Comments on: Free Video! Public Domain Video Should Be Public http://www.mediaite.com/online/make-public-domain-video-public/ Mediaite Fri, 10 Feb 2012 18:57:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=2012.06 By: Magister http://www.mediaite.com/online/make-public-domain-video-public/#comment-12285 Magister Sat, 05 Dec 2009 08:57:25 +0000 http://www.mediaite.com/?p=53692#comment-12285 BTW: I added an addendum to my boingboing comment making clear that I didn't interpret Mr Malamud's words to imply an "evil plot" and that I fully support his efforts. I also wished him luck with Congress, but I'll reiterate over here that Google, Microsoft or even MTVnetworks (iFilm), AOL Video or Ross Perot could get the ball rolling. BTW: I added an addendum to my boingboing comment making clear that I didn’t interpret Mr Malamud’s words to imply an “evil plot” and that I fully support his efforts. I also wished him luck with Congress, but I’ll reiterate over here that Google, Microsoft or even MTVnetworks (iFilm), AOL Video or Ross Perot could get the ball rolling.

]]> By: Magister http://www.mediaite.com/online/make-public-domain-video-public/#comment-12284 Magister Sat, 05 Dec 2009 08:34:50 +0000 http://www.mediaite.com/?p=53692#comment-12284 Thanks for the link and the following is the comment that I made to the boingboing thread; --- Unless I'm missing something... Amazon has a non-exclusive right to reproduce the footage onto disks. Their rights to the material is non-exclusive because it's public domain and anyone could do the same with equal footing. The actual disks have a cost. The government isn't going to underwrite the cost of producing, reproducing and distributing disks. Now, technology has advanced to the point that the material could be archived and streamed, but someone would have to prepare the material for streaming which would come at a cost and in this instance, Mr. Malamud has provided that service. Perhaps Congress could be persuaded to finance the transference of the remaining material, but that would also come at a cost and would have to be budgeted. As a taxpayer, I would object to any one company (Google/YouTube) having exclusive streaming rights, so if the electronic encoding were to occur on the government dime, it would need to be prepared in a format that could stream via any service (current and future), or it would need to exist on a government server. Way back in the early days of the internet, myself and hundreds of others took government-prepared, public domain documents and had them typed into an electronic format, so they could be served on our websites. We underwrote this effort with the promise of advertising and there were no limits on who was doing it, we just had to obtain the material and pay for the encoding ourselves. IOW: I don't see any kind of evil plot. Up until relatively recently, disks were the most efficient way to make this material available and Amazon seized an opportunity. Obviously the technology now exists to stream the material, but unless an army of volunteers were to appear, it'll have to be paid for and if tax dollars will be used for this effort, Congress would have to provide for it and no one company could benefit. Though of course, if Google, Microsoft or somebody wanted provide this service, they'd just be doing the same as Amazon (on equal footing) and the project could start tomorrow. Thanks for the link and the following is the comment that I made to the boingboing thread;
—

Unless I’m missing something…

Amazon has a non-exclusive right to reproduce the footage onto disks. Their rights to the material is non-exclusive because it’s public domain and anyone could do the same with equal footing.

The actual disks have a cost. The government isn’t going to underwrite the cost of producing, reproducing and distributing disks. Now, technology has advanced to the point that the material could be archived and streamed, but someone would have to prepare the material for streaming which would come at a cost and in this instance, Mr. Malamud has provided that service.

Perhaps Congress could be persuaded to finance the transference of the remaining material, but that would also come at a cost and would have to be budgeted.

As a taxpayer, I would object to any one company (Google/YouTube) having exclusive streaming rights, so if the electronic encoding were to occur on the government dime, it would need to be prepared in a format that could stream via any service (current and future), or it would need to exist on a government server.

Way back in the early days of the internet, myself and hundreds of others took government-prepared, public domain documents and had them typed into an electronic format, so they could be served on our websites. We underwrote this effort with the promise of advertising and there were no limits on who was doing it, we just had to obtain the material and pay for the encoding ourselves.

IOW: I don’t see any kind of evil plot. Up until relatively recently, disks were the most efficient way to make this material available and Amazon seized an opportunity. Obviously the technology now exists to stream the material, but unless an army of volunteers were to appear, it’ll have to be paid for and if tax dollars will be used for this effort, Congress would have to provide for it and no one company could benefit.

Though of course, if Google, Microsoft or somebody wanted provide this service, they’d just be doing the same as Amazon (on equal footing) and the project could start tomorrow.

]]>