Here is another great moment in A.P. history. In its quest to become the RIAA of the newspaper industry, the A.P.’s executives and lawyers are beginning to match their counterparts in the music industry for cluelessness. A country radio station in Tennessee, WTNQ-FM, received a cease-and-desist letter warning from an A.P. vice president of affiliate relations for posting videos from the A.P.’s official Youtube channel on its Website. See update below.
You cannot make this stuff up. Forget for a moment that WTNQ is itself an A.P. affiliate and that the A.P. shouldn’t be harassing its own members. Apparently, nobody told the A.P. executive that the august news organization even has a YouTube channel which the A.P. itself controls, and that someone at the A.P. decided that it is probably a good idea to turn on the video embedding function on so that its videos can spread virally across the Web, along with the ads in the videos.
Frank Strovel, an employee at the radio station who tried to talk some sense into the A.P. executive Twittered yesterday:
I was on the phone arguing w/ AP today. We were embedding their YouTube vids on our station’s site. We’re an AP affiliate.
And then added:
They asked us to taken them down. I asked, “Why do you have a YouTube page w/ embed codes for websites?” Still… they said NO.
The story was picked up by the Knoxville News, and then by a local video producer Christian Grantham, who captured the following Skype interview with Strovel in the video below (which is not an A.P. video, so I am going to embed it). Strovel notes that the A.P. accused the station of “stealing their licensed content.” He sounds flumoxed, as he should be. This back and forth during the interview says it all:
Grantham: What an idiot!
Strovel: I know, I know.
Strovel had to pull down all the videos from his Website.
Update: It looks like the A.P. is backing down and will allow the videos to go up again. The A.P. also sent me a statement saying no cease-and-desist letter was ever drafted. And technically, it wasn’t. The A.P. executive delivered his warning in an e-mail, which had the same effect as a formal letter. “This was a misunderstanding that has mushroomed into something else entirely,” the A.P.’s spokesman tells me. Here is the complete official statement:
There was a misunderstanding of YouTube usage when the Tennessee radio station was contacted by the Associated Press regarding the AP’s more extensive online video services. No cease and desist letter was drafted or sent by AP to the station at any time. The AP was trying to offer the station a superior service for their needs.
In other words, at the same time it was threatening the radio station it was trying to convince the station to use its “more extensive online video services,” OVN, when all the radio station really needs is what the A.P. already makes available on YouTube. The A.P. continues to amaze me. It just managed to shoot itself in the same foot twice.
You just can’t make this stuff up! roflcopter
lmao
Hilarious, yet another exec who doesn’t know what they are talking about.
Classic move, AP
Wouldn’t (or “shouldn’t”) there be something in the YT TOS that explicitly licenses their UGC for embedding? I mean, I’m not aware of any part of the YT controls that enable the channel owner to disallow embed codes, so the culprit is right on the AP YT page. It just seems that the AP should not have this avenue of harassment just from participating in YT.
Disallowing embed codes:
After you upload a video, visit the “Edit Video” page for that video.
In the “Broadcasting and Sharing Options” area, which is on the bottom-left section of the page,
there is a fly-out menu labeled “Embedding” with two mutually-exclusive options”
“Yes, external sites may embed and play this video”
“No, external sites may NOT embed and play this video.”
Problem solved.
This article might have mentioned that the AP has over SIXTEEN THOUSAND videos on its YouTube channel, and is #2 in the top viewed reporters category.
Quite a monumental gaffe.
That is retarded
There’s a new trend out there…
Awesomeness to the max. He should get a raised…
I mean raise. AIG and AP execs are sharp people.
what is this interwebs you speak of?
Well it’s a series of tubes…
It was invented by Bush Jr.
Dubyah is for Web.
a collection of tubes is called a series!!
It’s not a big truck either.
Lol, this kinds of stuff always makes me wonder how older excecutive means more experience & knowledge.
This kinds of stuff is not more experience & knowledge, it’s more like “i don’t give a damn about that series of tubes you all are talking about”.
AP is quickly becoming the most out of touch service left around. wish Google would unplug them so that they can die quietly
I can’t wait to see AP pick up this story.
haha! LMFAO!
OMG!
Absolutely amazing!
I love it.
Dear TechCrunch,
I recommend leaving AP alone. They are scary like CIA of Media. I would just hate to see them turn on you.
Your friend, Kevin
haha.
Is that Richard Dreyfuss in the photo? He’ll probably sue for using his likeness.
Dear Associated Press,
You suck. You couldn’t possibly “get it” less as a corporation. Enjoy going out of business.
Please note that while I could give you wonderful constructive criticism, I will not.
