Comments on: Thanks, lawyers!

Thanks, lawyers!

mullingitover — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 17:32:15 -0800

YouTube is taking down Daily Show and Colbert Report clips.

By: sdrawkcab

sdrawkcab — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 17:35:26 -0800

It's almost as though...someone is trying to make money! The horror!!!

By: mullingitover

mullingitover — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 17:37:59 -0800

It's interesting that it's a "third party" requesting that the links be taken down. Given Comedy Central's lenient attitude about posting the show, I have to wonder if enemies of either YouTube or Comedy Central sent in counterfeit takedown notices. I just can't see how this benefits Comedy Central.

By: jack_mo

jack_mo — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 17:42:08 -0800

Good Christ, how will YouTube survive without the occasionally not wholly unamusing content?

By: Ironmouth

Ironmouth — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 17:42:11 -0800

I'd guess that Comedy Central will be doing their own posting, like many other tv providers are doing.

By: mr_crash_davis

mr_crash_davis — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 17:42:42 -0800

Google's deep pockets are an attractive target, aren't they?

By: Target Practice

Target Practice — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 17:46:05 -0800

Is this really a surprise? Google owns YouTube now, and Google Video has always had strict rules about copyrighted material.

By: smackfu

smackfu — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 17:46:20 -0800

Now we'll have to start linking to crooksandliars again.

By: shnoz-gobblin

shnoz-gobblin — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 17:47:04 -0800

It's almost as though...someone is trying to make money! The horror!!! Is there a pay site that shows all the Daily Show and Colbert Report videos?

By: mdn

mdn — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 17:49:05 -0800

you can buy 'em off iTunes.

By: HuronBob

HuronBob — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 17:52:26 -0800

The surprise is what?

By: mullingitover

mullingitover — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 17:52:51 -0800

Daily Show and Colbert Report torrents are going to work a lot faster now. Time to go back to the Azureus RSS plugin and just get the entire episodes.

By: Nathanial Hörnblowér

Nathanial Hörnblowér — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 17:53:05 -0800

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!! *sigh*

By: elpapacito

elpapacito — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 17:56:43 -0800

It's almost as though...someone is trying to make money! The horror!!! Make money ? Only government make money, others take away from someone else pocket, giving exactly what back ?

By: stammer

stammer — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 17:57:59 -0800

Comedy Central already stream all the segments online, for free. I imagine they'll be back on YouTube soon enough.

By: F Mackenzie

F Mackenzie — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 18:01:49 -0800

Oh, you'll see Comedy Central on YouTube soon enough. But the clips will be posted by MTV Networks, packaged with Adsense, and perhaps even commercials. This is step two. Step one was taken in August.

By: _sirmissalot_

_sirmissalot_ — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 18:07:16 -0800

YouLube

By: dhartung

dhartung — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 18:13:23 -0800

It's interesting that it's a "third party" requesting that the links be taken down. No, they're just referring to third-party liability. The owner is Comedy Central, the infringer is the person who posted the clip, and YouTube is the "third party". If they fail to act on the DMCA, they are open to a contributory infringement claim.

By: benATthelocust

benATthelocust — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 18:13:24 -0800

There is so much content anymore that I wonder just how profitable pay-for-play services are for players like Comedy Central and MTV. I, for one, see more of The Daily Show and things like music videos on "open" services like YouTube. They wouldn't even be on my radar if it wasn't for YouTube.

By: unSane

unSane — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 18:15:11 -0800

If I were them I would do this too. They want to open up YouTube as a revenue stream but it will be impossible to do this if they do not draw a line in the sand. Expect micropayments.

By: mullingitover

mullingitover — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 18:16:27 -0800

It's so fascinating that the USA was a 'pirate nation' for so much of its history. I'd like to see Europe start to demand reparations for the 100+ years of copyright and patent infringement we've indulged in. It would also be interesting to see a country try to be a pirate nation now...Oh wait, that's China.

