TV Networks YouTube Clone Has Bigger Problems Than Antitrust Concerns

from the the-justice dept

Mon, Dec 18th 2006 9:16am — Joseph Weisenthal

There continues to be a lot of talk about the rumor that the various TV networks might build their own version of YouTube, a place to showcase their own content, that allows them to retain control as well as all revenue associated with the site. There are plenty of reasons to think this is a bad idea, not the least of which is the fact that a tightly controlled version of YouTube would violate that which makes YouTube popular in the first place. IP Democracy has taken a look at some of the relevant case law, to see if such a plan might run afoul with antitrust regulators. It appears the issue would come down to exclusivity. When the movie studios tried to create their own rival to HBO, it was deemed to be in violation, because the studios wanted to withhold content from HBO. More recently, the studios' misadventure into film downloads, Movielink, was given the green light, because there were no plans to make it an exclusive shop. So it may all depend on what the TV networks actually have in mind for the new site. It's hard to imagine that they'd launch such a site, but still allow their shows to be posted on YouTube. Then again, they'd probably make the argument that an unlicensed copy (of a show) posted on YouTube constitutes a copyright violation, a position that would probably hold up legally. Of course, if the networks were to keep all the content on their own sites, not allow embedding, and encumber it with DRM, then we fully expect the market to deal them an adequate punishment, with no help needed from the government. Network lawyers may be studying closely the legal implication of such a plan, but a possible antitrust case should probably be low on their list of concerns.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

6 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Monarch, 18 Dec 2006 @ 10:14am

Hey if the studios put up their current shows, without too many commercials, and no additional software that I need to download, I may occassionally watch a show or two.

But, if I need to download and install one plugin I don't already have, forget it!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Shohat, 18 Dec 2006 @ 10:33am

Its a great idea
It will be a real competitor to Youtube (currently there are just mini-competitors) , and the actual content owners will enjoy the revenue generated by the content .
Whats the problem ?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Dec 2006 @ 10:56am

YouTube Rules`
This whole entire thing is stupid. Simple facts are nothing is for free anymore. And everybody is out to rape you in the wallet. Well i got some advice for those people out there. Stop charge all these stupid ass charges and you will attract more people to your network or to buy from your company!!!!Music industry can go flip off!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
misanthropic humanist, 18 Dec 2006 @ 11:17am

Good for them
I agree with both of you, there's certainly no reason to resent legitimate content owners showcasing clips of their own material on sites they set up for exactly this purpose. I may even give it a browse if it meets the basic requirements Monarch mentions - a simple interface that allows me to download standard .mpeg files without JavaScript, proprietry plugins and all the usual obstacles and security risks. Moreover, if the intended aim of this venture is to promote DVD or theatre sales by word of mouth sharing they would quite simply be cutting their own throats to use any kind of DRM or system that makes it non-trivial to pop the clip on my phone or pod and show it to other people.

However, I Digg this story -1, it's moderately interesting but it isn't a technology story. It's a story about lawyers and unfathomable laws
which have no basis in reality. I have no interest in the machinations of ill informed legal commentators and their arbitary pontifications. I do not believe the law and lawyers have any place in technological advancement. The function of lawyers is only to impede progress, not to promote it, and as such they are the mortal enemies of progressive
ideology. Keeping law out of technology is as important as keeping politics and religion out of science.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Bum, 18 Dec 2006 @ 11:56am

Web 3.D
This is all just a fad. The three dimensional web where holograms and visors immerse the user is where the VC should be. I want to plug in! Not watch reruns of Law and Order - Elevator Inspection Unit.

(Web 3.D ® Copyright © Anonymous Bum 2006. All rights reserved)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The infamous Joe, 18 Dec 2006 @ 12:03pm

I got it!
Offer 1 million dollar rewards for anyone who turns in people who infringe on copyright laws!

Take that, me!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]