[iridehorses]

This is a discussion that came up on a thread yesterday. A YouTube video was put up for what amounted to a critique and a post came in saying that it was wrong for someone to critique that video. My argument was as follows:

That is such a difficult question. If a person posts a video for the entire world to see, how can they expect privacy? Look how many videos are placed on the news each day and used in courts of law. If the video was meant to be private then the internet is not the place to post it. Positing a video on YouTube, as an example, invites discussion - both positive and negative.

What is your opinion?

 

[Jake and Dai]

That is a very good question! And I agree with your argument iride. But now I'm curious...what are the legal terms posted on YouTube as it relates to privacy, or lack thereof, of uploaded content? I'd check but YouTube doesn't support the browser I use at work. It would be interesting to see what YouTube has to say about this.

 

[TwisterRush]

i kind of agree with that statement.

if you are uploading anything on the internet, it is most likely NOT going to be kept private, depending on the security system.
If you are not open to negative comments or want privacy, or something of the sort, you are better off not even posting it. Our society today, thrive's on positive comments and praises.
Most of the time, just to say. Expect the unexpected.

 

[TaMMa89]

I think there's an option to share your video just with only few people on Youtube. That's what you should do if you want to keep it private.

I'm not sure, but since I decided to embed some Youtube videos (not created by mine) on my website few weeks ago I tried to find out the Youtube's policy and rules since I don't want to rub elbows with any kind of copyright infringements. I got that you're allowed to share material on Youtube if you keep it in touch with Youtube (e.g. embedded player if the user hasn't prevented his video embedding, video links etc.) The thing against rules is that you take the video out of Youtube and use it then. Of course there's also material that has been downloaded illegal on Youtube (all kind of material under copyrights, when the downloader doesn't own the copyrights) and I doubt if it's legal to use material like that. I think it depends a bit on your national copyright laws which can be different in different countries. But like I said, I'm not sure.

About criticizing: When you put something on the Internet, you have to understand that somebody can criticize it. About responsibility of the criticizer: all kind of constructive criticize is ok, all kind of vulgar dissing against netiquette isn't.

 

[1dog3cats17rodents]

I think it should only be allowed to critique possible buys and such, or possibly as a 'wow, this video is amazing/hilarious!" I don't think it is fair to bash a video when the poster has no way of defending

 

[my2geldings]

I completely agree and you know what, that is one of my biggest pet peeves with threads in general. The minute you post a thread, video or even pictures, regardless of the reason or purpose of the thread or what you are expecting for response, you should be open to all sorts of responses.

Always makes me laugh when I see someone who wants a critique after posting a picture or a video and gets upset when forum members come on putting what their view and opinion is.

Get that regularly with threads of all sorts, people posting about something then get mad because they don't get the response they want. I find it to be very immature.

If you don't want your feelings hurt, then don't post anything to begin with

 

[Spyder]

This is a discussion that came up on a thread yesterday. A YouTube video was put up for what amounted to a critique and a post came in saying that it was wrong for someone to critique that video. My argument was as follows:

What is your opinion?

Video discussions critiques can fall under a few avenues of right and wrong..

Specifically on Youtube I feel can be critiqued. There is a way to make that video private if the user wants to.

What becomes dicey is when a video is out there that is of a party that does not wish it posted in public but it is.

Lets say for arguements sake that I took a video of someone riding. Technically the video is my property but the person being videod has some rights also and for me to post that video (that is mine) and ask people to critique the rider would be wrong (assuming I never asked the party videoed before I did the posting). The person may not want a critique and maybe they were trying to see what they are doing wrong FOR THEMSELVES then the person should be able to determine WHO critiques them and where.

I would be boiling mad if someone videoed me or my horse with or without my permission and then went and posted it for critique. If I want a critiqque I will ask for it.

 

[gypsygirl]

i feel like if you put a video up online for all the world to see, you cant get mad when people comment on it, whether positive or negative. thats what you get when you post a public video online

 

[iridehorses]

Spyder makes a good point. The person taking and uploading the video may know that it will be out in the universe for all to see but what about those in the video?

A photographer snaps a picture of a person but before that picture can be published, a release must be signed. The exception is if that picture was for the news (even a tabloid). Yet we have all seen photos taken from the news used in all sorts of ways without repercussions.

Another view is a person who uploads an "instructional" video or of a horse for sale. Their video is for the purpose of world wide viewing so is that video acceptable for critique?