you missed the bit with a gunfight and "Keep the money, you will need it to buy a funeral. The last thing you see will be my blade"



w.r.t. Vimeo, do they have a length limit like Youtube does? I've also found their player to be laggy on some computers...

Nope; you can upload up to 500MB a week for free members.

so effectively the same thing. crappy quality, or crappy length.

No; you can get good quality AND good length; youtube has a 1GB size limit, but a 10 min length limit, which is stupid because there's no way you could get 10 min of video to take up 1GB of space (unless it were raw or something). 500MB can get you at least an hour of HD material.

......90 minutes of SD is typically 700MB....

And an hour is 60 minutes

Of course, HD and SD are grossly misrepresented online. DVD quality SD (which you can easily get 60 minutes into 500mb using h.264) is far superior to much of the "HD" content you see floating around. Of course, 90 minutes crammed into 500mb will still look a good compared to youtube's "high quality". Of course, there really aren't all that many user created and/or legal hour long videos on these sites, so video length that long is rather irrelevant.

Code:


just sayin'......upping the resolution is a quadratic increase in memory usage, upping the time is a linear increase. Obviously you could decrease the bitrate, but what's the point of high resolution video with artifacts a quarter the size of someone's face?

Whether you're breaking the law by uploading copyrighted material or not, you are in fact violating YouTube's TOS. They do say that you may not upload material that is copyrighted unless you're the owner or have permission from the owner. This means that whether they're legally liable for the content, they will take it down if its copyrighted.

Technically no one can get in trouble for posting the material they take down (legally), but it is a violation of their TOS regardless.

EDIT:
Also look at Section 8.

Section 8 states the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. However, the DMCA only says that YouTube can be contacted if the company "thinks" their copyrights are being infringed. It says nothing about legal liability or anyone having to do anything about it.

No, you are missing the point. Videos that are *NOT* violating copyright laws are also being pulled. There was even a video pulled of a mother filming her child because the radio happened to be on (very quit, could barely even hear it much less tell what song it was). The point is also that it isn't YouTube deciding what is in violation. It would be like me coming on here and demanding you be banned because you are slandering me, and have kerm listen to me. Its ridiculous.



Except you are implying that quality scales linearly with bitrate. It most certainly does not. If I double the resolution, but half the bitrate, the overall quality will likely be an improvement (assuming that the source has the same or higher resolution, of course). You are also assuming that HD refers to 720p and above. Although this is correct, HD more often refers (incorrectly ) to simply higher than 640x480 (I've even seen 768x480 called HD)

That's just messed up, we should write a formal letter to Viacom and any other corporation that is "asking" YouTube to pull video's off its' site. As long as the focal point isn't the copyrighted material the video should be clean, free from being taken down.

Even though the copyright material is the focus to this video it should never be taken down - not for the cute factor - because the true focus is the kid singing. It's stuff like AMV's that should be taken down where the song and the video/pictures are both the focai of the video, as well as video's such as the one I posted because it is from ABC's AFV TV.

I'm going to end this here... Before I get you guys, and myself, confused.

Gosh, law is complicated

Actually, in this case the law is rather clear. Viacom and the **AA aren't using the law, they are simply demanding what they want. They are trying to censor the internet. The law never actually enters the picture.

sadly 768x480 is still technically SD. things in between that and HD aren't anything D.

I know, I'm just pointing out that using the terms SD and HD outside of TVs is ambiguous and should be avoided

Your Forgetting about ED which is 480p but yeah when you aren't talking about TV its kinda pointless to use HD or SD since the videos most likely aren't either of those.

If you read my post correctly that's exactly what I said. Whether they are in violation or not they will be taken down if content in it has a copyright on it.

Example: If you have copyrighted material (i.e. a song in your video) they will take it down unless you have proof that the artist gave you permission.

It doesn't say anything about the videos having to be in violation of the law. Simply having copyrighted content in the video is against YouTube's TOS. I'm not sure how else I'm supposed to explain it clearer with out hitting you upside the head with a 2x4 (lol).

I am most definitely against this rule, but that is their TOS. I would like to see a petition started to change their TOS personally, because it's some major bullsh*t.

SD lists 480p, though if you go to the page for 480p it does mention ED ( which I always thought was a medical disorder.... ).

@radio example: this should not happen; anything that has been released on the radio is fair play (for recording, etc) as far as I know, particularly because this is a second hand copy of it (and not a direct recording off the airways). That is an abuse of their "powers." I'm not sure why they would want to do it anyway since it is a really obnoxious move.

However, I do think that Viacom & friends definitely do have a right to pull a lot of the material off of youtube (particularly all of those listen to this song along with a slide show that shows pictures, etc). They should just be a little less picky / obnoxious about how they do it.

SD, assuming NTSC in the US of course, is 480i with ED being 480p (ED is more of an extension of SD).

Hence why it says EDTV in the row with 480p

I don't mind them removing copyrighted material per request of music label/company lawsuits as much as them removing non-copyrighted videos that are not against the rules and are just free speech that the government of a country doesn't like because the truth is told in the video.

And yet y'all are all for the MPAA and the RIAA when piracy is involved.