Looking more closer at the report cited the Videos removed only contributed 5.93% to the overall traffic from the 9.23% of Videos that were removed.
This is interesting because it shows that unlike the conventional wisdom that copyright materials are the key drivers of growth, like Grokster and Napster had.
This makes sense because unlike with the early Napster, sites like YouTube had already built in mechanisms to try and control that kind of content. Now I still see a whole lot of licensed anime in YouTube but it’s still a lot less than what I would find on bittorrent. Personally YouTube to me is not a replacement for quality shows because it’s not high quality video, I want to watch it on a crisp display so to me that’s why I will continue to watch YouTube. The grainy, choppy quality is part of what makes YouTube…erhm…YouTube! Would you watch entire episodes of CSI on YouTube?
I wouldn’t…lots of better ways to watch this sort of thing…honestly.
August 25th, 2007 at 9:14 am
I’m another one for high quality videos but there are times when you are stuck on a craptastic connection or firewalled or something else equally lame and you really just have to take what you can get and youtube is one of the few things that you can goto on almost any connection and it works. Sure corporations block it but it’ll work on even the crappiest of computer setups, when did you last try to watch a HD H264 video on a low end computer?