The Inquisitr » justin.tv

Justin.tv gets serious on copyright, signs deal with Fox

Duncan Riley — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 02:17:02 +0000

Justin.tv has signed new deals with Fox and others that will see the live stream site hit pirated content that is archived on the site, as well as pirated content as it’s being streamed live.

Working with Vobile, Justin.tv has begun fingerprinting all saved clips and scanning them against Vobile’s content database. Users with clips that are found to be infringing will have their clips removed and the channel taken offline.

The bigger challenge is live video, with users uploading 24.3 hours of live video per minute every day. From November, in partnership with Fox and Net Result, Justin.tv will expand the fingerprinting system to all live video, which in theory will mean broadcasts of pirated live content (such as sporting events, see picture above) will be stopped as they begin, not some time later following a takedown request from the provider.

As a preemptive measure for Justin.tv the deals make a lot of sense: the company may be protected by the DMCA, but likewise the volume of pirated content made the company a possible target for legal action.

Justin.tv proves to win live video wars, break the law

Paul Montgomery — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 13:20:21 +0000

YouTube got to the top of the online video clip industry by systematically flaunting copyright laws until it could get big enough to be bought by Google and let their lawyers handle it. It seems that in the fight between Justin.tv and Ustream.tv for the live video market, one side has taken the high road and the other is going to win.

Quite apart from an allegations of Justin.tv enabling child pornography, which the Inquisitr is also investigating, Justin.tv is the hub of a network of Web sites which provide global sports fans with links to live video streams of sporting events, openly flaunting international broadcast laws.

Atdhe.net and Channelsurfing.net are just two of a number of sites which maintain databases of sporting events and link to them as they are shown each day. These sites embed video feeds from Justin.tv which are blatantly stolen re-broadcasts from ESPN, Fox Sports, NFL Network and the free-to-air networks, and a list of international events like soccer from a variety of networks, plus Australian rules football and rugby league on Australia’s Channels Seven, Nine and Ten and a host of European feeds.

While some of the feeds are hosted on private sites, by far the most popular conduit for these feeds is Justin.tv, which even puts its watermark over the offending streams. Ustream, which in comparison has taken the responsible route of partnering with CBS and other content partners and squashing anyone who tried to use its site for infringing rebroadcasts, is being thrashed on traffic numbers in comparison, according to any metrics firm you’d care to ask.

Can Justin.tv hide behind the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), which at least nominally protects them from legal action, long enough to get bought YouTube-style by someone who can defend them from the inevitably massive law suits they are risking? Allowing these feeds to stay up for so long that a subculture of sites has now spread up around them is pushing the intention of the statutes way too far for comfort.

Branding your existing product as a Twitter app isn’t a recipe for success

Duncan Riley — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 02:18:25 +0000

It goes without saying that Twitter is the big success story of 2009. Everyone wants a slice of the Twitter action, but the Twitter boom can’t last forever.

Among the sea of Twitter related tools and sites has been a number of companies with existing products who want to cash in as well. Mashable today reports on TwitCam, a live streaming Twitter application (yeah, WTF is right) from Livestream, the company formerly known as Mogulus.

The name might be funky, but the product is familiar: it’s Livestream with the added benefit of being able to log in with your Twitter credentials….and not a thing more. But it comes with Twitter I hear people saying… so does nearly every live streaming site now.

Justin.tv is also getting in on the act with a service called CamTweet (currently in closed beta) which offers…you guessed it, Justin.tv with the added benefit of being able to log in with your Twitter credentials…oh, and it has a Twitter term in the sites name.

I’ve picked on those two today, but they are far from the first to try to cash in on the Twitter craze. I understand the short term thinking behind the moves, but it’s a risky strategy over a long period. Companies such as Livestream and Justin.tv dilute their core brand by splitting its services between the original site and the Twitter related sites; yes, it could be argued that doing so may drive growth, but that growth may come at the cost of the original site. The bigger risk is investing money and time in an overcrowded market that is due for a crash some time before the end of the year. The growth in Twitter can’t last for ever, and the growth in Twitter applications is about 100x more unsustainable again.

