Apple is one company, imo, that doesn't need free marketing on top of copyrighted works.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Issues Takedown Order for Popular YouTube Channel That Archived WWDC Keynotes
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Incredibly surprising to read so many comments from people who think the public should be free to make and distribute copies of Apple’s property as they please. This is no different than any author, video, music or other IP. The owner of the property decides how to distribute. No one else can do so without explicit permission.
Is it okay to make unauthorized copies of someone’s music and distribute them?
I don’t understand why some here think Apple has some obligation or responsibility to let this go.
There is no argument that they have the right to do what they did. The question is whether it is a net plus for the company.
IMO, unless they’re going to make the same full content available, they would be pulling content that’s helping their loving fans stay engaged, thus it would be an overall negative. And even if they host all the content, it would cost them money when, until today, this free advertising cost them nothing.
So it was a valid legal move and a bad business move.
Operative phrase you used, "does not have Apple's permission." Case closed. They don’t have to explain or justify to any of us why or who they pursue for this.
This is not like a book or music. Apple would never make money off of this material even if they hosted it. It was free advertising that they stopped.
A valid legal move and a bad business move.
No, they do not have to justify it to us. But it is our right to say that it was a stupid move. They lost free advertising.
So when you say they lost free advertising, are you saying that Google (YouTube) should be making money on Apples content?
Are you serious? Who says no to free marketing? I’m sorry, but this is the epitome of Apple fanboyism.
And it is copyrighted material for which Apple cannot make a dime.
It was a valid legal move, and a stupid business move.
Are you saying they should cut their nose to spite their face?
You view this move as an overall negative. Apple, imo, views this as protecting copyrighted works…thus an overall positive.
So you’re saying Google should be making money from Apples copyrighted material? Why?
I think you're seeing this as a once off situation. Apple protect their copyright globally. Sometimes for what we see as stupid things like a pear that could be confused with an Apple, sometimes with actual content. If they wanted it free for all, they would have given access on their own servers. I protect the idea that Apple should control their own content.
Yes I’m serious.
There are few companies in the world that don’t need free marketing. Apple is one of them. If they want to market they’ll pay like hell for the right type of marketing in the right place.
They’re protecting their assets.
I’m betting apple thinks it was a smart business move.
So they want to pay for it instead of getting it for free and they think that was a smart business move.
Can you make an argument why they would be right in their thinking?
Or is it just “Apple did it so it must be right”.
Keynotes might re-surface soon as exclusive content on Apple TV+ 🍏🍏🍏
Cheap way to add content, and to take ad revenue away from Youtube/Google/ABC...
This is not about monetization, how many views do these videos have, lucky if they reached 50k after five years, peanuts to Youtube's bottom line, and Apple gets millions of dollars in free advertising via the Youtube fanboy reviews of their products.
You are referring to a syndicated television show, how many people give a hoot about an old Steve Jobs staff meeting at NEXT, these are educational and historical artifacts, no money is being made on these videos, if Apple wants to control them, fine, it is their right, but it would be cool for historical purposes for them to make them all available on Apple TV, they don't have to, it would be cool though.
Wrong. It is no different. They own it and they don’t want it distributed not controlled by them.
And they don’t consider it free advertising And don’t want it done. It is not bad business. And yes, case is closed.
i did not say you or others are not entitled to your opinion. Don’t put that on me.
So if someone infringes on an Apple patent or uploads Ted Lasso videos, a judge is going to allow it on the grounds that Apple failed to takedown a 1980's Mac keynote, come on, be real here.
Do you know this for a fact, because you should read the NY Times article on The Steve Jobs Archive, they are taking down Steve Jobs related videos everywhere.
Making peanuts on those amount of views, most are under 20k, you have a few that are close to a million over ten years, with those views, over ten years, lucky if the account made $5k in revenue, a grain of sand to Apple and Youtube.
The question is, "why bother", look CBS or the NFL could take down all of the old NFL games on Youtube, minimal amount of views, but again, why bother, MLB would allow Twitter users to post highlights, a few years ago they cracked down, of course they have the right, but it made me less interested in MLB, if I were the MLB commissioner, I would allow the freedom to post MLB highlights everywhere and anywhere, the more people I reach, the better.
You will never be able to measure this, I just think that Apple opening up as much as possible benefits them in the long run, since few people watch these views, probably means little to nothing either way, but if I were the Apple CEO, I would not care, and I would not be afraid of a Steve Jobs biographer writing a tough book, I would not reflexively close my company up, I bet more companies have died quicker from having such a mindset.
I can promise you there is no conspiracy theory here. There are countless books and articles documenting Apple's history as well as video documentaries. Obviously removing WWDC videos that others uploaded without permission is not going to erase any history or leave people with no source of information about Apple's past.
I highly doubt that. He and Steve were very close. I don't think he has a shred of resentment about people saying nice things about Steve.
Not sure how old WWDCs are useful marketing for Apple since those products are now all outdated. And more recent WWDCs and other Apple events are on Apple's YouTube channel along with plenty of other videos.
They control their own advertising. They advertise to certain markets in certain ways. It could be kids/students in one campaign, creatives in another or whatever (you get my drift). They didn’t become the biggest trading company in the world by advertising by osmosis. They don’t need free spasmodic advertising by the likes of a YouTuber stealing/streaming their copyrighted videos.
Absolutely not. I doubt anyone would believe "Apple did it so it must be right". They messed up big time with the "I’m a PC, and I'm a Mac”. If for no other reason, it has bitten them in the backside as Samsung copy them now and they can’t hold a higher ground, no matter how positive their messaging. But it does make Samsung look silly/desperate. Apple mess up often, with product features, or Siri or whatever.
So you never answered the question. Do you think it’s right that Google and their subscribers should be making money from Apples copyrighted material through ads, without the copyright owners permission?