WhoseTube?Nick Douglas takes readers' questions about the impact of YouTube.

Slate contributor Nick Douglas was online at Washingtonpost.com on Thursday, July 19 to discuss the impact of YouTube and the world of online video. An unedited transcript of the chat follows.

(Continued from page 1)

PRINTDISCUSSE-MAILRSSRECOMMEND...SINGLE PAGE

FacebookMySpace Mixx Digg Reddit del.icio.us Furl Ma.gnolia SphereStumbleUponCLOSE

Nick Douglas: I made this point about lawsuits when Google bought YouTube. Google, I realized, saw the potential of online video about to be crushed. YouTube was destined for a lawsuit (which is why I foolishly concluded that the company would die). So Google bought the lawsuits. That is, Google swooped in, made deals with almost every potential plaintiff, and is now negotiating with Viacom, something YouTube couldn't have done on its own. So as a Google property, YouTube is helping to set good precedents. If YouTube had remained independent, it probably would have lost its suits (having no money to defend itself) and set some of the chilling precedents that we've seen in online radio. (Incidentally, I wonder why Google decided online audio wasn't worth this protective action. I mean, I'd have to agree that online audio isn't as important as video, but still.)

_______________________

Mountain View, Calif.: As a follow up to your reply about publishing more candidate campaign moments: do you think that live streaming sites, like Ustream TV, are more apt to facilitating presidential candidates?

Nick Douglas: They would be, if a candidate had the guts to stream. There's a brilliant documentary whose name I forget; it uses footage from satellite-to-station streams to show the candidates before and after TV appearances. We learn a lot about the softly Machiavellian moves that the players make. For instance, Larry King desperately tries to talk himself up as a potential presidential debate moderator to Bill Clinton. If a candidate let a live stream capture all this, I'd definitely watch it. Why not Kucinich? Isn't he our "Do whatever, you have no chance" guy this time around?

_______________________

Mountain View, Calif.: What do you think of "livecasting"—sites like Justin.tv who are broadcasting people's lives online, 24 hours a day? Will this phenomenon last?

Nick Douglas: It'll last, but it's still in its infancy. We'll need a much more sophisticated delivery system than a low-res stream. I tried broadcasting for Justin.tv for a week; I quickly realized how dull a constant stream was, and how it mostly attracted bored and negative "fans." I'd like to see more live shows; Justin.tv, as far as I know, is looking into some live shows that take advantage of real-time viewer chat (for instance, letting the broadcaster chat with viewers through a Blackberry). There's also great potential for COPS-type reality shows. And yes, some people would be interesting to watch 24/7. But it often takes a good budget to give someone the luxury of being interesting all day.

_______________________

Bangkok, Thailand: Why did YouTube take so long recently to take down offensive video clips to the majority of Thais(maligning HM the King)when it hypocritically forbids such material in the first place? We fully support freedom of expression in Thailand and nobody condoned the government's decision to block YouTube when it did but YouTube should have complied with its own rules to gain credibility.

Nick Douglas: I'm afraid I don't know the legal issues involved, but it's my understanding that Google maintains YouTube's servers in the U.S. and thus maintains that only U.S. law applies to their content. That's the claim they made in a similar case in Brazil. "Offensive" is, of course, a loaded word, and Google wants to interpret such terms in the tightest way possible to avoid censorship. The situation is much more complex but that's all I can add.

_______________________

The Fray: Youtube's "permissiveness" and its choice of short-form (< 10 minute) video clips are linked. The time limit means would-be scalawags can't post entire TV shows and movies without splitting them up. That decision helps YouTube argue that it's not designed to be a gigantic copyright infringement tool. Perhaps that'll make a difference in court, perhaps it won't. But it's the kind of design decision companies make in the face of copyright law run amok: an arbitrary limit on functionality, a sacrifice to appease the angry lawyer gods.

Nick Douglas: To be honest, I could believe YouTube's argument that they're not DESIGNED to be a tool for stealing. But it's obvious that the site is a piracy tool. YouTube has taken measures to help major content producers get their content off; it's harder to find a Simpsons episode now than it was a year ago. (I've tried.) But what scares me is their attitude of "We'll leave it alone until you come to us." Okay, this works for CBS or Fox, who have lawyers to do this sort of thing. But does the Joe Schmoe Comedy Troupe have to constantly scour for copies of their material?

At the same time, I'll grant that YouTube just can't afford to actively hunt down all copyrighted info. How do they know that the Joe Schmoe clip isn't uploaded by a member of the troupe for publicity?

Someone needs to invent a clever term for technology that destroys our previous understanding of strategy. Online video does to moving pictures what nuclear weapons do to war — you have to invent new ways of figuring out strategy using the vast new firepower given to everyone.

That was an awful metaphor, but hopefully it worked for someone.

_______________________

Bowie: Back in the days of the Internet bubble, there were a lot of websites with business models not far removed from "we lose money on every sale, but make up for it in volume."

Can YouTube continue to dominate only by not making money?

Nick Douglas: Check their front page. There's a video ad. I wouldn't assume they don't make a good bit of money.

And, of course, by integrating with Google search, YouTube makes more money for the parent company.

_______________________

New York, N.Y.: I see YouTube has an online video bulletin board.

How do you see the user interface evolving over the next five years?

PRINTE-MAILRECOMMEND...RSS

FacebookMySpace Mixx Digg Reddit del.icio.us Furl Ma.gnolia SphereStumbleUponCLOSE

SPONSORED CONTENT

• Turkey Takes a Holiday
  Prudie counsels a vegan whose family refuses to go meatless for Christmas—and other advice seekers.
  Dec. 7, 2009
• Fiance on the Down Low
  Prudie counsels a woman whose partner has secret sex with men—and other advice seekers.
  Nov. 30, 2009
• Thanksgiving Misgivings
  Prudie talks turkey with advice seekers about the upcoming holiday and all its pitfalls.
  Nov. 23, 2009
• Search for more Chat Room, The articles
• Subscribe to the Chat Room, The RSS feed
• View our complete Chat Room, The archive