Because
A.) This Email Will Never Escalate
B.) You Are So Clueless, You Couldn’t Possibly Understand
C.) I Will Actually Enjoy Watching You Fail
D.) Inverted Pyramid SUCKS
Yours,
Joshua Fleetwood
: )
Can’t one disable the “share” feature on their own videos on YouTube. Wouldn’t that work in AP’s favor (although diluting the purpose of a video on youtube).
And these are the people we “trust” to report the truth??? 1 more reason that the clueless mainstream media/propaganda industry is dying.
Gutted!
/facepalm. That is all.
ROTFLMAO
Awesome.
I feel like a fool each time an organization I respect proves I should cease-and-desist.
Now when I see the letters ‘AP’ I will think they are one letter short of being a useful App.
Stupidity should hurt.
Then you’d never get a moment of peace with all of the screaming going on.
smackdown
What else is there to say. Simply stunning in the AP’s stupidity.
>>Insert Roscoe P. Coltrane joke here <<
coot…coot…coot
I had heard about fools and today i witnessed them LOL
I quit shooting for the AP years ago- mostly because they feel it’s OK to fleece photographers but expect everyone to cow-tow to their every wish because they are “THE AP” (said in your best, booming “God” voice…). Heck, they even stole negatives from me. Yes… stole. I was credentialed through my publication and they took the negatives and refused to return them. Gives “members” a great, warm-fuzzy when the service that the PUBLICATION is paying for fleeces them. A world without the AP would not be a bad thing. Reuters, AFP and other can easily pick up the slack. I say don’t let it hit you in the backside on your way out.
And as far as their management goes, letting shooters who have 20 years of experience go simply because they don’t want to move their family is the norm. Morons- all of them.
Is there a cool new way to say EPIC FAIL?
If not, I’ll just stick with that.
Also, that story is AP-tastic!
That would make a great slogan: “You can’t spell “EPIC FAIL” without A.P.”
And print media wonders why it’s going to fail? Pure hilarity.
You know, I jumped on the “AP is dumb!” bandwagon, but after reading the blog post from Strovel, the guy at the radio station (http://leftofdial.com/?p=1016), I kind of have a hunch that TechCrunch is being over-sensational and melodramatic with that headline.
Strovel says:
“The radio station I work for is an affiliate of the Associated Press. We air their top–of–the–hour newscasts 24/7.”
The AP Regional Rep (not necessarily an executive, from what I can tell) says is:
“I noticed you are posting our video content with out a license and have to ask you to remove the AP video content from the site ASAP. If you would like to know more about our web services please contact me.”
The implication seems to be that the radio station’s agreement with the AP only extends to radio news updates, and doesn’t explicitly cover web video.
Makes sense to me as a content owner to call someone on using unlicensed content, if that’s the case. Though given that, leaving the “embed” option available just seems to invite abuse.
Now if being an AP affiliate DOES license you to embed web video, then yes, this is a blunder.
But I’ll skip the tar-and-feather party and put away my torch and pitchfork until that’s clarified.
no.
And correct, Mr. A. AP would be correct in controlling video being embedded (through other non-standard scraping mean) on thier OWN site, but AP has absolutely zero say in anything they decide to embed or send on other sites (like MySpace, FB, or YT) – even from their own site – once that occurs, AP is bound to the new hosts agreement, and so must at least turn off the embedding feature to regain control. The affiliates ONLY would need a license for video embeding coming from and served by AP-owned or operated servers.
By using Youtube as their video host, they agree to Youtube’s TOS, which states that unless they opt out when publishing a video, the video may be embedded elsewhere.
If AP wants to publish their videos on their own website, there are plenty of mechanisms by which they could do that so that it would be very difficult (not impossible, but difficult) for others to share them.
Maybe it’s hard for AP to read YouTube’s TOS with their Hercules monochrome monitors, DOS 2.1 and what not.
Aliotsy, it doesn’t matter if they have the correct kind of license or not. If the AP has their Youtube channel settings set to allow embedding then ANYONE, AP affiliate or not (say me for instance), can embed their videos. This is first rate stupidity and they deserve to be called out on it.
Tomorrow, out of protest for the AP’s last few days of idiocy, my site, which recontextualizes and aggregates content from all over the Internet, is going to link to nothing but AP articles. And will draw traffic to them.
If they can’t see the value in sharing their information, they deserve to die. I say this as a newspaper guy who’s been using AP content for years.
So. Game plan for tomorrow: Draw traffic to AP member Web sites by quoting, pulling stats from, and recontextualizing their content. Thank me later, Dean Singleton.
