this post was submitted on 22 Jun 2023
10 points (100.0% liked)

Fediverse

287 readers
1 users here now

This magazine is dedicated to discussions on the federated social networking ecosystem, which includes decentralized and open-source social media platforms. Whether you are a user, developer, or simply interested in the concept of decentralized social media, this is the place for you. Here you can share your knowledge, ask questions, and engage in discussions on topics such as the benefits and challenges of decentralized social media, new and existing federated platforms, and more. From the latest developments and trends to ethical considerations and the future of federated social media, this category covers a wide range of topics related to the Fediverse.

founded 2 years ago
 

The content hosted on Youtube cannot be 100% hosted legally. It is impossible to believe that you can find a full album of Pink Floyd hosted on Youtube and that's a legal thing.

This is an extract from the support page of Google:

Videos removed or blocked due to YouTube's contractual obligations

YouTube enters into agreements with certain music copyright owners to allow use of their sound recordings and musical compositions.

What is the bottom line here? Is Youtube big enough to be allowed to publish full albums of Pink Floyd? Or does Youtube pay a dime to Universal so they are allowed to publish the audio content?

My question is: If Youtube can go away Scot's free with this, why can't the fediverse? If we start to host massive video/audio content, what will happen to the fediverse?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] C_Spinoff@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

Adding to this, Youtube rarely hands out high quality versions for recordings - so the low fi version on youtube is more like a demo. If you have expensive equipment, you will want to pay for a high quality version if you like the tune.