Some of the other rebranded products of late (this doesn’t apply to Livestream or Justin.tv) share another trait: the original product was mostly unsuccessful and the rebranding is an attempt to find success. I’m at a loss to see how rebranding a dud as a Twitter application will make it any less of a dud…but then again you can only try.

Justin.tv streams child porn: industry crackdown coming?

Duncan Riley — Sun, 19 Jul 2009 17:00:11 +0000

The mainstream live video streaming industry has always struggled with content control. Unlike pre-recorded content which can often be filtered at the point it is uploaded, or close there to it, live content can only be moderated if a complaint is received and the person in the stream is caught in the act.

We’ve learned from a reader that Justin.tv this week streamed child pornography featuring 13 year old girls. We are in receipt of pictures and a comment stream that back that observation up to a point, however I would note for the record that none of the pictures we receive show nudity…as the act of receiving and viewing the said images would be illegal in Australia, even when sent for journalistic purposes. We would note that our tipper was appalled by what he stumbled upon on Justin.tv as well and has made no effort a far as we are aware to capture the parts of the video that would constitute child pornography.

According to out tipper, at around 10pm July 14 a number of 13 year old girls streaming live on Justin.tv were being asked to take their clothes off or were hit on by around 800 viewers. Here’s one of the initial screen shot:

After some time the girls started to flirt more with the people in the chat room, and that’s when the nudity started. According to our tippers, the 13 year old girls flashed their breasts. These images do not show them doing that, but do show one girl stripping, and another posing in a suggestive fashion.

I’ve not asked Justin.tv for comment because I know this isn’t a problem restricted to them alone, and to their credit (and what I would note would have been the standard response) they suspended the account some time after the child pornography went to air based on an internal complaint system (they nearly all exclusively work this way.)

Some providers are more prone to this sort of content than others though. Stickam has long been know for its scantily clad young girls as this screen shot taken early Sunday US time shows:

Sites that attract a younger demographic tend to have the issue more: Live Universe has it, but you rarely if even see this sort of content on Ustream.tv. The problem then is knowing the age of those on screen: the porn industry has a record keeping requirement for age verification, something seemingly not required by streaming video sites.

What is clear though is that the live video streaming industry faces far greater risks from carrying child porn than it does in its constant fights against pirated content. Laws may offer some protection for these companies today, but laws can always be changed, and hosting naked 13 year old girls isn’t a good look for any company. A crackdown seems likely and it’s just a matter of when it will happen.

Justin.tv delivers a dose of WTF with new pro membership offering

Duncan Riley — Fri, 15 May 2009 02:13:55 +0000

The challenge in the live streaming market from the beginning has been monetization. Sites such as Mogulus have moved from a consumer offering to a revenue focused professional model, but the rest of the players have had it hard: how do you charge for a service that your competition is offering for free?

Justin.tv, who for the record we love, not only because it’s a great service, but because they’ve also catered for non-US users where similar services haven’t, have offered for the first time a paid pro membership. Having looked at it, I can confidently say that even if this new subscription offering had come from my wife or mother, I’d say the same thing: WTF.

For $9.95 a month, pro account holders get to watch videos without ads, special colors in chat, a special icon in chat, special pro badges on their profiles, and last but not least, five free “gifts,” little graphics you can send to other users on Justin.tv that usually cost $1 each to buy.

Let me make that clear: no ads, pretty colors, special badges, and five dinky graphics. Did I say WTF already?

Justin.tv is pitching the offering as a way of “giving [users] access to features that are difficult or impossible for us to provide for free.” The ad part I get, but pretty colors in chat? Really? And even then, would users really pay $9.95 a month to not have ads?

What a pro membership should have offered is ad share or ad rights for users who broadcast on Justin.tv, maybe improved quality streams or priority access, or even improved customization options for their profile pages (not trinkets, but actual html access, even on a limited basis.) Surely there’s something better they could have pitched that what they have?

(via Centernetworks)

Teen commits suicide live on Justin.tv

Duncan Riley — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 01:17:08 +0000

Abraham K. Biggs, 19 from Florida committed suicide live on Justin.tv Wednesday after being encouraged by viewers to do so.