By: gsteff

gsteff — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 18:22:01 -0800

This isn't about comedy central or The Daily Show, it's about advertisers not wanting YouTube to destroy the TV business model. While YouTube was relatively new and was seen as a way to build buzz for products, advertisers were ok with it, but now that it's being backed by Google, they're worried that it could become an alternative to television itself, and are going to force the networks to fight it.

By: VulcanMike

VulcanMike — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 18:24:45 -0800

omg dey yhood ma flkr!

By: MetaMonkey

MetaMonkey — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 18:26:30 -0800

I really don't get why this is a big deal. If someone started broadcasting their own TV channel with copied material, and everyone started to watch that, there'd be no more money for TV shows. That's what is happening with YouTube - the money to make the shows has to come from somewhere, so they'll eventually come to agreements for internet licencing, to be paid for by micropayments, ads or subscription. Simply: TV is moving on to the internet, and it's a long time coming. Expect more adverts, but higher video quality, and far more video to choose from. It could work out pretty well for eveybody, so long as the content owners don't get dumb and greedy (*crosses fingers*).

By: VulcanMike

VulcanMike — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 18:29:34 -0800

gsteff said: This isn't about comedy central or The Daily Show, it's about advertisers not wanting YouTube to destroy the TV business model. I'll be you $1.65 billion that this is war is already over. Oh, and good timing -- this is literally today's news: Google execs have vowed the company will not soften its stance on copyright once it has completed the purchase of video sharing website YouTube. ... YouTube and Google have seen the ham-fisted Digital Rights Management mistakes of Sony and others, and learnt that trying to completely control the way users view or listen to copyrighted material is counterproductive. Instead, the company seems keen to make the most out of new technology by working with it rather than against it.

By: scottreynen

scottreynen — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 18:36:25 -0800

Comedy Central already stream all the segments online, for free Indeed, the clips straight from Comedy Central are generally more complete than what shows up on YouTube, and they've been around much longer. I've been scraping RSS feeds of these clips for about two years now, if anyone's looking for a new source to watch Comedy Central shows online. The only downside is that the clips are Windows Media format.

By: thebigdeadwaltz

thebigdeadwaltz — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 18:44:31 -0800

It was bound to happen... It's still a damn shame though!

By: caddis

caddis — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 18:45:51 -0800

Time for an email campaign to Comedy Central, Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert. It's only to their benefit to allow this stuff up. Half of the reason these shows are so popular is all the buzz they get on the internet by people posting these clips.

By: cellphone

cellphone — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 18:52:59 -0800

How is this a DMCA violation?

By: jimfl

jimfl — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 18:53:12 -0800

I don't watch TV. When someone asks me if I've seen the latest episode of 'Lost' I can only remind them of the fact that I don't watch TV. Though when I am asked about the latest relevant episode of The Daily Show, I can usually respond in the affirmative (specifically: "Fuck yeah!") No longer. Point: terrorists.

By: runningdogofcapitalism

runningdogofcapitalism — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 18:54:39 -0800

Always count on the lawyers to suck the fun out of life.

By: muckster

muckster — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 18:55:29 -0800

The Market 2.0

By: George_Spiggott

George_Spiggott — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 18:57:16 -0800

It's almost as though...someone is trying to make money! The horror!!! sdrawkcab, in light of this comment it's sorta interesting that your homepage (as linked from your user profile at this writing) consists entirely of embedded youtube clips of television programs.

By: PinkStainlessTail

PinkStainlessTail — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 19:03:40 -0800

I just can't see how this benefits Comedy Central. I don't think I've bothered to tune into either show once since the best clips became available online. Datapoint.

By: clevershark

clevershark — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 19:07:26 -0800

In a couple of years Google will discover that it has paid $1.6 billion in stock for a web site with a huge collection of insipid videocasts by angsty and abored 14-year olds, because anything and everything of interest will have been taken off YouTube by copyright suits...

