Friday, March 30, 2007
Thot bubbled #48
Why would entertainment suppliers have trouble with people posting clips of their stuff on Youtube? It's not like these clips are eating into their revenue stream. As far as I can see, it's free advertising. Or do they believe the people who watch clips on Youtube will start subscribing to their feed when they realise that they can't see it, grainily, for free on Youtube? The latest case of this foolishness is the ICC demanding that Youtube pull down all clips of the on-going World Cup of Cricket '07. Any thoughts that can help me deconstruct this puzzle?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Entertainment suppliers have traditionally hoarded all content as a possible revenue stream - now and in the future. If you see the repackaged, regurgitated collections of Beatles music you'll know what I mean.
By controlling the medium in which they distributed stuff, content companies have grown to believe that they could repackage and earn money endlessly.
So, rather foolhardily they continue to see any 'repackaging' as a threat to their monopoly over doing so. I also cannot help but think - that though it is beneficial in the short run - the real thing they are worried about are the gates opening and the flood sweeping them by.
All it takes is for one court ruling to state that the stuff on Youtube isn't illegal - and the walls of this mighty edifice will come crumbling down. Which is why they are fighting tooth-and-nail - even when it seems stupid to do so.
Post a Comment