What do Russian meteors, the Harlem Shake, and Daytona 500 have in common? They’ve all been touched by the hand of YouTube in recent days, and totally change the rules in how we approach civilian-generated content.
Cases in point:
1) Baauer is making more money in ad & publishing revenue than he would on his own, as he lays claim to thousands of fan-uploaded versions of “Harlem Shake” daily. And Baauer shooting to #1 on the Billboard charts as Nielsen adds YouTube views to the formula only reinforces the legitimacy, speed, and impact of this phenomenon.
Related: read how Universal Publishing is teaming up with Fullscreen and Maker Studios to exploit content for more pub revs & ad sales — smart. In fact, Maroon 5 is getting more play on their last single from cover versions than they are for their own video! Follow the fans, follow the money.
2) The single most amazing event in our time, a falling meteor streaking across the sky, wasn’t captured by news organizations, but instead by Russian citizens, whose cars are equipped with cameras to protect them from police corruption!
3) NASCAR tries to quash civilian footage of that horrific crash Saturday, only to be smacked down by YouTube for attempting to overreach legal claims.
In fact, I didn’t even know, until reading this article, that NASCAR lays claim to any and all footage shot during their events per agreement stated on the back of their tickets — the very practice I have been I’ve been suggesting to the concert industry for some time.
(While you’re at it, download this white paper just published by digitalmusic.org, which I originally submitted for review last summer.)
Nearly every person under 30 is armed with a smartphone, and it is only a matter of time before Google launches Glass — which begs us to ask, what rights are assigned to all this content, and how do we truly harness the power of still & moving image moving forward?
Instagram’s attempted December landgrab and NASCAR’s weekend CYA operation speaks volumes about the need to study and redefine the boundaries of civilian footage moving forward.
Food for thought — 20,000 people attend a Madonna concert nightly, and yet she has no means of curating, archiving, and repurposing all the Social Visual content fans share across multiple platforms. Under current regulation, what rights does she have to that content? It’s her concert, you’re there on your own volition, right?
Shouldn’t there be a blanket statement that grants the performer / manager / promoter / venue the right to use any still / moving audio / video content shot during said event at said venue? If not, how do we change existing rules in a means that is fair for all involved?
How will the rules change when 10% of all attendees at a U2 concert, an NFL / NBA / MLB game, the World Cup, or the Olympics attend an event wearing a video-enabled glasses-type device? Do you quash the buzz, or charge ads against the shared content?
Seriously. Turn every thing off, watch this video, ignore the hype, and just think of the potential — let your mind wander for 10 minutes and ask yourself what would you do if every kid at a show was wearing Google Glass? How would you harness the promise of that power? How would you suppress it? Would you *want* to suppress it? Who’s going to be the first band to play a show wearing Glass?
Yup, the future’s so bright, you gotta wear, um, Glass? Seeing is believing? Guess the revolution will be televised after all?