By: furtive

furtive — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 19:07:39 -0800

Not having a Tivo, and refusing to sit in front of the TV at 11pm, or whenever it's on, the youtube links to The Daily Show were a godsend. Now that it's gone, I'll just have to go back to eating dirt.

By: Effigy2000

Effigy2000 — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 19:17:31 -0800

This is a cryin' shame, to be sure. Thank god for BitTorrent, though.

By: Mikey-San

Mikey-San — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 19:23:44 -0800

I don't think I've bothered to tune into either show once since the best clips became available online. Datapoint. "Anecdote" is not a synonym for "data". It could be argued that the prevalence of clips floating around keeps people interested in watching the show on a regular basis.

By: fenriq

fenriq — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 19:34:23 -0800

You know, it was funny, I tried to find the Rich Franklin and Anderson Silva fight on YouTube but it wasn't there. So I checked Google Video and it was super easy to find. I like hypocrisy in my tech overlords

By: PinkStainlessTail

PinkStainlessTail — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 19:37:04 -0800

Reports of personal behavior are in fact data. However, one individual's experience does not represent conclusive data, nor was my presentation of such meant so to be. (15 love, your serve.)

By: Kickstart70

Kickstart70 — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 19:37:58 -0800

Lots of places to get Colbert and Stewart. I just hope they don't take down Olbermann. With MSNBC's crappy non-linux-compatible video player I depend on YouTube to show me those clips.

By: Pastabagel

Pastabagel — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 19:40:15 -0800

The objective is not to get peope to watch the show. The objective, Viacom's objective, is to sell advertising first, and boost cable ratings second. Not so good for Jon Stewart et al who made themselves relevant, but Google couldnt' allow it to continue. They've got to monetize the angsty teen diary side of it, becasue thats the revenue. On the whole, this will ultimately be good for apple.

By: homunculus

homunculus — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 19:47:46 -0800

Back to Crooks and Liars, I guess.

By: Mikey-San

Mikey-San — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 19:51:04 -0800

(15 love, your serve.) I don't understand the goal of this little bit tacked on at the end. Is it supposed to make you sound clever or right? Both? Is it intended to belittle anything I have said previously, or perhaps even preemptively downplay any response I might have in the future? Go back and look at what you said originally. You come off authoritative. I said what I said because it shoudn't be taken that way. Whether your anecdote is qualitatively relevant or not, it required grounding.

By: dhammond

dhammond — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 19:54:04 -0800

How is this a DMCA violation? Are you serious? The fact that this is a DMCA violation is not even debatable. It's copyrighted content, posted without the permission of the rightsholder.

By: dhammond

dhammond — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 19:56:07 -0800

I like hypocrisy in my tech overlords This doesn't have anything to do with hypocrisy, really. Google has yet to receive a takedown notice and, when they do, they will take the clips down. Such is the very fun game of DMCA whack-a-mole.

By: fenriq

fenriq — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 20:00:24 -0800

dhammond, but Google is YouTube. Or they own it at least. But you are right, it s a silly game of whack-a-mole. There's still plenty of places to get the clips. Honestly though, I don't really find Colbert's show all that funny, it seems alot repetitive and more "hammy" than I can put up with. I liked Colbert more when he was still Jon Stewart's bitch.

By: Mikey-San

Mikey-San — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 20:03:00 -0800

So, who's Stewart's bitch now? I think that's really what's important here.

By: leftcoastbob

leftcoastbob — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 20:04:10 -0800

You can always watch clips here. I do.

By: stbalbach

stbalbach — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 20:09:00 -0800

One of things that made the Daily Show such a success was its viral quality - the passing of clips around, and the public discourse it created. Locking those clips up will reduce the amount of chatter and bring down overall ratings - there will be less aggregate attention paid to the Daily Show. John knows this, but the lawyers can't see past their own noses to understand how the hidden internet currency of attention works.

