Originally posted 2010-08-04 12:57:16. Republished by Blog Post Promoter

Imagine a world where producers and owners of TV shows, movies and the not only upload full-length copyrighted video content onto the Web in the full knowledge that it will be ripped off, but welcome the prospect?

Why not, if they can sell advertising on the programming?

MySpace and Viacom International-owned MTV Networks today moved to resolve some key online video issues by tapping a new technology that inserts advertising into any videos uploaded by users to MySpace — whether they’re authorized or not.

The deal pairs the two companies with Auditude, a start-up firm that has developed technology that can identify any uploaded professional video and allow the content owners to insert ads into the video, the companies said.

The Auditude tool can be used to add information to a video clip, along with e-commerce links that offer opportunities to buy expanded clips or merchandise related to the content.

Well there are still plenty of “why not’s,” and indeed it seems only a matter of time until someone hacks this.  But this sort of thing sure does continue change the whole landscape on how creators and promoters of copyrighted works can actually benefit, instead of battling, new forms of promotion, distribution and exhibition.  Hat tip to Andie Schwartz!

UPDATE:  DailyMotion gets on board.

By Ron Coleman

I write this blog.

2 thoughts on “Ads for pirates”
  1. These technologies pose real threats to First Amendment free speech. Copyrighted materials that are used without permission in ways that constitute fair use are allowed precisely because of our rights to free speech. Fair use is not an infringement on the copyright. This technology, therefore, would be, without my consent, inserting advertising into my own free speech (if it happened to include copyrighted material). I don’t think that’s any more justified than Viacom-MTV putting a billboard on my front lawn

  2. Fair use as a right to the original, unadulterated work, huh?

    So all copy protection would be equally offensive to you, right? Because you’re being deprived of your right to make fair use of the work?

Comments are closed.