« Get Your Video Popups Here! | Main | Update on YouTube and NBC scuffle »
February 19, 2006
NBC sends YouTube Take-Down Notice for SNL Lazy Sunday
This video is illegal.
YouTube received a take-down notice from NBC regarding the SNL Lazy Sunday video. That was sure a long time coming. Here's what YouTube says on their blog:
NBC recently contacted YouTube and asked us to remove Saturday Night Live's "Lazy Sunday: Chronicles of Narnia" video. We know how popular that video is but YouTube respects the rights of copyright holders. You can still watch SNL's "Lazy Sunday" video for free on NBC's website.
This response from YouTube must be firmly tongue-in-cheek. They "respect the rights of copyright holders"?! Give me a break. There's tons of infringing content all over YouTube. There's no way they could possibly plead ignorance here (they even hired the brother of one of the SNL sketch writers to be their "director of community" soon after they struck gold with this clip)... its clear that the video was infringing from the moment it was posted onto the site. Its an entire clip from SNL, not an excerpt, and certainly not fair use. Its got an NBC watermark on it.
At what point was YouTube given permission to re-broadcast this video to millions of viewers through their website? Its not like this was file sharing amongst a few friends, this was re-broadcasted on a video portal site to millions of viewers. This is like CBS recording Saturday Night Live and then airing it the next day... and everyday after that for weeks. YouTube quite obviously benefits from video plaigarism of this sort all the time... but then again they're not alone.
This clip was all over the internet. It was also on CollegeHumor.com, and yanked from there by Google Video (obvious from the CollegeHumor watermark, so its a copy of a copy on Google). It was probably on several other video hosting sites and portals (there's a lot of them out there now), as well as on several personal websites.
NBC later released the clip as a free download on iTunes (its now $1.99), and they offer it for free viewing on their website (only for PC users with Internet Explorer).
Of course, some people think that YouTube should be congratulated for their copyright infringing practices. Here's what Xeni Jardin says about it on BoingBoing:
This isn't like another television network broadcasting the skit without permission. YouTube is a service through which individual fans can share stuff they're nuts about with others. NBC issuing a C&D to YouTube makes about as much sense as NBC sending attorneys to the homes of every blogger or Livejournaler user who posted a link to a torrent somewhere
Sorry, Xeni, that's completely wrong. In the same blog entry where YouTube responds to the take-down notice they also say:
YouTube is now serving up more than 15 million videos streamed per day- that's nearly 465M videos streamed per month
So how exactly are they different from a TV network? How are they exempt from the laws and standard practices of the industry?
Posted by jkinberg at February 19, 2006 12:36 AM
Comments
awesome post about copyright , youtube, google video, etc...
Thanks for taking the time to write about it in such a coherent way
You nailed it...
Posted by: Steve Garfield at February 20, 2006 8:24 AM
you are dead on.....while I am no fan of the recording or motion picture BS, in this case NBC was clearly right and YouTube was clearly wrong and they had to know it, well before the C & D letter. Of course NBC did take it's time...........
Posted by: Heath at February 20, 2006 8:25 PM
youtube deleted my account because I had 3 videos from SNL on there.. I also gad over 500 other music videos....assholes
they were old SNL videos from the 80s too..
NBC can suck my fat cock. Rich mother fuckers who have nothing better to do...
ahwell I can still go to any p2p network or torrent site and download any SNL videos I damn well choose, and NBC can't do a damn thing about it. HAHAHA. I'm making illegal burned discs of my favorite NBC Performances, and they can't do anything about it. HAHAHAHA. assholes.
Posted by: fucknbc at February 28, 2006 1:24 AM
Was NBC right in sending a CAD? Yup. Their copyright was infringed upon by people sharing the file. But in this case, NBC should turn a blind eye. SNL is now known to have funny material. This should be treated as a marketing tool, much like when Joss made those Session416 vids and released them online. They help promote. Is NBC loosing a dime? No. Of course, if the clip is for sale somewhere else, that enters a totally different world. But NBC is labeling videos on their website as "viral." They only become viral once they are passed around the website like a bottle Boones Farm at a freshman frat party. SNL became a contender, and in the forefront of peoples' minds thanks to the Lonley Island Boys. But I think they are just showing that they aren't in it for the funny by being stingey with their clips.
Posted by: Rich Sigfrit at March 3, 2006 4:41 AM
It's also funny that NBC tells people to go to their site. Yes a site where videos will not run on Mac OS X. That's the beauty of Youtube - it took the compatibility issue out of the equation.
Posted by: spencer Lewis at March 6, 2006 7:36 PM
youtube start to vanish us guys , now they also have a law , that a video should be no more then 10 minutes long .
really terrible , it means no more TV episodes : seinfeld etc..and more that are more than 10 minutes.
Posted by: billy at March 23, 2006 9:44 AM
You asked "At what point was YouTube given permission to re-broadcast this video to millions of viewers through their website?"
I'm guessing that YouTube was never given permission to re-broadcast the video. As I understand it, members upload videos to YouTube, which hosts the videos and takes them down if a copyright owner asks them to. It's not at all like CBS recording Saturday Night Live and airing it the next day. CBS is a broadcaster, quite different from a content host. I presume the video was uploaded to CollegeHumor.com and Google Video in the same way. However, CollegeHumor.com watermarked the video with it's own logo, which begs the question, who is the greater offender, YouTube, who hosted the pirated clip, or CollegeHumor, who added their own logo to NBC-owned intellectual property and may have even uploaded it to YouTube?
Are you implying that YouTube is not different from a TV network because they stream video? YouTube is a platform for sharing videos. A TV network is an entity that broadcasts video. They are not in the same industry and therefore should be governed by different laws. I would think that you, as a FireAnt creator, would be arguing FOR their position, as FireAnt would face the same issue if a videoblogger created a feed that shared their favorite pirated SNL video clips. Does FireAnt currently remove these feeds if asked by the copyright owner? If not, than it is worse than YouTube in that respect.
From what you said it appears that you think YouTube is not exempt from the laws and standards of the broadcast industry. If this is your stance, what is your feeling about FireAnt doing the same thing? After a quick search, I found three feeds that redistribute copyritten content:
http://fireant.tv/directory/episode/1068438? - Colbert Report
http://fireant.tv/directory/episode/1017342? - Ali G
http://fireant.tv/directory/episode/1033786? - SNL - dane cook in the hospital
What is FireAnt's response to these clips. Does FireAnt "respect the rights of copyright holders" or not?
Posted by: Yves at April 28, 2006 12:44 PM
FireAnt absolutely respects copyright. We do not host any content and thus we are not liable for the content that other people host and distribute. That's totally different than YouTube.
Posted by: Josh at April 29, 2006 11:30 AM
I am the Founder of 