By: stavrosthewonderchicken

stavrosthewonderchicken — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 20:09:33 -0800

There's so much Stupid here, it's hard to know where to start. Google buying Youtube for elenty gajillion dollars, Comedy Central thinking that segments of the shows up on streaming sites are anything but a net positive, the mad piggy clueless scramble of advertisers to suck money out of as much as they can as quickly as they can, right on down to this post itself ("It's over"? Yep, the end is nigh. I'm about to hang myself out of grief after this bit of news). On the whole, this will ultimately be good for apple. More's the pity, those DRM cultural stealth-injection shitweasels.

By: dhammond

dhammond — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 20:09:58 -0800

Google is YouTube. Or they own it at least. Technically (and technically is all the lawyers care about), I don't think the sale has closed yet. My guess is that, as of today, YouTube is not legally part of Google. But, even if I'm wrong about that, it is a long process to track down links for thousands of clips and get the documentation in order. The Google stuff will come soon is my best bet (or maybe Comedy Central does a PPV deal with them).

By: econous

econous — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 20:12:26 -0800

daily show and colbert report clips have gone forever.. oh Mohamed on my cock what are we to do.. oups I've just shat in my pants with disappointment. It would have missed your attention that they were shit anyhow. If you had seen Paxman you'd not be worrying about ironed flat crap like that. Blessed ladies fuck holes, what has become of the single best hope for humanity.. nothing Europe is still there. Yeah think of the marketing, cause it aint political.

By: Kickstart70

Kickstart70 — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 20:16:11 -0800

econous, was that intended to be deep, indecipherable, both, or neither? However, you reached 'lame' within the first 10 words.

By: mathowie

mathowie — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 20:17:07 -0800

Comedy Central is too smart to leave youtube completely forever. I bet it all returns soon under an official Comedy Central user account. So this big takedown is just to kill the unofficial clips.

By: econous

econous — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 20:29:21 -0800

Kickstart70 those two shows were the most potent criticism broadcast in the nation, the greatest analysis on TV. The conversation in the thread is powerful evidence that the nicest empire ever seems to be missing the point.

By: PinkStainlessTail

PinkStainlessTail — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 20:30:17 -0800

Go back and look at what you said originally. You come off authoritative. No I didn't. You are in error, sir.

By: kenlayne

kenlayne — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 21:02:49 -0800

So who's going to be the smart guy and start a YouTube in some Enemy of America country? Maybe Venezuela? It's a good market for a non-Google adwords biz, too.

By: delmoi

delmoi — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 21:38:16 -0800

This isn't about comedy central or The Daily Show, it's about advertisers not wanting YouTube to destroy the TV business model. It's not about the advertisers; it's about the network. Advertisers can go advertise on youtube, and probably target a hell of a lot better then they can on comedy central. They'd love it. It's the networks that don't want to lose their content. Still, I'm really surprised that Colbert would have his clips taken down, given how much he talks about youtube and promotes it. So who's going to be the smart guy and start a YouTube in some Enemy of America country? Maybe Venezuela? Good luck with the bandwidth... If you tried to do it it would probably starve the entire nation's Internet feed.

By: fenriq

fenriq — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 21:46:16 -0800

dhammond, good point on the sale not being finalized yet. I guess they're just starting with the biggest and easiest whack-a-mole to start smashing on. I don't see YouTube working as a pay-per-viewing model though. the quality absolutely blows.

By: signal

signal — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 21:54:59 -0800

You know, if I wasn't busy waiting for tonight's battlestar galactica to download, I might give a flying fuck about this.

By: bonaldi

bonaldi — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 22:02:52 -0800

1. Google launch video site: is full of dull copyright-free tedious shit, nobody uses it. 2. YouTube launch site: is full of neat things. Everyone uses it! 3. Google look at their crappy and busted, want hot and shiny. Buy it! 4. Ouch, too hot. Too shiny. Hurts eyes. 5. Google say: "we will do same things with this that we did with Google Video". 6. Google's new video site: full of dull copyright-free tedious shit, nobody using it. 6. Youtubers launch boat: on caribbean, everyone full of pina coladas!

