I don't always agree with this guy but I think in this case he makes a good point....
_________________________________________________________________________________ NEW YORK (Reuters) - Billionaire investor and dot-com veteran Mark Cuban had harsh words on Thursday for YouTube, the online site that lets people share video clips, saying only a "moron" would purchase the wildly popular start-up.
Cuban, co-founder of HDNet and owner of the NBA's Dallas Mavericks, also said YouTube would eventually be "sued into oblivion"[/b] because of copyright violations.
"They are just breaking the law," Cuban told a group of advertisers in New York. "The only reason it hasn't been sued yet is because there is nobody with big money to sue." [/b]
Listen... Do not give credit to a guy that made his money the same way he's now criticizing. He made a shit load of money selling something pretty much useless now to yahoo. A very small part of why there was a dot com burst, is because of what he made billions off. For him to turn around now and use words like crazy/morons is laughable to say the least.
Mr. Cuban does not know what Googles plans are for Youtube. So, he should really just sit back, count his money, watch his mavs lose, have a coke & a smile and STFU.
Also, let me just add...
It's not like the dudes at Google all of a sudden were like "Hmm, we got $10 Billion cash sitting in the war chest, what should we do with it? *HIT BONG HERE* Hey, dudes, that Youtube site is pretty kewl, let's fukkin' buy it"
For awhile now, both Youtube & Google have been working out deals with major labels & other companies to get things in motion. The one dude from Google stated awhile back his plan is to have every music video ever made available to watch for free. Plus, I'm betting part of this buy was just to make sure yahoo or microsoft didn't make the purchase.
As far as being sued from individual users who see their stuff on the site.. I'm no lawyer. But I'm guessing there is a bit of protection from it with DMCA, where they could just send out remove the copyrighted material letters. Cause, if ur a lil dude, are you going to have enough money to take them to court?
The success of YouTube has a lot to do with how these companies deal with large corporations and how large corporations have grown to accept or at least tolerate the internet. Napster is a bad example because it was such a pioneer and leader in the new wave of internet sharing and user-driven control that it scared the industry who didn't want anything to do with it. In todays market the industries would probably be much more willing to tap into Napsters user base instead of trying to stop them. Part of the blame does lie on Napster who was unwilling or at least couldn't change fast enough to create a viable commerical model for both themselves and the recording industry. The industry just wants to make money and if you can help them make money then they'll be your best friend.
YouTube will succeed where Napster failed for numerous reasons. They have the DMCA laws which actually support what they do so long as they actively police their content. Google has the clout and connections to negotiate deals. They have the money and legal power to handle any lawsuits thrown at them and, most importantly, they are now the leading providers of video services on the internet. They won't be competing against other video services, they'll be competing against television. The music and TV industries better realize this and jump on the bandwagon or they'll be sunk within the next 20 to 30 years.
So do you folks think that YouTube will retain it's "underground", non-commercial content that is a big part of it's attraction or become a very commercialized site that exists solely as a vehicle to promote other commercial endeavors and make money???
IMO....if it becomes the latter than it's not going to be YouTube as you know it today.
Maybe it's time for one of you enterprising guys to start "U(nderground)Tube"
So do you folks think that YouTube will retain it's "underground", non-commercial content that is a big part of it's attraction or become a very commercialized site that exists solely as a vehicle to promote other commercial endeavors and make money???
Yes, YouTube will continue to see "underground" content uploaded and viewed as it is currently. In one of his rants over the last week, Mark Cuban made an interesting point about what he believes makes YouTube so popular:
Free Hosting from any 3rd Party site Hey, why pay for bandwidth for a video if you dont have to ? A blog, a myspace page, an email, any website. Just throw in some html in Youtube.com foots the bill for bandwidth. Sure you are limited by size of file, but so what. Just chop it up into parts 1 through N. Its fast, easy and free.
And according to an article I read earlier today, YouTube was born out of the frustration of two now ex-PayPal employees who couldn't find an easy way to upload and share video of a dinner party.
I still think Google paid more than YouTube is worth, but it also seems that it's worth that much to Google to tell Yahoo, Microsoft, Fox, and every other popular, risk-taking media company to fuck off.
With that said, I do not believe Google is the kind of company that would kidnap their own kin and turn them inside out with pay-to-play only or/and an overwhelming amount of commercial-originated content.
Google merger ups pressure on Yahoo to strike deal
Wed Oct 11, 2006 7:53 AM ET
By Megan Davies and Eric Auchard
NEW YORK/SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Yahoo Inc. YHOO.O> is under pressure to clinch a deal to acquire Facebook.com, the No. 2 U.S. social networking site, to recapture momentum from Google after that company struck a deal to buy YouTube, analysts said on Tuesday.
Google Inc.'s GOOG.O> deal to buy video entertainment site YouTube Inc., announced on Monday, has raised the bar for other major Internet players to strike quickly as confidence in the sector grows and valuations rise, industry insiders said.
A Yahoo acquisition of Facebook, the dominant hangout for college-age students, could approach $1 billion, these people say. Industry sources have previously said the pair have held talks although it is unsure what stage these are currently at.
"We think Yahoo is being out-executed by Google in terms of innovation, financials and partnerships/acquisitions," Scott Kessler, an analyst with S&P's Equity Research Services, wrote in a note to clients on Tuesday...
Comments
Also, let me just add...
It's not like the dudes at Google all of a sudden were like "Hmm, we got $10 Billion cash sitting in the war chest, what should we do with it? *HIT BONG HERE* Hey, dudes, that Youtube site is pretty kewl, let's fukkin' buy it"
For awhile now, both Youtube & Google have been working out deals with major labels & other companies to get things in motion. The one dude from Google stated awhile back his plan is to have every music video ever made available to watch for free. Plus, I'm betting part of this buy was just to make sure yahoo or microsoft didn't make the purchase.
As far as being sued from individual users who see their stuff on the site.. I'm no lawyer. But I'm guessing there is a bit of protection from it with DMCA, where they could just send out remove the copyrighted material letters. Cause, if ur a lil dude, are you going to have enough money to take them to court?
YouTube will succeed where Napster failed for numerous reasons. They have the DMCA laws which actually support what they do so long as they actively police their content. Google has the clout and connections to negotiate deals. They have the money and legal power to handle any lawsuits thrown at them and, most importantly, they are now the leading providers of video services on the internet. They won't be competing against other video services, they'll be competing against television. The music and TV industries better realize this and jump on the bandwagon or they'll be sunk within the next 20 to 30 years.
IMO....if it becomes the latter than it's not going to be YouTube as you know it today.
Maybe it's time for one of you enterprising guys to start "U(nderground)Tube"
Yes, YouTube will continue to see "underground" content uploaded and viewed as it is currently. In one of his rants over the last week, Mark Cuban made an interesting point about what he believes makes YouTube so popular:
And according to an article I read earlier today, YouTube was born out of the frustration of two now ex-PayPal employees who couldn't find an easy way to upload and share video of a dinner party.
I still think Google paid more than YouTube is worth, but it also seems that it's worth that much to Google to tell Yahoo, Microsoft, Fox, and every other popular, risk-taking media company to fuck off.
With that said, I do not believe Google is the kind of company that would kidnap their own kin and turn them inside out with pay-to-play only or/and an overwhelming amount of commercial-originated content.
Google merger ups pressure on Yahoo to strike deal
Wed Oct 11, 2006 7:53 AM ET
By Megan Davies and Eric Auchard
NEW YORK/SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Yahoo Inc. YHOO.O> is under pressure to clinch a deal to acquire Facebook.com, the No. 2 U.S. social networking site, to recapture momentum from Google after that company struck a deal to buy YouTube, analysts said on Tuesday.
Google Inc.'s GOOG.O> deal to buy video entertainment site YouTube Inc., announced on Monday, has raised the bar for other major Internet players to strike quickly as confidence in the sector grows and valuations rise, industry insiders said.
A Yahoo acquisition of Facebook, the dominant hangout for college-age students, could approach $1 billion, these people say. Industry sources have previously said the pair have held talks although it is unsure what stage these are currently at.
"We think Yahoo is being out-executed by Google in terms of innovation, financials and partnerships/acquisitions," Scott Kessler, an analyst with S&P's Equity Research Services, wrote in a note to clients on Tuesday...
(Read more)