Muziic: YouTube playlist factory
p2pnet news view | P2P | Music:- “This is the first we’ve become aware of the site,” a YouTube spokesman told CNET. “We’re looking into it now.
“On a preliminary review, however, it appears that the site violates our API terms of use.”
Violates our API terms of use. But of course! Anything innovative, creative, competitive, stomp it.
Or buy it and turn it into an advertising platform.
Says the story:
“Muziic, created by teen developer David Nelson, has built an iTunes-like interface on top of YouTube. The service enables users to stream YouTube’s music to their PCs without fiddling with videos. Users can build playlists and organize songs in a way similar to iTunes.”
“CNET blogger Matt Rosoff first wrote about the service and gave it a favorable review. ‘Any song that’s been uploaded to YouTube is available in Muziic,’ Rosoff wrote. ‘This includes music unavailable on most commercial services, like the full Pink Floyd performance at Live 8 and Led Zeppelin’s one-off performance in 2007′.”
Teen creates program that delivers YouTube tunes to your desktop – Vancouver Sun
Muziic Turns YouTube Into a Playlist Factory – Wired
Muziic: YouTube music without the video – Ars Technica
[I’m afraid I’m feeling too cruddy to do much today so I’m simply going to post headings with notes and links and ask anyone who’s interested to perhaps post more data under individual items. Cheers! And thanks - Jon.]
CNET – Teen-created Muziic likely to irk YouTube, March 8, 2009
Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. It’s really easy!
Subscribe to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile – http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
Net access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for details.
March 10th, 2009 at 9:03 am
The whole point of an API is that an application is free to use it as it chooses. If there’s some way in which the API can be used that its provider doesn’t like then there’s probably a design flaw in the API or a deficiency in the implementation of the service provided by it. The provider should either stop providing the service until they’ve fixed it, or learn to like what people do with it. If any privileges are infringed, then such privileges need to be removed from the legislation. If anyone’s rights are being violated, then identify the right, the violation, the violator, and the violated.
Playing the audio in a sequence of YouTube clips offends YouTube? or those possessing the unethical privilege of Copyright?
Copyright is a crime against humanity. Do not accept it. Assert your human right to free speech and cultural liberty.
March 10th, 2009 at 10:56 am
Well, of course (cough!), this would immediately qualify as a copyright violation. Anything remotely innovative just IS, nowadays!
But, I can’t help thinking the “copyright” issue may only be a smokescreen in this case, as interested parties scramble to figure out how to avoid the possible lost AD REVENUE from eliminating some middlemen in the click process.
March 10th, 2009 at 4:00 pm
This sounds great and FREE & LEGAL! Think I’ll give it a go….cheers!
March 10th, 2009 at 5:07 pm
” This sounds great and FREE & LEGAL! Think I’ll give it a go….cheers!”
“On a preliminary review, however, it appears that the site violates our API terms of use.”
Go right ahead
March 11th, 2009 at 12:31 am
Y’know what’s fascinating about this:
The fact that the developer is just some guy. A teenager, no less.
This says something about where we are as a “civilization” — when corporate megaliths pretend to understand open technology (by putlicizing their API and such), but then feel free to bitch about what people create with it.
Fitch: as usual, you’re spot-on in regard to copyright etc. (I’d love to see a debate between you and a copyright apologist, btw.)
Also, there’s something really inspirational about the fact that the developer of this isn’t some multi-billion-dollar corporate R&D lab somewhere that “needs” twenty years of monopoly ‘protection’ via patent to provide “incentive to innovate”.
If capitalism is so innovative, why is the MOST innovative stuff lately happening in areas with relatively lax Intellectual monopolies (like open APIs, FOSS software, etc.?), with at least a version of it being offered gratis, and — at most — a “premium” version being sold?
I mean, come on — recent history flies in the face of all the fashionable propaganda about how innovation works.
Glad people are waking up, however.
March 11th, 2009 at 10:50 am
It’s playing youtube content that is freely available by going to youtube. its just a search engine for yout tube, how can it not be legal?
March 11th, 2009 at 11:04 am
Google is already hinting that it may violate their term of service.
If it gains any popularity I think it’s a safe bet that Google will sue this
kid to either eliminate or get control of this app.
If it is used to get copies of RIAA member songs that are on YouTube for free,
do you honestly think the labels will allow it to live ?
Legal or illegal has never been a factor for the RIAA member labels.
What matters is that there are enough ‘if’s ‘ in the equation to allow the
RIAA members to use their financial weight to sue it out of existence.
Can a lone teenager afford to fight them ?
I doubt it.
I fully expect to hear about a lawsuit within a month.
But, you go right ahead and keep supporting them David.
It’s people that continue to insist on giving them money, whether by buying or
supporting DRM clogged ‘rental’ sites that give them the money to eliminate
stuff like this, that even you can see should be perfectly legal.
March 11th, 2009 at 11:14 am
” its just a search engine for yout tube, ”
TPB is just an aggregator of torrents.
Same thing.
March 11th, 2009 at 11:21 am
it’s either searc directly at youtube or search with google or search youtube with a third party search engine, its still youtube content, youtube can oll down any content they are asked to, torrents are harder to control i assume
March 11th, 2009 at 11:30 am
” youtube can oll down any content they are asked to, torrents are harder to control i assume ”
That would be an incorrect assumption.
Even if TPB were closed down those same
torrents would still be easily found via Google searches.
Besides, EMI has made a lot of noise about it’s ‘partnership’ with Google, which would
mean a lot of EMI content would be showing up on YouTube, legally … see where I am going
with this … EMI allows EMI content to be put up, and THEN has to have their content pulled ?
No, they will sue to keep their advantage rather than allow someone to get their music for ‘free’
for use outside of YouTube.
It doesn’t make sense to anyone but a record label exec.
March 11th, 2009 at 11:33 am
” it’s either searc directly at youtube or search with google or search youtube with a third party search engine, ”
Now reread your own words and insert TPB where you put YouTube.
March 11th, 2009 at 11:34 am
“That would be an incorrect assumption.”
Honesty i have only tried torrents 3-4 times so I don’t know much about them, othr than they are peiced together from multiple sources so any assumptions I have could vewry well be in correct!