By: MetaMonkey

MetaMonkey — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 22:15:15 -0800

The thing is, google video has as plenty of copyrighted stuff perhaps vaguely as much as youtube - but at much higher quality, and full length. YouTube with its shitty quality and short snippets is not a good replacement for the original show, while google video is.

By: MetaMonkey

MetaMonkey — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 22:16:21 -0800

sorry as, insert comma after 'stuff'

By: sourwookie

sourwookie — Sat, 28 Oct 2006 00:09:59 -0800

I haven't shelled out a cent to cable for three minute lo-res clips before youtube and I'm not about to start paying cable for three minute lo-res clips after youtube. I might consider watching broadcast, but I haven't been able to pick up anything but snow via an antannae for at least a decade. It was a fun year, TV, but I've gotten along just fine without you most of my life. My wallet is still not your turf.

By: Riovanes

Riovanes — Sat, 28 Oct 2006 01:07:03 -0800

Youtube died for me when Metalocalypse was taken off, which was about two days after the takeover. R.I.P. (At least I can still watch Inu-Yasha ... god I'm a nerd) I for one am glad to have traded television for torrents and generous websites. Advertising bugs the shit out of me, and I will never take for granted the ability to just watch a program instead of spending 8 minutes every 1/2 hour being bombarded with, essentially, corporate propaganda. I show up at movies ten minutes late on purpose now, to avoid that giant screen telling me that drinking Diet Coke will make my life rule in unimaginable ways.

By: PeterMcDermott

PeterMcDermott — Sat, 28 Oct 2006 01:25:46 -0800

Go back and look at what you said originally. You come off authoritative. He described his experience, and followed it with the word 'datapoint'. Which was precisely what he was providing -- a single point of data.

By: sparkletone

sparkletone — Sat, 28 Oct 2006 02:00:04 -0800

YouLube YouLube your GooTube.

By: 29

29 — Sat, 28 Oct 2006 02:02:34 -0800

to econous:

By: 29

29 — Sat, 28 Oct 2006 02:04:58 -0800

uhhh i meant

By: evil holiday magic

evil holiday magic — Sat, 28 Oct 2006 03:58:51 -0800

I'm sure the marketing and legal departments will find some way to shim a diluted, dumbed-down, over-produced, committee invented analogue to their thing we once loved into our good graces at the moment our outrage has passed through dull hostility and into leaden indifference. That logic worked for Napster.

By: XQUZYPHYR

XQUZYPHYR — Sat, 28 Oct 2006 05:30:50 -0800

By: mediareport

mediareport — Sat, 28 Oct 2006 06:01:17 -0800

Worth noting that the Google/MTV/AdSense experiment in August doesn't seem to have been a smashing success, since Viacom chairman Sumner Redstone swooped in and fired MTV CEO Tom Freston one month later, citing MTV's poor Internet performance as the major reason. I think Matt's got it above; unless Comedy Central has its head completely up its ass, it'll continue seeding YouTube with video clips, if for no other reason than to lure folks to its own site with the promise of more. That said, any deal that puts ads before video content is doomed to kill off any benefit to big companies. The key to viral marketing is the lack of barriers to sharing; put an ad in front of a clip and you'll watch the sharing slow down dramatically. I'd bet most folks in the business know this already; it's just a question of whether they can convince the dumbass money people to shut up and listen. Probably not.

By: econous

econous — Sat, 28 Oct 2006 06:40:52 -0800

29, fag me and move it.

By: schoolgirl report

schoolgirl report — Sat, 28 Oct 2006 07:37:51 -0800

cellphone: How is this a DMCA violation? It's not. dhammond: Are you serious? The fact that this is a DMCA violation is not even debatable. It's copyrighted content, posted without the permission of the rightsholder. That's copyright infringement, not a DMCA violation. The DMCA gives service providers safe harbor from copyright infringement claims so long as they comply with takedown notices. That's how the DMCA is involved in this.

