -K
          > > > > >
          > > > > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com <videoblogging%
          > 40yahoogroups.com><videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com>,
          > > > > > sull <sulleleven@> wrote:
          > > > > > >
          > > > > > > that's right mike.
          > > > > > >
          > > > > > > and if their is a high profile copyright legal case against
          > youtube,
          > > > > > it will
          > > > > > > be strategically timed based on some potential scenarios
          > that may
          > > > > > play out
          > > > > > > first. sit back and watch, wait, strike. or not.
          > > > > > >
          > > > > > > if not, that could mean a deeper realization to the key
          > points you
          > > > > > make here
          > > > > > > and the legal hounds are forced to back off. it's all about
          > numbers
          > > > and
          > > > > > > since crunching them all to attain an accurate value
          > measure of
          > > > social
          > > > > > > media... against the value of legal pursuit.... is not an
          > exact
          > > > > > science and
          > > > > > > so moronic decisions are just as likely... more likely....
          > than
          > > > logical
          > > > > > > progression in this new era.
          > > > > > >
          > > > > > > we shall see who the fools and kings are.
          > > > > > >
          > > > > > > sull
          > > > > > >
          > > > > > > On 10/1/06, groups-yahoo-com@ <groups-yahoo-com@>
          > > > > >
          > > > > > > wrote:
          > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > I think it's a more subtle and complex issue than Mark
          > Cuban
          > > > thinks.
          > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > Why?
          > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > Because these media companies WANT access to this huge
          > market on
          > > > > > > > youtube. They're not just going to sue youtube because
          > youtube is
          > > > > > > > actually giving them VALUE! And there-in is the key, the
          > bottom
          > > > line
          > > > > > > > to all open access media... despite a few extreme
          > instances of
          > > > > > > > copyright violation youtube is providing tremendous value.
          > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > This is a core thesis / theory of my thoughts on
          > filesharing. When
          > > > > > > > intellectual property are shared openly (not on some
          > darknet
          > > > > > > > filesharing network)... as long as there is not excessive
          > > > copyright
          > > > > > > > infringement.. (ie. a whole 196bit album or whole 1080p
          > movie)
          > > > there
          > > > > > > > can be tremendous value created for the owner of the IP.
          > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > In my opinion, one day EVERYTHING will be traded freely
          > *on some
          > > > > > > > level* just because of the intrensic value to EVERYONE,
          > including
          > > > the
          > > > > > > > media owner.
          > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > The key is finding what *level*.
          > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > For mp3's I think that might be complete artists libraries
          > > > available
          > > > > > > > for free on their websites for sampling and listening at
          > perhaps
          > > > 64
          > > > > > > > bit... or some lower quality. This would allow widespread
          > sampling
          > > > > > > > and listening and sharing and online playlisting (ie.
          > webjay)
          > > > which
          > > > > > > > will act as an "open access marketing model" meanwhile
          > holding
          > > > > > > > SIGNIFICANT value in reserve for sale. Ultimately over
          > the slow
          > > > > > > > process of time and market forces and experimentation I
          > think
          > > > we'll
          > > > > > > > one day arive at this balance of openess, aka "freeness"
          > in the
          > > > > > > > marketplace.
          > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > Another example... one day even hollywood movies may be
          > available
          > > > > > > > completely for free on the web. Their trailers are now
          > widely
          > > > > > > > available... what if the whole movie was available at a
          > por
          > > > quality...
          > > > > > > > say 320x240... it would be referenceable, previewable,
          > > > discussable,
          > > > > > > > clips could be taken by users for reference... in short
          > it would
          > > > > > > > allow, even spur tremendous discussion.
          > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > I call this theory "resolution value theoery" / "open
          > access
          > > > > > > > marketing" / "open access business models" / "freedoom
          > value
          > > > theory".
          > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > It's been something on my mind for litterally 5 years
          > since we
          > > > first
          > > > > > > > saw that napster was not ALL evil... that it did provide
          > some
          > > > value.
          > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > The key is in widespread experimentation to best
          > capitalize on the
          > > > > > > > value of "social media" while minimizing the downsides.
          > There is
          > > > no
          > > > > > > > one right answer... such openess is different from a major
          > > > hollywood
          > > > > > > > movie, or recording artist, then for an independant film
          > maker or
          > > > > > > > musician.
          > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > it's only through widespread experimentation we're getting
          > > > > > there... and we
          > > > > > > > ARE.
          > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > The podsafe music phenom is a great example of this in
          > action...
          > > > by
          > > > > > > > becoming freely shareable the music potentially gains
          > tremendous
          > > > value
          > > > > > > > potentially in promotion.
          > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > Videoblogging and podcasting are ALSO huge advantages of
          > this.
          > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > There are already getting to be podsafe music charts,
          > video
          > > > podcast
          > > > > > > > top show charts, and of course top audio podcast charts.
          > These
          > > > imply
          > > > > > > > there is TREMENDOUS value in these open access media
          > business
          > > > > > > > models... monetization of these models will of course
          > happen in a
          > > > big
          > > > > > > > way... it's inevitable... it's just coming slowly.
          > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > Another point of comparison can be drawn to open source
          > business
          > > > > > > > models... which is the heritage of open access media. But
          > it's a
          > > > > > > > slightly different beast... not all rules apply 1 to 1.
          > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > -Mike
          > > > > > > > mmeiser.com/blog
          > > > > > > > mefeedia.com
          > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > On 10/1/06, mcmpress <mcmpress@ <mcmpress%40yahoo.com>>
          > wrote:
          > > > > > > > > I disagree. You won't see trials but you'll see
          > settlements and
          > > > lots
          > > > > > > > > off them. Copyright violation is a no brainer for big
          > media.
          > > > Easy to
          > > > > > > > > prove, easy to win. Though, culturally, it might be bad
          > PR for
          > > > media
          > > > > > > > > to enforce it, as You Tube is so wildly popular. I love
          > my old
          > > > > > "Facts
          > > > > > > > > of Life" clips as much as the next gal.
          > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > Mary
          > > > > > > > > videopancakes.blogspot.com
          > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com<videoblogging%
          > 40yahoogroups.com>
          > > > <videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com>
          > > > > > <videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com>,
          > > > > > > > "Robyn" <robyn@> wrote:
          > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > I actually posted on this late last night. These were
          > the same
          > > > > > > > > > statements said about MySpace right before Murdoch
          > bought it
          > > > > > last year
          > > > > > > > > > (and they've not been 'sued into oblivion' from
          > parents whose
          > > > > > kids who
          > > > > > > > > > were victimized or by artists whose music has been
          > stolen).
          > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > You see the odd lawsuit here and there, but they're
          > not
          > > > > > hurting from
          > > > > > > > > > legal fees (and they could be). And, I know that the
          > big media
          > > > has
          > > > > > > > > > more resources, but class action suits and sorrowful
          > parents
          > > > > > stand a
          > > > > > > > > > bigger chance of winning $.
          > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > Robyn Tippins
          > > > > > > > > > sleepyblogger.com
          > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com<videoblogging%
          > 40yahoogroups.com>
          > > > <videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com>
          > > > > > <videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com>,
          > > > > > > > "Mike Meiser"
          > > > > > > > > > <groups-yahoo-com@> wrote:
          > > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > > Spotted this on another mailing list I'm on.
          > Thought you all
          > > > > > might
          > > > > > > > > > find it
          > > > > > > > > > > interesting.
          > > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > > Can't escape the youtube issues. :)
          > > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > > -Mike
          > > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > > From:
          > > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > >
          > > > > >
          > > > > >
          > > > http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?
          > type=internetNews&storyid=2006-09-
          > 28T210712Z_01_N28230044_RTRUKOC_0_US-MEDIA-YOUTUBE.xml&src=rss&rpc=22
          > > > > > > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/ed2zx
          > > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > > Only a "moron" would buy YouTube, says Cuban
          > > > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > > > By Paul Thomasch
          > > > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > > > NEW YORK (Reuters) - Billionaire investor and dot-
          > com
          > > > > > veteran Mark
          > > > > > > > > > > > Cuban had harsh words on Thursday for YouTube,
          > the online
          > > > site
          > > > > > > > that
          > > > > > > > > > > > lets people share video clips, saying only
          > a "moron" would
          > > > > > > > purchase
          > > > > > > > > > > > the wildly popular start-up.
          > > > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > > > Cuban, co-founder of HDNet and owner of the NBA's
          > Dallas
          > > > > > > > Mavericks,
          > > > > > > > > > > > also said YouTube would eventually be "sued into
          > oblivion"
          > > > > > > > > because of
          > > > > > > > > > > > copyright violations.
          > > > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > > > "They are just breaking the law," Cuban told a
          > group of
          > > > > > > > > advertisers in
          > > > > > > > > > > > New York. "The only reason it hasn't been sued
          > yet is
          > > > because
          > > > > > > > > there is
          > > > > > > > > > > > nobody with big money to sue."
          > > > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > > > YouTube, based in San Mateo, California,
          > specializes in
          > > > > > serving up
          > > > > > > > > > > > short videos created by everyday people. Its
          > popularity,
          > > > > > with more
          > > > > > > > > > > > than 100 million video showings daily, has spurred
          > > > > > speculation the
          > > > > > > > > > > > firm will be sold or taken public.
          > > > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > > > But YouTube has also come under scrutiny because
          > users
          > > > > > often post
          > > > > > > > > > > > copyrighted material, including music videos
          > produced by
          > > > > > > > > > > > well-established artists.
          > > > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > > > YouTube company representatives were not
          > immediately
          > > > > > available to
          > > > > > > > > > > > respond to Cuban's comments.
          > > > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > > > Cuban said "anyone who buys that (YouTube) is a
          > moron"
          > > > > > because of
          > > > > > > > > > > > potential lawsuits from copyright violations.
          > > > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > > > 'GOING TO BE TOASTED'
          > > > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > > > "There is a reason they haven't yet gone public,
          > they
          > > > haven't
          > > > > > > > sold.
          > > > > > > > > > > > It's because they are going to be toasted," said
          > Cuban,
          > > > > > who has
          > > > > > > > sold
          > > > > > > > > > > > start-ups to Yahoo Inc. and CompuServe.
          > > > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > > > YouTube, which has nearly one-third of the U.S.
          > Web video
          > > > > > > > audience,
          > > > > > > > > > > > three times that of Google Inc., or twice that of
          > News
          > > > Corp's
          > > > > > > > > MySpace,
          > > > > > > > > > > > has been working on signing licensing deals with
          > music
          > > > > > companies
          > > > > > > > and
          > > > > > > > > > > > TV networks to ensure they are paid when users
          > view their
          > > > > > content.
          > > > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > > > This month YouTube unveiled its first deal to
          > distribute
          > > > music
          > > > > > > > > videos
          > > > > > > > > > > > legally from a major music company by agreeing a
          > deal with
          > > > > > Warner
          > > > > > > > > > > > Music Group, home to pop stars James Blunt and
          > Madonna.
          > > > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > > > In other remarks, meanwhile, the often-
          > controversial Cuban
          > > > > > also
          > > > > > > > told
          > > > > > > > > > > > advertisers that the reach of YouTube is limited,
          > > > particularly
          > > > > > > > > when it
          > > > > > > > > > > > comes to user-generated videos.
          > > > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > > > "User-generated content is not going away," he
          > said. "But
          > > > > > do you
          > > > > > > > > want
          > > > > > > > > > > > your advertising dollars spent on a video of Aunt
          > Jenny
          > > > > > watching
          > > > > > > > her
          > > > > > > > > > > > niece tap dance?"
          > > > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > > > "Somebody puts up something really good and you
          > get, what,
          > > > > > 60,000
          > > > > > > > > > > > viewers?" Cuban added during the event at
          > Advertising Week
          > > > > > in New
          > > > > > > > > > > > York.
          > > > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > > > YouTube now offers advertising through banner ads,
          > > > > > promotions and
          > > > > > > > > > > > sponsorships. It has said it plans to roll out a
          > range of
          > > > > > > > different
          > > > > > > > > > > > advertising options over the coming year.
          > > > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > > > Cuban cautioned advertisers against investing
          > heavily in
          > > > > > so-called
          > > > > > > > > > > > viral campaigns that are spread by users beyond
          > their
          > > > initial
          > > > > > > > > point of
          > > > > > > > > > > > distribution on YouTube or other video sharing
          > sites. But
          > > > he
          > > > > > > > touted
          > > > > > > > > > > > opportunities to run commercials on high-
          > definition
          > > > television
          > > > > > > > > such as
          > > > > > > > > > > > his HDNet network.
          > > > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > > > "What makes viral so special is it's so hard to
          > do. It's
          > > > > > so hard
          > > > > > > > to
          > > > > > > > > > > > plan. It's hard to stand out," he said,
          > describing 99
          > > > > > percent of
          > > > > > > > > money
          > > > > > > > > > > > advertisers spend on viral campaigns as "wasted."
          > > > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > > > "You guys love to be the trailing edge," he said.
          > > > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been
          > removed]
          > > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
          > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > >
          > > > > > > >
          > > > > > >
          > > > > > >
          > > > > > >
          > > > > > > --
          > > > > > > Sull
          > > > > > > http://vlogdir.com (a project)
          > > > > > > http://SpreadTheMedia.org (my blog)
          > > > > > > http://interdigitate.com (otherly)
          > > > > > >
          > > > > > >
          > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          > > > > > >
          > > > > >
          > > > > >
          > > > > >
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > > --
          > > Sull
          > > http://vlogdir.com (a project)
          > > http://SpreadTheMedia.org (my blog)
          > > http://interdigitate.com (otherly)
          > >
          > >
          > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          > >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > Yahoo! Groups Links
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
        • Soulhuntre
          Hey Mike :) You still interested in working with IT? Ken ... [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          Message 4 of 15 , Oct 11, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            Hey Mike :)

            You still interested in working with IT?

