BBC I Player and youtube - how to download

[nakedlunch]

Hi all,

I wish to transfer the Ronnie Scott's documentary from i player to youtube but I have no idea how to do so. Is it at all possible? I have only 3 days left before it dissapears from i player and want to make sure a copy is kept within the public domain for years to come.

Thanks

 

[Chris]

On iplayer there is a download option..If you use windows media player you should end up with a video that will upload to youtube..( I think!! )

Chris..

 

[Chris98]

Hi all,

I wish to transfer the Ronnie Scott's documentary from i player to youtube but I have no idea how to do so. Is it at all possible? I have only 3 days left before it dissapears from i player and want to make sure a copy is kept within the public domain for years to come.

Thanks

Do you own the copyright? If you don't, you have no right to transfer it to YouTube.

Chris

 

[nakedlunch]

Do you own the copyright? If you don't, you have no right to transfer it to YouTube.

Chris

No I don't but I doubt the BBC will be bothered, do you? I can also see plenty of other BBC programmes on YouTube. What tends to happen is that the copyright owner will claim ownership of the clip but not take it down, thus preventing the downloader from making money from the exercise.

 

[Chris98]

No I don't but I doubt the BBC will be bothered, do you? I can also see plenty of other BBC programmes on YouTube. What tends to happen is that the copyright owner will claim ownership of the clip but not take it down, thus preventing the downloader from making money from the exercise.

Forgive me if I don't share your point of view. If you don't own the copyright you have no right to upload material, whether you are making money from it or not. It is a hard enough industry to make a living in without people taking it upon themselves to do a 'public service' and distribute it freely.

Chris

 

[nakedlunch]

Forgive me if I don't share your point of view. If you don't own the copyright you have no right to upload material, whether you are making money from it or not. It is a hard enough industry to make a living in without people taking it upon themselves to do a 'public service' and distribute it freely.

Chris

Really Chris, so a film made in 1989 by the BBC, paid for by licence fee subscribers should never see the light of day again unless the BBC decide to show it again? This is hardly the same as a struggling film producer having his/her new work ripped off by downloaders. Technically you are correct in what you say but I doubt most people, including the BBC, would be too concerned about this.
If you put BBC into YouTube you will get 10's thousands of clips. The BBC could, if they wished, ban them all. However, I believe that they are not so bothered in old programmes being downloaded - it gives them coverage and often people will then go on to buy work by the artist.
If I can download I will and let others enjoy a public broadcasted programme. If the BBC wishes to close it down or sue me then I know the consequences.

 

[Nick Wyver]

I'm with nakedlunch on this one.

(Any fan of Mr Burroughs is a friend of mine)

 

[Chris98]

Really Chris, so a film made in 1989 by the BBC, paid for by licence fee subscribers should never see the light of day again unless the BBC decide to show it again? This is hardly the same as a struggling film producer having his/her new work ripped off by downloaders. Technically you are correct in what you say but I doubt most people, including the BBC, would be too concerned about this.
If you put BBC into YouTube you will get 10's thousands of clips. The BBC could, if they wished, ban them all. However, I believe that they are not so bothered in old programmes being downloaded - it gives them coverage and often people will then go on to buy work by the artist.
If I can download I will and let others enjoy a public broadcasted programme. If the BBC wishes to close it down or sue me then I know the consequences.

It is not my intention to anger anyone, I'm not an idiot, I know what you can find on YouTube, is it all legal? No, not by a long way, could the BBC and other broadcasters get YouTube to remove their stuff, yes, but it will cost them because they have to have employ people to scourer the site looking for their material.

Once you've found it you need to show proof that you own the copyright, which involves writing a legal letter/fax to YouTube, luckily now there is an online form you can use. Last time I used it YouTube suggested I might have made a fraudulent declaration, but they were very good once they were given the relevant details, and the films were removed. The BBC is now increasingly becoming just a broadcaster, they don't own the copyright for all the content they broadcast, so it's left to the individual production companies to chase down uploaded content. They are quite likely small and struggling with ever decreasing budgets, and so will only have limited resources to combating YouTube, Google Video, Vimo etc. Then there are the pirate copies being sold on ebay, that's fun, that's more legal letters, then the same person pops up under a different username, and you start the whole thing over again. Then there are the major download sites, and if the major software companies, major music labels and movie studios are struggling to get to grips with it then what chance does the independent film maker have?

However you seem to indicate that you think it morally okay.

I guess it depends whether it affect you and the people you work with and chose spend some of your free time with.

Chris

 

[nakedlunch]

It is not my intention to anger anyone, I'm not an idiot, I know what you can find on YouTube, is it all legal? No, not by a long way, could the BBC and other broadcasters get YouTube to remove their stuff, yes, but it will cost them because they have to have employ people to scourer the site looking for their material.