By: signal

signal — Sat, 28 Oct 2006 09:15:23 -0800

evil holiday magic writes 'That logic worked for Napster.' ¿"Worked"?, really? Not from where I'm sitting.

By: FeldBum

FeldBum — Sat, 28 Oct 2006 11:27:21 -0800

South Park too! At least you can get basically the entire TDS and CR episodes from Motherload on comedycentral.com

By: mrgrimm

mrgrimm — Sat, 28 Oct 2006 11:40:19 -0800

i watched the South Park WoW episode off Google Video with the commercials removed. yet Kelis' Bossy video was pulled from YouTube. whack a mole is right. YouTube jumped the shark long ago. expect a micropayment system that only survives b/c of porn, or in-video ads.

By: mrgrimm

mrgrimm — Sat, 28 Oct 2006 11:41:05 -0800

¿"Worked"?, really? Not from where I'm sitting. i think that was sarcasm.

By: psmith

psmith — Sat, 28 Oct 2006 12:45:49 -0800

dhammond: Technically (and technically is all the lawyers care about), I don't think the sale has closed yet. You're correct. When the Agreement and Plan of Merger was signed, Google filed an 8-K, which you can see here. The 8-K says they "expect the transaction to close in the fourth calendar quarter of 2006." One of the things they're waiting on is U.S. Gov't antitrust approvalpursuant to the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act. This entails filings with the FTC and the DOJ and a statutory waiting period. It's likely they filed for early termination, but it doesn't appear it's been granted yet.

By: evil holiday magic

evil holiday magic — Sat, 28 Oct 2006 15:40:12 -0800

I, for one, am furious that once again it has been suggested $34.95 a month for internet access does not entitle me to immediate and inherent access to all media content produced in the world since the dawn of time. posted by XQUZYPHYR at 5:30 AM PST on October 28 [+] [!] I'm sorta pissed that enough money means copyrights are prevented from expiring normally and making it into the public domain. Or that even one-beat audio samples are considered royalty worthy intellectual property. Meanwhile tresspasses on private citizens (Ghyslain Raza/Star Wars Kid, or that jerkoff Aleksy Vayner) are helping companies collect ad revenue. Viral videos are often public humiliations exhibited for free with no benefit to the "content creators" or the participants, but (with the proposed ad model) a financial benefit to the usual suspects: Media companies who've grown so stale and disconnected they see their financial futures in home movies of hamsters trying to fuck bran muffins.

By: MildlyDisturbed

MildlyDisturbed — Sat, 28 Oct 2006 16:48:02 -0800

Does not appear as though they've been too successful - looking over on the highest-ranked ones of the day and there's The Daily Show

By: Falconetti

Falconetti — Sat, 28 Oct 2006 21:41:16 -0800

blah, blah, blah...the only thing I am interested in is what Cory Doctorow has to say about this.

By: clevershark

clevershark — Sun, 29 Oct 2006 12:52:34 -0800

If your lawyers are your primary means of doing business, don't be surprised if, after you nix all the free stuff, you still aren't meeting your sales/audience quotas.

By: flapjax at midnite

flapjax at midnite — Mon, 30 Oct 2006 07:34:45 -0800

Hey, anybody home? I heard it was still open around here... Helllooooooooo.....

By: smackfu

smackfu — Mon, 30 Oct 2006 21:19:20 -0800

Heh. During tonight's Daily Show they ran a commercial saying: "Missed last night's show? Now you don't have to get it one piece at a time from some crappy blog! Comedycentral.com has last night's Daily Show complete and uncut."

By: MetaMonkey

MetaMonkey — Mon, 30 Oct 2006 21:51:53 -0800

"Missed last night's show? Now you don't have to get it one piece at a time from some crappy blog! Comedycentral.com has last night's Daily Show complete and uncut." *ding ding ding* we have a winner!