Forum:YouTube embedding policy

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > YouTube embedding policy
Archive
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 9 June 2008 by Clv309.

Currently, we have no policy on YouTube videos being embedded in articles. Some users remove them anyway, with nothing currently to stand on. I recommend that we make some policy on embedding YouTube videos. I say that the video must portray no opinions (like how a review is very opinionated), and be informational, and stuff like that.

I have footage of a weird version of the death glitch myself, but HyperCam nor Windows Movie Maker lets you export clips as .gifs, only .wavs (I think they're .wavs.).

As a note, if something gets passed saying that videos aren't allowed in articles, many cases would still fall under RS:IAR. Dragon medium helm! Whaddaya know?Chiafriend12Better than rune!I have 12 friends. 00:10, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't really enjoy YouTube videos within articles since there are technical issues that may crop up, copyright problems can arise and aesthetically, it doesn't look very nice. However, I personally think that they can and should be included if they convey some information which for one reason or another can not be conveyed through a simple textual or pictoral display, the creator of the video has given their express permission of its use, and the video itself avoids using loud music, swearing, biased opinion and respects all other current rules within policy; in short, the video must be encyclopedic.--Diberville 15:55, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
I tend to agree with not letting youtube vids into main articles. There are so many issues (mentioned above) that can easily arise. [[File:Drunk dragon.png|Drunk dragon]]Cheers! Atlandy 19:12, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
I think YouTube articles should be kept. Most are very useful. Also, if the creator has to give licenses, then I don't think many would be allowed on this wiki, anyway. I say we just keep it like it is. White partyhat old.png C Teng talk 20:08, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
Whoa, hold on there. No matter our opinions on the validity of YouTube videos in articles, wiki policy dictate that we can not use someone else's own intellectual property, be it a map, an image, text or anything else, without their express permission.--Diberville 20:27, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
Okay, but I never saw any. I assumed that they wouldn't mind unless they directly said, "Do not use this!" White partyhat old.png C Teng talk 20:35, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
Well if you check below the edit window, it says in bold lettering "Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!" Here's our policy and it links to the umbrella Wikia policy which in a nutshell means that you have to assume you can't freely take and use someone's intellectual property unless there's something that expressly says you can.--Diberville 20:44, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
RuneScape videos, as all the images and animations on this wiki, are copyright of Jagex, not the video maker/image taker/animation taker, and of which qualify under Fair Use, so that isn't a problem. Dragon medium helm! Whaddaya know?Chiafriend12Better than rune!I have 12 friends. 10:24, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
I think you're confusing the right of a YouTuber to make a RuneScape video without Jagex's permission versus the right of this wiki to use that video without the creator's permission. The former is allowable, the latter, which is what we are discussing, is not.--Diberville 15:08, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

I want to clarify the "fair use" argument about Jagex's intellectual property. Based on quite a bit of legal precedence and statutory law, what happens on this wiki is largely a derivative product, not really in the spirit of fair-use. What this means is that the content comes from Jagex copyrighted material and draws largely from that. We use so much Jagex material that claiming a "fair use" exception is really more of a joke than anything else, and IMHO not a valid legal excuse.

There is a defacto agreement to allow us to use Jagex content... as I have a very hard time believing that Jagex has never heard of the Runescape Wiki and hasn't had lawyers come and check us out. That none of us are making money off of this website (Wikia is, but not us, the contributors) certainly makes it quite a bit harder to prosecute the "authors" of this website. There is also a statute of limitations, both within the USA (where this website is hosted) and in the UK (home of Jagex) that requires the person whose copyright is being violated to step up and claim copyright violation.... usually (in the USA) with a DCMA "cease and desist" letter. That Jagex isn't being more forceful about the copyright is due to the benevolence of Jagex and their property, not due to some very liberal interpretation of fair use (or "fair dealing in Europe") copyright doctrine.

In other words, we exist because Jagex thinks having a bunch of fan sites that do screen captures and reproduce content from their web servers can help their bottom line, and that we act as a sort of advertisement branch for the company... or at least "free publicity" under theories of good public relations. All that it would take to shut down this wiki is some idiot of a new CEO/lead lawyer to get their "panties in a bunch" and decide to file that cease and desist request with Wikia.

BTW, this has happened when Paramount Studios went on a rampage and did just that against a whole bunch of Star Trek fan websites.

I highly doubt that including some "YouTube" videos is going to change that status... as long as the "authors" of those videos have either given explicit GFDL (or GFDL-compatible) copyleft licensing terms or are "officially" released by Jagex (as we are running ragged over Jagex copyright anyway, a little bit more doesn't make a difference). I do agree with Diberville that it should be something encyclopedic in nature, and demonstrating something like one of the riots or some other feature in a fashion similar to how we are using animated GIFs right now. All YouTube would be in this case is a free content hosting service, and helping to "offload" some of the data storage requirements from Wikia... who could also be "hosting" the video data as well all things considered.

The real argument is if we should allow external (to Wikia) content storage at places like YouTube, or should all of the content be hosted "locally" on Wikia servers. On that point, I really don't know what the best answer is. Certainly it would be useful to know if Wikia is hesitant about having a huge video archive or not... due to data storage requirements. --Robert Horning 16:40, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

I will step away from the legal and fair use issues that Robert has already addressed and comment simply on the aesthetics. And on 99 percent of the RS vids I have seen, they really really suck. I feel they lower the overall quality of any page they are on, and therefore lower the overall quality of the wiki. We (i.e. all good contributors combined) put in hundreds of hours a week overall to make this site not only as informative as possible, but to do it in a neat concise way. The vids do not add to the neatness. Now, to be fair to the claim that some of them are informative and helpful, maybe the videos can be put on an article subpage linked to from that particular article. So each user can decide on thier own if they want to open it.--Degenret01 18:51, 20 May 2008 (UTC)