Once you've found it you need to show proof that you own the copyright, which involves writing a legal letter/fax to YouTube, luckily now there is an online form you can use. Last time I used it YouTube suggested I might have made a fraudulent declaration, but they were very good once they were given the relevant details, and the films were removed. The BBC is now increasingly becoming just a broadcaster, they don't own the copyright for all the content they broadcast, so it's left to the individual production companies to chase down uploaded content. They are quite likely small and struggling with ever decreasing budgets, and so will only have limited resources to combating YouTube, Google Video, Vimo etc. Then there are the pirate copies being sold on ebay, that's fun, that's more legal letters, then the same person pops up under a different username, and you start the whole thing over again. Then there are the major download sites, and if the major software companies, major music labels and movie studios are struggling to get to grips with it then what chance does the independent film maker have?

However you seem to indicate that you think it morally okay.

I guess it depends whether it affect you and the people you work with and chose spend some of your free time with.

Chris

And then there is Cliff Richard at the other end of the scale who thinks even after 50 years he should have recording rights to something he made back in 1962! If only the rest of us could live of work we did decades ago!
Chris, I don't disagree with much you write but I think there is a moral distinction between what I am suggesting and what you warn others of. Technically you must have also been against the use of VHS tapes in the 80's?
With this programme in mind, surely the BBC still own the copyright and I am certain that even if viewed on YouTube a million times they could re-run it on BBC4 and get healthy viewing figures.

 

[Chris98]

You know what... I made a decision never to get involved in an antagonistic discussion on this good natured forum, after all, we have a common appreciation for this wonderful instrument that would hopefully be enough to transcend any differences. I have therefore broken my own rule and and posted in an antagonistic way from the beginning. My apologies, I stand by what I said, but could have perhaps phrased it a little better.

I think I have generally grown weary of forums.

So Long, and Thanks for All the Fish,

Chris

 

[gladsaxisme]

I cannot for the life of me understand why people are getting their nickers in a twist about this when having just watched this on iplayer and there before your very eyes is the share button which to me says iplayer is inviting you to share this with whoever you want or am I miss understanding this share button....john

 

[Pete Thomas]

I cannot for the life of me understand why people are getting their nickers in a twist about this when having just watched this on iplayer and there before your very eyes is the share button which to me says iplayer is inviting you to share this with whoever you want or am I miss understanding this share button....john

Yes, they are inviting you to send the link to the page to people, that's all. I don't think that is necessarily connected to what people are discussing in relation to the legality of downloading and uploading copyright material.

The word "share" is a bit misleading, "filesharing" is the practise of copying and distributing or making available digital information (that may or may not be legal) but "share" in this case is sharing the link to the BBC page.

 

[Two Voices]

No I don't but I doubt the BBC will be bothered, do you? I can also see plenty of other BBC programmes on YouTube. What tends to happen is that the copyright owner will claim ownership of the clip but not take it down, thus preventing the downloader from making money from the exercise.

I think the BBC takes its copyright very seriously, has deep pockets and a strong legal team.

And then there is Cliff Richard at the other end of the scale who thinks even after 50 years he should have recording rights to something he made back in 1962!

Why shouldn't he be entitled to earn on something he did 50 years ago?

... With this programme in mind, surely the BBC still own the copyright and I am certain that even if viewed on YouTube a million times they could re-run it on BBC4 and get healthy viewing figures.

But that still doesn't make it legal.

 

[nakedlunch]

Why shouldn't he be entitled to earn on something he did 50 years ago?
QUOTE]

I personally think 50 years is too long, always have. Lengthy recording rights stifle innovation and originality. I think 20 years should be max. Perhaps after 20 years a musician should be thinking of writing new good music that will earn him/her money.
In the Pharma world drugs come off patent after 12 years (I think) and then companies can make generic copies. This forces the Pharma companies to think of new and better products which helps progression. Perhaps the same rule should apply to the music industry!

 

[kevgermany]

Why shouldn't he be entitled to earn on something he did 50 years ago?
QUOTE]

I personally think 50 years is too long, always have. Lengthy recording rights stifle innovation and originality. I think 20 years should be max. Perhaps after 20 years a musician should be thinking of writing new good music that will earn him/her money.
In the Pharma world drugs come off patent after 12 years (I think) and then companies can make generic copies. This forces the Pharma companies to think of new and better products which helps progression. Perhaps the same rule should apply to the music industry!

I've a lot of sympathy with this point of view. Perhaps copyright is too long, but maybe this is too short. No easy answers. It's only recently that copyright law was standardised across europe.

 

[trimmy]

So if i send this to my facebook page (which i have done) does this stay on my facebook page ? or will the link be lost ?


ps Love the version of ' A house is not a home '

 

[BigMartin]

So if i send this to my facebook page (which i have done) does this stay on my facebook page ? or will the link be lost ?

The link will still be there but anyone who clicks on it will get "This content is not currently available" or some such. I'd better get back to listening to Mr Rollins now before it expires.