Hi, Over the past couple of months we have been developing and testing a related videos module on some wikis like Harry Potter, Hunger Games and Halo. During these tests we have been tracking the number of video plays as well as collecting community feedback. We are now ready to expand the rollout to the rest of the site, and we are starting with wikis that there are the most videos for - which includes your wiki!
The videos we have are fully licensed from video partners we have developed relationships with. They include videos such as trailers, famous movie/TV clips, walkthroughs and behind the scenes interviews. We currently have video content from Screenplay and are working to create partnerships with other vendors, including Hulu, soon. You can see the video content we have by visiting the video wiki and either searching by keyword or checking out the various categories.
When the module is enabled, it will already be pre-populated with videos related to your topic. We will try to pick the best videos from the video wiki, but understand that the community’s ability to adjust the content is very important, so you will have access to both adding and removing videos within the module. This can include adding videos already on your wiki or adding new ones from the video wiki.
Our high-quality videos will compliment the fantastic articles and photos on your wiki. On 5 of the test wikis the videos in the modules have already had over 10,000 views. This is an exciting number and we hope as we make more videos available these numbers will increase. We are in the process of pre-populating the related videos module for your wiki, and expect the module to go live within the next couple of weeks, so please let me if you have any any questions or concerns. Sarah (help forum | blog) 23:49, May 23, 2012 (UTC)
Hi, This will be a sitewide addition, so there will not be a way to hide the module. It will not appear in monobook. Being in the first round of wikis to have this means that you will be able to offer early stage feedback on both the module and the content you would like to see. In order to activate the module, we will need to enable the video extension tool here. You will be able to add and remove videos you feel are most fitting to the wiki, so that the content you feel is most important is what users see. Let me know if you have any other questions. Best, --Sarah (help forum | blog) 18:05, May 25, 2012 (UTC)
- With our unusual (and occasionally tenuous) relationship with Paramount, CBS, and Pocket Books (never mind other license holders along the way), we had some serious issues with the video module previously, which is what led to our request to turn it off (and leave it off). As you may have noticed, we are very careful with all of our copyright issues, and indeed, every image here has full copyright notices on it, something that is much more difficult to rationalize with segments of video. I'm (as are the other admins here) more than a bit hesitant to reopen that can of worms with the re-enabling of the video module on Memory Alpha.
- Unless this is a feature being forced upon us (despite a prior decision to not have videos) by Wikia, I'd prefer that we leave the videos off until we have a chance to talk with the rest of our community. -- sulfur 18:40, May 25, 2012 (UTC)
- Videos should remain off here. They were disabled for good reasons, and while I wasn't here for that discussion, I do agree with the result. From what I've seen, all the copyright issues remain with this, up to and including that the videos currently on the video wiki don't meet the minimum for fair use under US law. Wikia may not be concerned with copyright violations, but MA isn't wikia. - Archduk3 19:11, May 25, 2012 (UTC)
- Without weighing in on the merits here, could the available videos be limited to those Wikia has obtained licenses to(assuming some of them deal with Trek), to keep users from adding their own(thereby avoiding copyright problems)? 31dot 20:29, May 25, 2012 (UTC)
- The problem with that 31dot is that, as I understand it, one of the major copyright issues here is that even if the videos have correct licenses, you can't easily get to them like you can with an image, so claiming fair use becomes a problem since easy access to that license is required. I also doubt that wikia would end up with anything directly related to Star Trek except for the trailers to the films, which we already link to on youtube where someone has felt it necessary. I assume that wikia does have permission for the videos they do have, and they just didn't add the information required due to continuing ignorance, ineptitude, or both, but I also have to assume that videos can still be uploaded and edited, without meeting any of the requirements in US law, elsewhere, where we can't do anything about them, and then placed here, where they become our problem, because wikia doesn't "police" these. We don't need the trailers internalized so badly that we need to open ourselves to massive administrative overhead and copyright violations. - Archduk3 21:08, May 25, 2012 (UTC)
Hi All, Thank you for your feedback, the issues you presented around licensed content sparked a really great conversation in the office. While all of the content we’re hosting on video.wikia.com is fully licenced and legal, we realize there are communities who are concerned about users uploading video from non-licenced sources. One of the ideas that came out today’s discussion was the ability to only allow videos that are licensed and available via http://video.wikia.com. Will this help allay your concerns regarding licensed content? We've chosen not to turn the related videos module on for your community while we continue to explore options regarding allowing communities the choice of using only videos we have licensed specifically for use on Wikia.--Sarah (help forum | blog) 23:22, May 25, 2012 (UTC)
- While it's nice that you've chosen to respect the community consensus to not have videos turned on here for now, most of the core problems, as in the reasons video were disabled here, remain with what you are proposing.