This is exactly why I’m happy we have sites like TechCrunch and Techmeme. They cut through the bullshit and give it to us raw.
LOL @ AP
this is really funny.
and embedding is still turned on.
They just dont get it. Oh well, more room for TC to grow!
AIG should give back the money and whatever happens to them happens, they are disrespectful, money waisting company.
Would it make any difference if I told you that most AP Video contracts are free, so long as you meet their benchmark requirements for number of videos watched?
Oh wait. That actually makes this whole thing EVEN MORE FUCKING ABSURD.
LOL @ AP
That says it all.
Except for maybe
LOL @ RIAA
Can someone make T-Shirts?
These guys are really dumb. Maybe the AP will vanish like the newspapers currently are…. Has anyone told them that times are changing and it’s time to move forward?
The Tshirt should have a pic of Vivian from the Young Ones saying “Have we got a video?”
YES WE HAVE A VIDEO!
I thought TC was boycotting AP?
Anyway… this is ridiculous! The ignorance people have on technology is depressing. If you don’t want people to embed, post them with that feature disabled or don’t post at all! This is just like other organizations that don’t edit their robots.txt file for aggregation sites.
Either use the technology or don’t. But don’t go after the (little) guy for doing what you enabled them to do.
Agreed (although, seriously, not that many people even know what the robots.txt even does, nor those who use it, know what it can’t do)
AP still has the other foot to shoot yet, no shortage of ammunition! Lmao!
Now what will you do AP????
Maybe AP should have read the YouTube Terms of Service where they granted YouTube (and each user of YouTube) a worldwide, royalty free licensce to use it’s video as it sees fit….forever.
Read for yourself from YouTube TOS
6.c.
For clarity, you retain all of your ownership rights in your User Submissions. However, by submitting User Submissions to YouTube, you hereby grant YouTube a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free, sublicenseable and transferable license to use, reproduce, distribute, prepare derivative works of, display, and perform the User Submissions in connection with the YouTube Website and YouTube’s (and its successors’ and affiliates’) business, including without limitation for promoting and redistributing part or all of the YouTube Website (and derivative works thereof) in any media formats and through any media channels. You also hereby grant each user of the YouTube Website a non-exclusive license to access your User Submissions through the Website, and to use, reproduce, distribute, display and perform such User Submissions as permitted through the functionality of the Website and under these Terms of Service. The above licenses granted by you in User Videos terminate within a commercially reasonable time after you remove or delete your User Videos from the YouTube Website. You understand and agree, however, that YouTube may retain, but not display, distribute, or perform, server copies of User Submissions that have been removed or deleted. The above licenses granted by you in User Comments are perpetual and irrevocable.
The school where I work: one of their employees has a flickr account with pics of various events going on at the school. ALL PHOTOS ARE PUBLIC (not private). So, as long as you don’t COPY the photo to your site for storage (giving the impression that the photo belongs to YOU), and you dont obfuscate or change the link and any tag info, then you are NOT violating Copyright, and can not to be told that you are violating copyright (iow, the school would have to “Know what they are talking about” before making a statement or sending a C&D email or letter; i.e., a court would have had to enter a judgment against the infringer before flickr would block the images. flickr doesnt pull down just on suspicion nor accusation alone, they must have evidence of legal proof – a decision – before takedown; same with Myspace and FaceBook)
Clearly embedding is covered by the YouTube TOS and if not the Ap can disable the code…
FYI – the Knoxville newspaper mentioned in the article is named the Knoxville News-Sentinel but the website is located at http://KnoxNews.com.
OK I had to do it. I couldn’t resist –> http://bit.ly/7rpA
Imagine the days before Twitter made the internet retarded. That last exposition of evidence would have taken two lines, instead of two monolithic blocks of images to display.
Seriously, why not just copy the lines? Is it because the twitter branding needs to be there as justification for such a shallow piece of ‘content’? “Oh, he only had x characters to work with, so it’s okay!”
“Imagine the days before Twitter made the internet retarded.”
People have been acting retarded on the internet since WAY before Twitter was ever a gleam in its creators’ eyes.
Young whippersnappers these days. No sense of what came before.
The eternal September started in 1993.
In MY day, I had a 300 baud acoustically coupled modem and a teletype terminal, and LOVED it!
Kids these days don’t know how good they got it.
So correct. The students I work with? I force them to use old technology for at least 6 weeks before they are allowed to touch a computer. The only way to learn audio editing and audio concepts correctly.
She is very gorgeous.She has posted her nice profile on a
celeb dating site *************tallmeet
…COM …….. she is hot on
that club. Many rich guys were seeking for her.