Forums | MacLife

yeah, I was disgusted when I read that article.

I mailed them to tell them that I erased all their TV channels from my sateliite receiver as a protest. smurf MTV.

Mr. T wrote:

Sherlock wrote:

I mailed them to tell them that I erased all their TV channels from my sateliite receiver as a protest. smurf MTV.

You're still paying for it, though.

But he isnt being exposed to any advertisements Viacom's clients paid to run on those channels either.

Dang I sometimes watch CC when there's nothing else on.

That list is a bit outdated: Viacom spun off CBS Corporation in 2005 into a separate company. (Interestingly enough, CBS is much more YouTube-friendly... they post a lot of clips of their shows on YouTube.)

Here's a current list of Viacom properties. Avoid them until the case is settled in Google's favor:
-BET
-CMT
-Comedy Central
-DreamWorks Studios
-LOGO
-MTV (and MTV2, MTV Tr3s, MHD, etc.)
-Nickelodeon
-Nickelodeon Movies
-Nicktoons
-Paramount Pictures (Which I still have a slight grudge against over their $150 million Toshiba HD DVD bribe. Even though it's over.)
-Spike TV
-The N
-TV Land
-VH1 (includes VH1 Classics, VH1 Soul)

Last edited by MFfan310 (2008-07-05 8:05 am)

I expect they're vetted more carefully these days. I've seen many come down the last few months, and it's not hard to guess why.

I would but I'd have to start playing.

LLEVIATHANN wrote:

MFfan310 wrote:

That list is a bit outdated: Viacom spun off CBS Corporation in 2005 into a separate company. (Interestingly enough, CBS is much more YouTube-friendly... they post a lot of clips of their shows on YouTube.)

Here's a current list of Viacom properties. Avoid them until the case is settled in Google's favor:
-BET
-CMT
-Comedy Central
-DreamWorks Studios
-LOGO
-MTV (and MTV2, MTV Tr3s, MHD, etc.)
-Nickelodeon
-Nickelodeon Movies
-Nicktoons
-Paramount Pictures (Which I still have a slight grudge against over their $150 million Toshiba HD DVD bribe. Even though it's over.)
-Spike TV
-The N
-TV Land
-VH1 (includes VH1 Classics, VH1 Soul)

Blizzard is a Viacom Co. as well. Who's giving up WoW first?

You got that wrong, Blizzard is owned by Vivendi, and unless Viacom owns Vivendi, I think that the two conglomerates are actually competitors.

ScifiterX wrote:

Your right Your right they've only done business together. (Vivendi sold Viacom a theater chain).

Oops bad source. But did find this while looking:

Who does Viacom own?
Viacom’s list of subsidiaries reads like a who’s who of entertainment across the gamut of digital media. Under its wing, it houses:

Film: Viacom International, Paramount Pictures, DreamWorks, Republic Pictures, MTV Films, Nickelodeon Movies, Go Fish Pictures

Television: Comedy Central, Logo, BET, Spike, TV Land, Nick at Nite, Nickelodeon, Noggin, The N, Nick Jr TEENick, MTV, VH1, MTV2, CMT, MHD

Video Games: Xfire, Harmonix, GameTrailers, Neopets, Shockwave

Viacom's secret weapon?
Viacom’s owners already enjoy a stake with one established publisher in video games – Midway.

Viacom chairman and majority shareholder Sumner Redstone’s daughter, Shari Redstone, became chair of Midway’s Board in December and her father owns a major stake in the publisher – which could be up to 90 per cent.

http://www.mcvuk.com/interviews/229/Whats-Viacoms-game
No Rock Band for yous and no UT3 fer me.

kman wrote:

The toughest for me would be The Daily Show and Colbert - pretty hard to part with those.  Everything else is no problem.

Though I do enjoy the Screw Attack videos on GameTrailers.

And those two shows are what prompted the lawsuit in the first place. Those were/are hugely popular on YouTube. At least Viacome partially wised up and made it easier for their customers to view those two shows on their perspective websites.

Bat wrote:

The whole thing is backfiring.

As a media company, there's always a fine line to tread concerning copyright protection.  On the one hand you can't let your represented works be blatantly stolen, or you'll risk losing your source of income.  However, if you are too zealous in targeting users in mass who might be guilty of posting a stray video online, you risk alienating your audience.  Legally, you are entirely within your rights in doing so, but as a business that has to sell products or services, you risk losing the very business you try to protect.

Viacom recently won what many analysts say is a pyrrhic victory over Google that exemplifies this struggle.  Viacom, MTV, and Paramount Pictures' parent company, have been at war with Google for over a year now over Google property YouTube and its users' actions.  It slapped Google with a $1B USD copyright lawsuit, saying the company wasn't doing enough to prevent Viacom property, including South Park and the The Daily Show, from appearing on YouTube.

In a major legal victory last week, Viacom obtained a judge's order that Google must turn over all YouTube usernames, Internet Protocol addresses and the viewing histories of YouTube's users.  However, the legal victory turned into a PR disaster for Viacom, which is being blasted across the web for alleged censorship and privacy violation.  Viacom claims it never asked for and personal user information and its intentions are just.  However, its response has done little to quell the fury.

Viacom Feels Fallout of Online Strong Arm Tactics Against YouTube Users

That's right bitches, don't be messing with the internet

beachgirl123 wrote:

I can see both sides to the issue.
    Intellectual property including patents, copyrights, and brands are economic cruxes of the Developed World.  Our economies are suffering because of law breakers who steal media, technologies, and brands.
    BUT, I think in this case where individuals aren't inherently making money off sharing video content there isn't a real cause for civil action.

There is also a HUGE difference in whether someone UPLOADS copywritten video to YouTube or whether someone VIEWS copywritten video on YouTube.

Last edited by frankly (2008-07-10 2:27 pm)