http://www.vincentnguyen.com/youtube-owns-your-content-2006101.php a daddy, technology blogger, social media evangelist, & entrepreneur Tue, 07 Feb 2012 10:02:03 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7.1 hourly 1 http://www.vincentnguyen.com/youtube-owns-your-content-2006101.php/comment-page-1#comment-19 YouTube doesn’t own your content » Wagalulu - Web Development » » YouTube doesn’t own your content Wed, 26 Jul 2006 20:58:11 +0000 http://www.vincentnguyen.com/youtube-owns-your-content-2006101.php#comment-19 [...] media and the Internet » Bookmark on del.icio.us Last week, several dozen high profile bloggers jumped the gun and started writing nasty thingsabout YouTube’s new terms. …by submitting the User Submissions to YouTube, you hereby grant YouTube a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free, sublicenseable and transferable license to use, reproduce, distribute, prepare derivative works of, display, and perform the User Submissions in connection with the YouTube Website and YouTube’s (and its successor’s) business… in any media formats and through any media channels. http://www.youtube.com/t/terms Bloggers across the blogosphere simply reposted what Wired magazine and BoingBoing posted without actually reading the terms themselves. As pointed out on a couple blogs, Eliot Van Buskirk, the original poster failed to disclose that the terms also contain the following two statements. For clarity, you retain all of your ownership rights in your User Submissions. The foregoing license granted by you terminates once you remove or delete a User Submission from the YouTube Website. This completely contradicts Eliot’s claims, BoingBoing’s claims and well everybody elses. Digging further, you’ll also find out that these supposedly new terms have been around for at least six months, if not longer. But, the real truth is that these terms are standard for any forum or community where the users generate the content. In order for YouTube to play your video for me, they require that they license that video from you. That’s what this license says. Nothing more. [...] [...] media and the Internet » Bookmark on del.icio.us Last week, several dozen high profile bloggers jumped the gun and started writing nasty thingsabout YouTube’s new terms. …by submitting the User Submissions to YouTube, you hereby grant YouTube a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free, sublicenseable and transferable license to use, reproduce, distribute, prepare derivative works of, display, and perform the User Submissions in connection with the YouTube Website and YouTube’s (and its successor’s) business… in any media formats and through any media channels. http://www.youtube.com/t/terms Bloggers across the blogosphere simply reposted what Wired magazine and BoingBoing posted without actually reading the terms themselves. As pointed out on a couple blogs, Eliot Van Buskirk, the original poster failed to disclose that the terms also contain the following two statements. For clarity, you retain all of your ownership rights in your User Submissions. The foregoing license granted by you terminates once you remove or delete a User Submission from the YouTube Website. This completely contradicts Eliot’s claims, BoingBoing’s claims and well everybody elses. Digging further, you’ll also find out that these supposedly new terms have been around for at least six months, if not longer. But, the real truth is that these terms are standard for any forum or community where the users generate the content. In order for YouTube to play your video for me, they require that they license that video from you. That’s what this license says. Nothing more. [...]

]]>