With Google's purchase of YouTube.com, there are about a billion questions swarming around the web today. Google, Inc. (NASDAQ: GOOG) faces new challenges as it enters the uncharted territory that may bring even more riches to the Internet search leader as it desperately tries to jump out of the shadow of being a one-trick pony (Internet search). Just today, Google unleashed its Google Docs and Spreadsheets web-based threat against office productivity suites like Microsoft Office. So Google is definitely in the game of trying to move outside the pure search arena and gain revenue streams from other areas (mostly with advertising vehicles). This is good, and as I've said many times before, this is a strategy Google has needed to follow for a while, and 2006 is shaping up to be a watershed year in that direction for the Mountain View, CA company.
With YouTube.com, though, the bad areas that crop up according to bloggers -- even famous ones -- are intense issues with copyright violations that *may be* plaguing the social video-sharing website right now (and in the future). Google will surely clamp down on the sharing of copyrighted content in an effort to remind copyright holders and content producers that it can have a socially-responsible video-sharing website that is not a haven for stolen pieces of video.
But, like Apple Computer, Inc. (NASDAQ: AAPL) and its apparent negotiations with movie and music studios, Google may have to enter the policing stage to ensure that if it wants to use YouTube to recruit advertising, it won't have questionable and stolen content all over the place. I doubt Google will put in place the strong, DRM-laced controls that Apple uses, but you never know.
Is a second stimulus check up ahead?
Coke (KO) moving up nicely following Q3 earnings
Will Lehman bankruptcy drop a $400 billion shoe on October 21st?
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
10-11-2006 @ 3:04PM
OVGuide said...
With most of the content on YouTube being copyrighted, Google may be facing some big challenges ahead to legally own much of the material they acquired.
The future of online video might be more suited to separate providers that keep ownership of what they produce, much like TV networks that do not share their shows.
At OVGuide.com, we are taking an approach that connects users to the many different online providers, which in the end gives people more choices. It also helps keep ownership of copyrighted material to the sources who produced them.
10-11-2006 @ 4:27PM
an_observer said...
I'm not at all worried about legal actions from major studios. They'll deal rather than sue their way to the banks. I am worried about all the participants inside those 100 million videos streamed a day, and every individual who play parts in each stage. There is no money in participating in YouTube right now. When money starts to flow, people will find their lawyers. YouTube's demise = lawsuits from an unimaginable large number of plaintiff coming from an unimaginable large number of different litigable angles.
That scenario is a resource-drain money pit, where irreparable PR/brand damages could be done to Google, a stock primarily valued on the basis of wild speculations.
Nevertheless, if these problems could be solved timely without dispelling end users, $1.65 billions = the best bargain since Louisiana purchase.
10-12-2006 @ 5:03AM
Jon T said...
You refer to "Apple's DRM laced controls"... as if it is the villain of the piece. It isn't.
Apple has done more to ensure the DRM requirments of the copyright holders are as LIBERAL as possible. Don't point the incriminating finger at Apple when it has done more than everyone else put together to make access to digital content accessible and affordable.
Geeesh, where does all this mis-information and ignorance come from? Wake up will you?
10-12-2006 @ 8:38AM
Brian said...
Nice try, Jon,
I am a huge Apple fan (as many readers know), but Apple's DRM is very (very) restrictive to the point that I don't own an iPod (for that reason). Apple's great UI and total user experience are first-rate and excellent, though (no argument there). But DRM? Come on! Disagree with you there (FairPlay). It's DRM handcuffing if I can't take my music anywhere else *except* one of Apple's products. Period.