Watch and learn… We can’t make this up. Seriously you have to watch this video.
If we had a nickle for every YouTuber or Tech Journalist that advised musicians that “YouTube” was the SOLUTION TO PIRACY we’d be rich. Really rich. I mean, really, really, really rich. We we’re told YouTube was “promotion” and “exposure” to make money other ways.
We were told how if you just “made stuff people wanted” and “connected with fans” then they would reward you with loyalty and support. Musicians were told they were “whining” about piracy and that they should “adapt and evolve” to the “new way” and just embrace all of this “awesome internet empowered promotion”.
Funny how it is when the shoe is on the other foot. See here’s the thing. All of these YouTuber’s make money from the advertising that runs on their YouTube videos. But when those videos are ripped from YouTube by fans and uploaded to Facebook guess who doesn’t get paid? Yup, you guessed it… the YouTuber’s are getting stiffed and they don’t like it.
Where is Larry Lessig to help these folks out? Remember kids, don’t break the internet! It’s “sharing economy” afterall. You do the work and silicon valley shares the profits.
Soooo… when a musician’s work is pirated on Napster, Grockster, Kazaa, Limewire, The Pirate Bay, oh and YouTube… Musicians should “get over it”. But when a YouTuber’s work, labor and creative output is devalued, or worse monetized by a third party (Facebook) who doesn’t pay them anything, well then, you know, that’s “bad”.
The issue gained national attention this year earning editorials and reports from the likes of Slate, “Facebook’s Piracy Problem” in July. Time followed with a story in August, “This Is Facebook’s Biggest Problem With Video Right Now.” And recently as November AdWeek chimed in, “Facebook’s ‘Freebooting’ Piracy Problem Just Cost Casey Neistat 20 Million Views“.
This quote from the AdWeek story above kind of says it all…
But then they ran into a problem known as “freebooting,” which entails republishing videos on social sites without the consent of the folks who made the clips. In essence, it’s a practice of intellectual-property theft that’s plagued Facebook more than other digital platforms—PR-wise, at least—in recent months thanks to a few whistle-blowers.
They go on…
“I spent roughly a week issuing take downs on Facebook—a convoluted process,” Neistat told Adweek. “I crowdsourced the process of finding the freebooters because there is no way to search Facebook. In all, I took down well over 50 different posts—[which was] not nearly all of them. I simply gave up after a while. I anecdotally kept track of the view counts—over 20 million views on the videos I took down.”
Here’s more to chew on from a post by Hank Green on Medium, “Theft, Lies and Facebook Video“.
According to a recent report from Ogilvy and Tubular Labs, of the 1000 most popular Facebook videos of Q1 2015, 725 were stolen re-uploads. Just these 725 “freebooted” videos were responsible for around 17 BILLION views last quarter. This is not insignificant, it’s the vast majority of Facebook’s high volume traffic. And no wonder, when embedding a YouTube video on your company’s Facebook page is a sure way to see it die a sudden death, we shouldn’t be surprised when they rip it off YouTube and upload it natively.
Facebook’s algorithms encourage this theft.
Hmmmmm… where have we heard this story before? Maybe it was Daily Finance back in 2010, “Viacom vs. YouTube/Google: A Piracy Case in Their Own Words“.
• On July 19, Chen wrote to Hurley and Karim: “Jawed, please stop putting stolen videos on the site. We’re going to have a tough time defending the fact that we’re not liable for the copyrighted material on the site because we didn’t put it up when one of the co-founders is blatantly stealing content from from other sites and trying to get everyone to see it.” Four days later, Karim sent a link to the other founders, and Hurley told him that if they rejected it, they needed to reject all copyrighted material. Karim’s reply: “I say we reject this one but not the others. This one is totally blatant.”
• A July 29 email conversation about competing video sites laid out the importance to YouTube of continuing to use the copyrighted material. “Steal it!” Chen said , and got a reply from Hurley, “hmmm, steal the movies?” Chen’s answer: “we have to keep in mind that we need to attract traffic. how much traffic will we get from personal videos? remember, the only reason our traffic surged was due to a video of this type.”
Yup, Karma meets irony… How very interwebs… Ok, Ok, Ok… Sorry, just one more…
Everyone’s creativity deserves to be protected. All creators should be united against the illegal, infringing and exploitative uses of their work (especially for profit) without consent or compensation.
The Trichordist 
>
I find this a strange post. You call karma on original artists like Kurzgesagt, whose content gets stolen. I would expect you to sympathize with them, seeing that they are in the same position as many music artists.
What is your message? Do you blame them for trying to make money through YouTube? Do you think they support an idot like Larry Lessig? I don’t get it. It seems a false opposition to me.
It appears you didn’t read to the end…
“Everyone’s creativity deserves to be protected. All creators should be united against the illegal, infringing and exploitative uses of their work (especially for profit) without consent or compensation.”
I did read to the end, but it still seemed confusing to me. But that might just be me.
And to prevent misunderstandings: I wholeheartedly agree with your actions to protect all content creators.
The comedy here is that most of the stuff on You Tube is already free booted! The majority of You Tube videos are posted by third parties, not the creators. Which means the creators provided no approval for the postings and they get no cut. You Tube can easily prevent these uploads with their Content ID software. But they choose not to – because it is pure profit and no cost. And they can get away with it because they bought Congress and the White house. The message is not that free booting is ok – rather it is down right ridiculous to complain when the number one free booting site (You Tube) is itself free booted by another site.
What is surprising is that YouTube seems to turn a blind eye to this, as it (as well as the content creator) will be missing out on the income that goes to Facebook and the freeloader that uploads the YT video to the Facebook video player.
This reminds me of your post about how Lloyds refused to insure Cox communications because there was proof of deliberate copyright infringement. Who insures Facebook?
Join the movement, #ProtectOurFutures , in route to change the current DMCA laws and to change the ridiculous unfair pay for streaming of digital content. Help stop internet piracy and illegal file sharing in a nonsense one-way-profits’ “share economy” of which none of the creatives have bought into (Legally or other). This “shit pie” or “share economy” has been offered up and served to all creatives without choice or being ordered. Why are we all stupid enough to eat it? Stand up and have your voices heard!