- There is still is no easy way to get to the video description page from here, and that description page isn't even going to be here from what I understand. Now, I'm under the impression that the law requires copyright information to be easily available to claim fair use, so please correct me if I'm wrong there.
- MA isn't CC-BY-SA, so videos "hosted" anywhere on wikia that isn't here or Uncyclopedia would seem to be incompatible with our CC-BY-NC license, since the two don't mix.
- None of the videos on the video wiki have US law and MA required copyright information. They list your "corporate partner", aka the source, who is most likely paying for this little venture, but none of them even mention the copyright holder, and the last time I checked you have to at least mention Warner Brothers to use footage from a Harry Potter movie. Once again, if you don't need to mention the copyright holder to claim fair use, please correct me.
- There currently are no videos on the video wiki that are directly related to Star Trek, therefor they have no place here. People shouldn't be coming here to watch a clip from Shrek, and that shouldn't be encouraged, since there's a whole other wiki for that.
- This isn't just about the module, since you said you have to turn on the video extension here to use it. That should be clearly not acceptable, since the reasons for it being off all remain. If the mentioned restrictions don't effect the whole wiki, they're really only going to be has helpful as replacing Hoover Dam with an umbrella. If the restrictions do effect the whole wiki, that doesn't really address any of the other issues.
- So the short answer is no, only having videos from the video wiki on this wiki is not acceptable, or even legal it seems. - Archduk3 00:17, May 26, 2012 (UTC)
- I assume the Trek videos are coming, or they wouldn't be mentioning them to us. I do not pretend to know much about copyright law, but if licenses have been obtained, don't those issuing the licenses know what will be going on here and not bring up any copyright problems like the ones Archduk mentions? 31dot 00:34, May 26, 2012 (UTC)
Hello, Thanks for spurring such a great discussion. I just wanted to weigh in here and see if i could clear up any confusion.
The first point I wanted to make is that fair use does not have any specific legal requirements to display copyright information. Attributing the source of an image or video is a good thing to do, but it does not have any bearing on the fair use analysis. Material that otherwise qualifies as a fair use would not be faulted for a lack of copyright notice and material that does not qualify would not be saved by referencing the source of the material.
The second point I wanted to make is that fair use is a defense to copyright infringement. We are discussing video content partnerships that would restrict the module to displaying licensed material only. That means that our partners have acquired permission from the copyright holders to display the videos. Copyrighted material distributed under a license is by definition, not infringing. Fair use does not enter into this discussion, because the material is licensed. Also, as part of the licensing process, they will have worked out the preferred notice requirements of the copyright holders.
The video wiki will have useful and applicable Star Trek related content before being activated here.
As to your point about the videos being hosted on Wikia and potential conflicts with the CC-BY-SA and CC-BY-NC licenses, this isn't necessarily the case. The Wikia license is satisfied as long as there is attribution and is covered by this program. The use of these videos would operate as an extension of the same exception that allows Wikia to advertise on Memory Alpha. Hope this helps, Sarah (help forum | blog) 18:48, May 30, 2012 (UTC)
- While that clears up some of the issues, it still doesn't cover the reasons the video extension was disabled here, and without being able to see what content wikia feels is related to Star Trek beforehand or the module itself, I haven't heard or seen anything yet that would be worth the problems that come with enabling the extension. My issues with the difference between the SA and NC licenses isn't just with what would be displayed in this module, but with how the video extension functions on the wiki as a whole. As for the exception that allows Wikia to advertise here, exactly what section of the 2.5 NC license are we talking about, or does this involve other legalese somewhere? - Archduk3 20:04, May 30, 2012 (UTC)
Hello, You can see the module live on a couple of wikis, such as harrypotter and diablo. You can also search on the video wiki now to see what content we currently have. We are working to get more content partners, and hope to very soon have more content there. As for your point regarding potential hosting issues, can you elaborate?
