The offer applies only to people who own the full copyright of the videos that they are uploading to the YouTube website.While it is clear that users uploading Colbert and Family Guy will not be paid for their services, I'm a bit curious about this "full copyright" jargon. Take the example of Dilpreet and Minhaws:
Minhaws is riding his bike on campus. Dilpreet happens to have her video camera rolling when . . . suddenly . . . Minhaws bikes straight into a campus golfcart! And Dilpreet caught the whole thing on tape! Obviously, Dilpreet uploads Minhaws to YouTube, where he soars to the top of the user ratings! And oh is Dilpreet happy, because the $$ is rolling in . . .
But Minhaws happened to be wearing his favorite James Blunt tee-shirt that day. . . and last time I checked, Warner Bros has the exclusive rights to Señor Blunt, including his name and likeness. So, does Dilpreet own the full copyright? Is Dilpreet an infringer? Would YouTube honor a Warner take down notice in this instance? Granted, I have been continuously editing this poor example for over thirty minutes and it's time for bed . . . but there is a real issue here:
How will the entertainment industry react to individual users profiting from videos they deem as infringing? And what about Minhaws . . . after all, HE hit the golfcart! Doesn't he deserve a share of the profits . . . . (nevermind)
(via BBC News)