Apple Issues Takedown Order for Popular YouTube Channel That Archived WWDC Keynotes

[Kwikyy]

We live in a society where archiving things are bad but it's ok to make clickbait content that's misleading! Seriously, what's been happening at Apple for the last few months with the stupid decisions like putting ads on the App Store?

There were already ads on the App Store, the controversial thing was gambling ads and they were paused too temporarily

 

[SpotOnT]

If the YouTuber was monetizing the videos, I can understand the takedown. But if it was simply for posterity, that’s really petty of Apple.

If Apple wanted to post the videos on youtube and monetize them, I wouldn’t care. But if they just want to prevent people from watching the videos, I feel this is the wrong move - even if that guy was making money off of them.

 

[randyhudson]

Thats ridiculous, he was just archiving them and preserving history ffs…

You realize that 100% of YouTube videos have advertisements, and that YouTube's parent company creates competing devices and services. Not only is this guy making money off other people's content, but he's diverting traffic FROM Apple TO Google, their competitor. It's really not hard to figure out.

 

[PsykX]

If it bothers them so much, Apple should archive them themselves and let us watch them on the Apple TV.
Then nobody would take their own free time to archive them.

When I watch them it's just for the sake of watching old school Apple (Steve Jobs) give a pitch and become inspired to give a presentation.

 

[aliengin]

I am a photographer and if someone archived my work, even with good intentions without any benefit I would be still pissed and pursue legal action.

 

[ProfessionalFan]

I am a photographer and if someone archived my work, even with good intentions without any benefit I would be still pissed and pursue legal action.

As would anyone, or as should anyone.

 

[pauloregan]

They aren't his videos. He's acting like they are.

 

[spazzcat]

Apple is making some pretty terrible decisions as of late.

Why should someone be allowed to make Ad money from someone else property?

 

[spazzcat]

Not of late, they have been making bad decisions for over ten years.
They stopped caring about consumers long ago.
Corporate American Greed in full swing.

Their net income disagrees with you ...

 

[applesith]

This is unfortunate. It's nice to have these older videos accessible. Too bad they couldn't come to an agreement where the channel cannot monetize the videos but they remain accessible.

 

[cardfan]

Why should someone be allowed to make Ad money from someone else property?

Yep. The concern over ads I get. This? Not an issue.

 

[jonnyb098]

How pathetic of apple. They don’t want anyone knowing where apple came from because of where it’s going.

 

[t0rqx]

If they would only be that strict and demanding about their soft- and hardware quality these days.

 

[spazzcat]

How pathetic of apple. They don’t want anyone knowing where apple came from because of where it’s going.

They have to defend their copywrites and trademarks.

 

[genovelle]

Look I understand the copyright issues and that Apple is probably concerned regarding the integrity of the Apple brand.

But I can't help feel that their actions are a little over the top sometimes?

They have to be consistent with protecting their IP or they loose their rights. If they allow him to knowingly infringe on their copyrights they have no leg to stand on when someone else does.

 

[ian87w]

It's remarkable how many businesses shoot themselves in the foot like this. Someone is doing your work for you, keeping your company's materials and videos alive on the internet.

It's similar to European soccer teams removing all highlight clips from Youtube because of copyright infringement. Do they not understand how much attention, excitement and brand loyalty those videos create?

The companies don't even need to do anything - just look the other way while someone is doing you a favor

A company like Apple doesn’t need a random youtuber to help their marketing. Majority of Apple customers probably don’t even know the existence of this channel.

Also, past Apple keynotes, especially during Jobs era, presented live music and/or ads many copyrighted music. I would guess those are the root of the problem.

Having said that, I do wish Apple provide those keynotes themselves. Many of them are quite “historic” in the context of consumer electronics and computing. Keynotes like the first iMac, iPod, etc were quite iconic. But it seems that Apple wanted to identify themselves as an iPhone company.

 

[erikkfi]

This is Nintendo levels of litigation ugliness.

 

[TVreporter]

Apple really wants to make sure we forget about AirPower ...

 

[Kazgarth]

That sucks major time.

 

[Eldaerenth Faexidor]

Copyright infringement is copyright infringement, wether you like it or not.

 

[sam_dean]

And THIS may be the single reason for this take down order. This is Tim’s Apple and no longer Steve’s.

See what’s going on here

I sense this wasn't Tim's doing as this is too low level.

Might be some lawyers needing the hours to prove their worth.

It just ends up pissing Apple fans off.

When the 15th anniv of the iPhone came around I watched the 1st iPhone event.

When the Intel to Apple Silicon transition was announced I watched the PPC to Intel transition.

 

[jonnyb098]

They have to defend their copywrites and trademarks.

Please….they produce most products in a country that regularly steals product info and creates knockoffs.

 

[Orange Bat]

As budgets tighten for big tech I expect more decisions like this. Big companies make weird movies when money gets tight.

 

[Manzanito]

WHAT? You can’t use people’s copyrighted material on your own web sites without permission? This can’t be right. Someone check the copyright laws right now, we need an answer. I want to speak to the manager!

Ok that might have been over the top, but funny

Seriously, I can see the value of his service of providing the WWDC materials(which is also available on Apple, Btw) but perhaps he should have secured permission. I mean who would not take free publicity?

Not that funny, maybe. Also, apple is looking like a bit of a dick here, even if they have every right to issue a takedown note.

 

[Born Again]

are his uploads monetized?