The fact that the videos from the module will be coming from videos.wikia.com does not create any additional license conflicts. This wiki does operate under the CC-BY-NC license, but when the wiki leadership decided to move to Wikia in 2005, certain facets of the noncommercial restriction were waived in order to facilitate hosting. Namely, the addition of advertising for Memory Alpha was approved. See this annoucement and the accompanying talk page.
The CC-BY-NC license does allow the waiver of any part of the license. See http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.5/. The content in the video module will be served with advertisements, but the addition of this module would be a direct outgrowth of the original waiver. The addition of the video module will not create a contradiction between the two licenses, because the provisions of the CC-BY-NC license that could theoretically complicate the situation have been waived. Hope this helps clarify, --Sarah (help forum | blog) 20:56, May 31, 2012 (UTC)
- Sorry for the late reply, but I was busy and hoping that some of this might have been answered elsewhere already. It seems none of it has been that I can find, so:
- The "wiki leadership" didn't have the authority to make decisions about waving parts of the copyright, since they were not the sole holders of that copyright, and clearly there was little to no time for input from the community as a whole, which is why the "leadership" isn't "in charge" anymore. In all the time since the move, no notice or message has been prominently displayed that parts of the NC license were supposedly waived, so "new" editors, such as myself, have had no reason to think that we were contributing under anything but the original license. Wikia doesn't have the legal authority to just change the license either. While I personally have no issue with the costs of hosting this site being covered by advertisements, I do have a problem with my content being used to enrich others, especially without any way to see just how much money is being made or even where that money is going. Now, wikia is telling us that they are going to override a community consensus to have the video extension turned off so they can advertise more for profit based on an illegal agreement from years ago with people who didn't have the authority to enter into such an agreement in the first place. I have a very large problem with that, though thank you for finally being honest about what this module is. I'm personally willing to work with wikia on this, as more transparency may be enough to alleviate some of the problems, but I do not think wikia has the legal, or moral right for that matter, to come in here and override a community consensus, especially when they're claiming to be able to do so because of a "consensus" of two made in secret with money exchanged.
- The problem with the video extension itself is that anyone can upload a video and place it on the wiki, something the community does not want to happen, and videos hosted elsewhere on a wikia wiki, not just those from the video wiki, which would have been uploaded under a different license, can be placed directly here without any notice of the difference in license. The reverse is just as possible, and there is no easy way to get to where the copyright info for these videos is, which is a requirement under our policies and US law, since fair use is going to be what we're claiming for these videos, and that's assuming that any copyright info is even added in the first place. So, once again, if the related videos module can be activated without videos being able to be uploaded or added to the wiki itself, then by all means say so. If not, then the original consensus that the video extension is a legal liability, inconsistent with MA's mission and goals, as well as simply not wanted, among other reasons, remains.
- While there is now some content actually related to Star Trek on the video wiki, I remain unconvinced that the inclusion of these is worth the problems, and most of the actual related videos are for non-canon material anyway. The basic questions of: how many videos actually have to be displayed in the module at one time, if we can rename videos (since "Star Fleet" isn't the same as Starfleet), and how often videos would be added after others are removed, have yet to be answered, or even asked. - Archduk3 07:33, June 8, 2012 (UTC)
- Everyone (esp. Wikia!), don't misrepresent that announcement as being a waiver of some of the rights reserved by CC-BY-NC - it isn't. That announcement just states that there will be advertisement, and the talk page clarifies that this is not in contradiction of the NC-clause, because it is advertisement not by the ones (I quote former Wikia boss Angela here) "operating the site and maintaining its content" but by the ones who are just hosting it.
- Sarah, I hope you see the problem here: the moment you (as in: Wikia employee) become more than just the host, namely a site operator and content maintainer yourself (by adding weird stuff that clearly no one of the other operators/maintainers wants), you will have to do it in a way that is compatible with CC-BY-NC - and that means, no ads.
- tl;dr - keep that feature off around here, because it would be a breach of license, and no one seems to want it, anyway. -- Cid Highwind 16:17, June 12, 2012 (UTC)