The story as best we can follow it is that Biggs threatened to overdose on pills live on Justin.tv on a bodybuilding forum at bodybuilding.com. According to eyewitness reports, moderators didn’t believe him, and other users either on bodybuilding.com, Justin.tv or both egged him on to do it. Biggs, known as “candyjunkie” then posted a suicide note (copy here), downed a pile of pills then “went to sleep” all on camera. According to a report here, “he breathes for a few hours, people think he’s going to be alright and keep joking and trash talking him on Justin.tv”. Some time later people realize he was not moving, someone tracks down his details, calls police and paramedics, who then broke into his house to come to his aid…with that all being streamed live as well.

NewTeeVee has confirmed Biggs’ death with the Broward County medical examiner.

The story is infinitely sad, and made worse by others having egged him on to do it, but this statement from Justin.tv CEO Michael Seibel doesn’t help things:

As for the broadcaster incident last night, we don’t comment on individual videos, however, our policy prohibits inappropriate content on Justin.tv. We rely on the community to flag videos that they feel are objectionable. Once a video is flagged, it is reviewed and quickly removed from the system if it violates our Terms of Use.

I understand they are concerned about the legal angle of what has happened, but to not at least express sympathy for the family, the kid, or even for what has gone on isn’t going to win them any fans.

(image: CNN iReport)

Turkey bans Blogger due to a handful of blogs linking to pirated football games

Duncan Riley — Sun, 26 Oct 2008 23:27:57 +0000

Turkey has completely blocked Google’s blogging service Blogger due to a handful of sites linking to pirated football (soccer) games. The ban took place Friday and blocks the entire service, not just infringing blogs.

The court ruling (censorship in Turkey is decided in the courts…mostly) followed a complaint from Digitürk TV, a subscription based digital TV platform that owns the right to transmit live coverage of Turkish football league games. Digitürk had asked Google to remove blogs that linked to pirated streams of their coverage (notably only linked, but were not hosting the content.) Google didn’t take the sites down, so Digitürk obtained a blocking order through a court in Diyarbakir for the two domains and their IP addresses, which in the case of Blogger are shared so now the entire service is blocked in the country.

Under Turkish copyright law, blocking is allowed where sites link to copyright material, where usually in western nations, a link may not necessarily constitute an offense in itself. Digitürk has previously been successful in having Justin.tv and MyP2P TV blocked in Turkey.

(via basbasbas and cyber-rights)

Stickam enters mobile streaming space, iPhone client coming

Duncan Riley — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 03:11:06 +0000

Live video streaming service Stickam has entered the mobile phone streaming spacing, launching a dedicated mobile client.

The initial release sees support only for the Nokia N95 and N96, but the company is working on an iPhone client for future release.

The move takes Stickam into new territory in a competitive space. On the live streaming side, Stickam competes with Justin.tv, Ustream.tv, Mogolus, Yahoo Live and others, in mobile streaming the market so far have been divided between Flixwagon and Qik. The move offers growth opportunities for Stickam by entering a space not yet targeted by its main competitors, although given the mobile streaming market is still limited by technology and regular use, the move may see an increase in content created by existing members than attract new ones.

Streams featured on Stickam’s home page generate more than 40,000 live views each hour of broadcast. Stickam.com has more than 2 million registered users, and receives more than 2.5 million unique monthly visitors and 4.8 million daily page views.

Stickam

Stickam Signs TWiT Deal

Duncan Riley — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 07:32:38 +0000

Live video startup Stickam.com has signed a deal to be the exclusive live streaming provider for Leo Laporte’s TWiT (this WEEK in TECH) Live show.

TWiT Live airs on Stickam.com five days a week and since first streaming on Stickam.com last month has attracted an amazing audience of nearly 400,000 people daily and more than 3 million total live views.

Stickam.com have also unveiled a high-definition wide-screen format for live streaming Internet video, providing a 16:9 aspect ratio. This is claimed to be the first wide-screen live streaming format publicly available on the Web.

I’ve been harsh on Stickam.com in the past, mostly because every time I have previously visited the site I keep seeing semi-naked young girls pout for a male audience and not much else. But to be fair Stickam.com is getting serious in the battle of live streaming supremacy, and the TWiT deal helps. I’ll make an effort to give it another shot in the next week and I’ll write it up.

Update: if you’re not sure by what I mean in the last paragraph, click here for a screenshot I just took from the streams page on Stickam.com. Note: marginally NSFW.