            Ken




            > -----Original Message-----
            > From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
            > [mailto:videoblogging@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Mike Meiser
            > Sent: Friday, September 29, 2006 4:23 PM
            > Subject: [videoblogging] Only a "moron" would buy YouTube, say Mark
            > Cuban
            >
            > Spotted this on another mailing list I'm on. Thought you all might find
            > it
            > interesting.
            >
            > Can't escape the youtube issues. :)
            >
            > -Mike
            >
            > From:
            > http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=internetNews&storyi
            > d=2006-09-28T210712Z_01_N28230044_RTRUKOC_0_US-MEDIA-
            > YOUTUBE.xml&src=rss&rpc=22
            > http://tinyurl.com/ed2zx
            >
            > Only a "moron" would buy YouTube, says Cuban
            > >
            > > By Paul Thomasch
            > >
            > > NEW YORK (Reuters) - Billionaire investor and dot-com veteran Mark
            > > Cuban had harsh words on Thursday for YouTube, the online site that
            > > lets people share video clips, saying only a "moron" would purchase
            > > the wildly popular start-up.
            > >
            > > Cuban, co-founder of HDNet and owner of the NBA's Dallas Mavericks,
            > > also said YouTube would eventually be "sued into oblivion" because of
            > > copyright violations.
            > >
            > > "They are just breaking the law," Cuban told a group of advertisers
            > in
            > > New York. "The only reason it hasn't been sued yet is because there
            > is
            > > nobody with big money to sue."
            > >
            > > YouTube, based in San Mateo, California, specializes in serving up
            > > short videos created by everyday people. Its popularity, with more
            > > than 100 million video showings daily, has spurred speculation the
            > > firm will be sold or taken public.
            > >
            > > But YouTube has also come under scrutiny because users often post
            > > copyrighted material, including music videos produced by
            > > well-established artists.
            > >
            > > YouTube company representatives were not immediately available to
            > > respond to Cuban's comments.
            > >
            > > Cuban said "anyone who buys that (YouTube) is a moron" because of
            > > potential lawsuits from copyright violations.
            > >
            > > 'GOING TO BE TOASTED'
            > >
            > > "There is a reason they haven't yet gone public, they haven't sold.
            > > It's because they are going to be toasted," said Cuban, who has sold
            > > start-ups to Yahoo Inc. and CompuServe.
            > >
            > > YouTube, which has nearly one-third of the U.S. Web video audience,
            > > three times that of Google Inc., or twice that of News Corp's
            > MySpace,
            > > has been working on signing licensing deals with music companies and
            > > TV networks to ensure they are paid when users view their content.
            > >
            > > This month YouTube unveiled its first deal to distribute music videos
            > > legally from a major music company by agreeing a deal with Warner
            > > Music Group, home to pop stars James Blunt and Madonna.
            > >
            > > In other remarks, meanwhile, the often-controversial Cuban also told
            > > advertisers that the reach of YouTube is limited, particularly when
            > it
            > > comes to user-generated videos.
            > >
            > > "User-generated content is not going away," he said. "But do you want
            > > your advertising dollars spent on a video of Aunt Jenny watching her
            > > niece tap dance?"
            > >
            > > "Somebody puts up something really good and you get, what, 60,000
            > > viewers?" Cuban added during the event at Advertising Week in New
            > > York.
            > >
            > > YouTube now offers advertising through banner ads, promotions and
            > > sponsorships. It has said it plans to roll out a range of different
            > > advertising options over the coming year.
            > >
            > > Cuban cautioned advertisers against investing heavily in so-called
            > > viral campaigns that are spread by users beyond their initial point
            > of
            > > distribution on YouTube or other video sharing sites. But he touted
            > > opportunities to run commercials on high-definition television such
            > as
            > > his HDNet network.
            > >
            > > "What makes viral so special is it's so hard to do. It's so hard to
            > > plan. It's hard to stand out," he said, describing 99 percent of
            > money
            > > advertisers spend on viral campaigns as "wasted."
            > >
            > > "You guys love to be the trailing edge," he said.
            > >
            >
            >
            > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > Yahoo! Groups Links
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >



            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.