• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Uhm, What? Youtube Now Charging for Video Downloads

Status
Not open for further replies.
thatll-do-pig-thatll-do-146458.jpg

That'll do Speevy.. That'll do
 
Aselith said:
No, STREAMING them is free. Downloading (in the sense that these are downloadable) you couldn't do til now through youtube. If you did it through third party software, that's the same as ripping a DVD. Now that youtube started allowing downloads, they are charging for them.
So are you actually defending this or do you just refuse to back down from your original statement?

goddam
 
Aselith said:
No, STREAMING them is free. Downloading (in the sense that these are downloadable) you couldn't do til now through youtube. If you did it through third party software, that's the same as ripping a DVD. Now that youtube started allowing downloads, they are charging for them.

Please, please explain to me how it's that big a difference me watching a video online or offline. Is it that they don't get as many views? Does that make it on the same level as piracy, really? (Actually, it's unique views anyway isn't it? So it wouldn't make any difference anyway)

I mean, all power if YouTube wants to give people the option to pay, but the only people I see doing it are people who don't know they can get it for free easily.
 
RedShift said:
Please, please explain to me how it's that big a difference me watching a video online or offline. Is it that they don't get as many views? Does that make it on the same level as piracy, really? (Actually, it's unique views anyway isn't it? So it wouldn't make any difference anyway)

I mean, all power if YouTube wants to give people the option to pay, but the only people I see doing it are people who don't know they can get it for free easily.

What's the difference between getting a free mp3? Does the radio get less listeners? Is that a big deal, really?

You can apply logic anywhere to justify anything. The point is that YouTube didn't let you download videos before. Youtube downloads are free like music is free, there's a workaround, but the proper way is by buying it. That's how it is.
 
i am willing to pay .99 cent for every 720p music video. I think they could do hell lot of money of they would offer that service.
 
I think they're also going to use RTSP instead of HTTP for their streams, which would make it a bit harder for people to rip, but we'll see.
 
RedShift said:
Please, please explain to me how it's that big a difference me watching a video online or offline. Is it that they don't get as many views? Does that make it on the same level as piracy, really? (Actually, it's unique views anyway isn't it? So it wouldn't make any difference anyway)

I mean, all power if YouTube wants to give people the option to pay, but the only people I see doing it are people who don't know they can get it for free easily.

I don't have access to youtube's financial structure so I don't know how they make their money. Clearly, they are trying to convert the convenience of having a video sitting on your harddrive "forever" into a revenue stream.

You can argue whether that's good or bad, I don't know and don't care. But, going around them to download something they are charging for without paying for it is stealing from them. Obviously, if you can find it somewhere else for download and still get it for free that would be fine. But you're talking about ripping the videos directly from their site.

It's perhaps a legal grey area so maybe you won't be arrested and I don't think youtube is going to pursue it even if they could. It is what it is though.


jonnybryce said:
What's the difference between getting a free mp3? Does the radio get less listeners? Is that a big deal, really?

You can apply logic anywhere to justify anything. The point is that YouTube didn't let you download videos before. Youtube downloads are free like music is free, there's a workaround, but the proper way is by buying it. That's how it is.

More succinct than the way I put it.
 
Hey look were GAF, we are totally disconnected from the REAL world where most people don't know how to even install a firefox addon. GET WITH REALITY FOLKS.
 
Aselith said:
No, STREAMING them is free. Downloading (in the sense that these are downloadable) you couldn't do til now through youtube. If you did it through third party software, that's the same as ripping a DVD. Now that youtube started allowing downloads, they are charging for them.
But what do I do if youtube rips them for me already in my cache folder :/

So if someone brings his DVD, game, music cd to my house, leaves it there, it's like I stole it? Fuck...
 
Hellraizer said:
But what do I do if youtube rips them for me already in my cache folder :/

So if someone brings his DVD, game, music cd to my house, leaves it there, it's like I stole it? Fuck...

I dunno. Did this person call you up later and say, "Hey man, if you're gonna keep my stuff, can you at least toss me a dollar per DVD?" If not, the situations are not remotely similar.
 
For that matter, johnnybryce's analogy is wrong too. You show me a place where I can listen to any song I want, as many times as I want, but only in my web browser. Only after I decide to download it am I charged.
 
riskVSreward said:
For that matter, johnnybryce's analogy is wrong too. You show me a place where I can listen to any song I want, as many times as I want, but only in my web browser. Only after I decide to download it am I charged.

Myspace has that set up now. Not every song but youtube doesn't have every video. You listen to it on Myspace and download from Amazon. Pandora also has a similar setup.
 
riskVSreward said:
When did this wave of big business apologists swarm GAF? Whats the matter, did somebody pirate your game?

They didn't. It's just a stupid thing to complain about. This in no way changes how you or anyone else view YouTube. They now have an option to download them, and they charge money for it. Who cares?
 
riskVSreward said:
For that matter, johnnybryce's analogy is wrong too. You show me a place where I can listen to any song I want, as many times as I want, but only in my web browser. Only after I decide to download it am I charged.

MySpace.

You kinda fail.
 
riskVSreward said:
For that matter, johnnybryce's analogy is wrong too. You show me a place where I can listen to any song I want, as many times as I want, but only in my web browser. Only after I decide to download it am I charged.
As long as it doesn't go in the way of iTunes or Amazon, as in youtube only giving people 30 second previews of videos, it'll be fine.

No one needs to buy "high" quality crap anyways.



PS, I've always hated youtube.


Ah, and I showed my brother how to use DownloadHelper, and he gets those low quality 22kHz songs from myspace ... eh
 
omg rite said:
MySpace.

You kinda fail.
Yeah, so I was wrong, I honestly didn't think there was a site that offered that. That said, it wasn't even a good argument in retrospect, so I didn't really fail, unless producing a bad argument was the fail.

Why don't you get off my dick?
 
If they really want to make money they should charge people if they want to upload videos over 10 minutes.
 
this won't hurt them much, but youtube is one step away from becoming irrelevant if they chose to charge for subscription fees, uploading, or streaming videos. I just hope this isn't the first step to the end of youtube.
 
Aselith said:
No, STREAMING them is free. Downloading (in the sense that these are downloadable) you couldn't do til now through youtube. If you did it through third party software, that's the same as ripping a DVD. Now that youtube started allowing downloads, they are charging for them.

downloading from youtube is just copying a file from temp folder to another folder on your pc. DVDs are encrypted and ripping them involves breaking this copy protection
 
Darko said:
If they really want to make money they should charge people if they want to upload videos over 10 minutes.
If you've had a directors account since early 2006 you can upload videos over 10 minutes anyway, for free. Wish I nabbed one then.
 
riskVSreward said:
Yeah, so I was wrong, I honestly didn't think there was a site that offered that. That said, it wasn't even a good argument in retrospect, so I didn't really fail, unless producing a bad argument was the fail.

Why don't you get off my dick?

You said something on a forum and I replied to you. Don't post on message boards if you don't want people "on your dick".
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom