Shared publicly  - 
TV Rights holders and small, wearable cameras, will go to war? Nascar style

Today Tyler Anderson shot some video and shared it on Twitter. He shot it with his cell phone. What was it of? A big wreck at Daytona that seriously injured several people.

I watched the video before it was blocked by Nascar for copyright reasons. It shows the point of view of a fan that was almost killed by a flying tire off of a car. That made it a news event. When there is a news event all copyright has to sit down and allow use of video and other media via "fair use" protections. But Nascar is still claiming copyright on the video (on the back of every ticket it says that Nascar owns all video, even stuff you shot).

Why do events do this? Because there's big money in selling TV rights. Sometimes billions of dollars. When I hung out with the Target Indy team they said I couldn't shoot their car on the track, only in the pits. They explained that that rule existed to protect the billions of dollars that TV pays the sport to have exclusive TV rights.

But now we are about to see a revolution in small, wearable cameras. Google's +Project Glass  is just the most famous one. 

A couple of weeks ago I met the founders of +Epiphany Eyewear, started by a couple of Stanford Students. They showed me their new 3D printed prototypes that hold a 1080p video camera and can record more than an hour of video. 

I've seen other cameras, like these, that can even stream video. Pairasight's founder told me (audio recording of interview here: ) that his 3D glasses could stream 1.5 hours to something like Ustream or Google+ Hangouts on a single battery charge. 

So, imagine that thousands of people will have wearable cameras like these soon at such an event. Can Nascar really claim ownership of all that video? Will that stand up in court? I don't think it will. I certainly don't think it should, particularly when a news event happens that should push video of that short event into fair use. 

I wonder how the law will change. But it is clear there's a war coming between TV rights holders and fans who have wearable cameras on. 

How will it play out? I'm not sure. 

By the way, all Nascar did was ensure that every media outlet will replay this video over and over so many more people are likely to see it now.
kris cobbaert's profile photoCody Leslie's profile photoMichael Roberts's profile photoMichael Dortch's profile photo
Thought provoking post based on today's event. Thanks.
wow, I'd love to see that video +Robert Scoble ! It is a brave new world... I wonder how this will all play out. I'd imagine the law is going to find it harder & harder to keep up with changing technology.
It always boil down to the big green monster of dollars and other such non cents.
NASCAR isn't the sole actor here. Google and their Content ID platform is the biggest issue. 
The more people that have these cameras and then post to more places the better.  That was not about TV rights.  It was about cover ups.

As soon as stuff spreads properly, lawyers can whistle.
I love seeing technology outpace our societal rules and laws. 
We had a great example of this in the UK not long ago.  A prominent sportsman got found out to be having an affair but the press were stopped from publishing it by a court order.  Anyone who went on the internet knew who he was.  In the end the order was dropped because you can't turn off the internet around here.
NASCAR is kidding themselves - their model (as well as the NFL and others) won't hold up
I'm less worried about TV rights being infringed than my privacy being infringed by countless cameras.  Imagine a world where you could do a Google image search of your face and see photos and videos taken by complete strangers whilst you're on the tube, in a pub, in a museum and so on.
There's going to be no stopping it. They can't contain video people post as it is with fancy algorithms. It's only going to get worse once there is hundreds/thousands of people posting the same event from different perspectives.
I'd like to see one that connects & records to an iPod/iPad. Allow the glasses to get main power from the iPod & only fall back on its own battery when necessary. This extends battery life. I can already imagine all the concerts I'll be enjoying from the first person perspective at the shows.  If concert promoters are smart, they'll jump on this first and offer virtual tickets and put their own people in the audience with eyeglass cams for multiple viewing angles.  This would be ideal for bands w/ sold out shows that have problems with scalpers buying up all their tix before fans can get them. Now fans can still see show, albeit not in person.  Of course, bands can already do this with regular cameras. I wonder what stops them.
+Mark Blacknell +Mimi Drake I know.  Its scary and tiny cameras will make it worse.  In UK, before every school play the parents are asked whether anyone objects to their children being filmed by other parents.  Very quaint compared to the world we are entering.
"We gonna take a left and then we gonna take another left"
+Andrew Mair - to be fair, people have been filming you/kids/whatever for a very long time. The only difference is that now there's a chance you/others can see what they captured.

Not an easy problem to solve.  Especially when a significant plurality (majority?) don't see a problem.
NASCAR censorship confirms what we don't like to admit even to ourselves: The crashes are part of the entertainment they are selling us. In fact, they are probably the most valued part of the package. We tune in for the possibility of mayhem.
In the long run, users will win this war. 

Not because justice always prevails, but because we will have more cameras.  
Sure makes you think, doesn't it? Nothing new though... Basically all sporting events have this same rule. Shoot, you can't even watch MLB videos on YouTube.
Gotta love the internet, it's around forever now. NASCAR has accomplished nothing by removing it.
Imagine how today's technology would have recorded events of the past.  Wonder whether the magic bullet theory in JFK's murder would have been solved if everyone in the crowd had their cell phones recording the event. 
all it will mean is the diminished revenue from tv will have to be made up for by the audience and as a result shows will get smaller and more intimate. There will be so much stuff for free but the quality will remain low.. To me this is good news all around. people will have to go out to see good stuff and local talent can now have a chance to compete with big shows and  venues.
I do not believe that it will improve an already dysfunctional society. Some things should be left to privacy as in the penumbras that this fertile ground harvested a versatile and audacious breed, e pluribus unum... 
Talking with few folks in different sporting leagues about this. Interesting president. 
Im looking forward to all the next step in technology..
But it is clear there's a war coming between TV rights holders and fans who have wearable cameras on.

Or rather, the fans with the wearable cameras are proxies pawns for the corporation that makes the hardware in its battle against the other corporations which controls the media. 
Information terms towards freedom. As much as they want to restrict this in the future, it will be impossible. They will lose unless they embrace it and use it.
Brands encourage user participation/ co-content creation when it suits them, and then wants to prevent it when it doesn't. It's not going to work like that because people participate when they are inspired to do so and that enthusiasm can't be turned on and off like a switch. This is just another indication of how behind TV is. There needs to be major changes in that industry so that it catches up to watch consumers want and how they behave. 
“The fan video of the wreck on the final lap of today’s NASCAR Nationwide Series race was blocked on YouTube out of respect for those injured in today’s accident. Information on the status of those fans was unclear and the decision was made to err on the side of caution with this very serious incident.” -Steve Phelps, NASCAR SVP/CMO

There are issues besides copyright here like common decency, and respect to the people injured and their families. The families of the injured fans may not have been able to be reached yet to be notified of the condition of their family member
What if you enter a movie theatre wit  these glasses? Or if everybody going to the movies had these glasses? It's an interesting question. 
If they are complaining now then wait till Google glass becomes mainstream
He could always flip them the bird because he didn't buy no stinking ticket with no silly copyright claim on it, he snuck in.  And then he could sue them back for claiming copyright to his video and causing him so much stress, which surely shortened his years by many!
All the hype about taking away gun rights was because senators only skimmed the information they were given and connected Shoot with guns instead of cameras.  What they really meant to do was to limit the capacity of Cameras to 10 pictures or less except for Magazine and movie photographers.  This is why they need to read the full text, this could have been avoided!
WIth Glass on the horizon. The narrow piece of privacy we have to day is becoming even smaller.  Funny how publicly corporations will try to own us.
There will come a time when nascar will be challenged in court and they would lose because nobody signed a valid document giving them rights to the images . That will force them to sell all event tickets online so they can make everyone sign electronically their T&Cs. 
Put a camera on it. If the Russians can capture real meteors, can't Americans at least capture hillbilly meteors. ;?
This is dumb... If you like NASCAR, obey the instructions on the ticket. If you spend all you're time trying to wreck their business model, and win, there won't be a Nascar for you to like. Or is Nascar a human rite too? (replace the word Nascar with any business name you want)
Robert, I don't understand how that YouTube video got reinstated because they showed video of the cars on the track, which is something you weren't allowed to shoot when you visited the Target Indy team.  What's the difference ?    
That being said, when all that Glass content hits the web, a lot of businesses are going to feel the pain.
It's already happening. People are video taping pay per view shows with their iPhones and uploading it online.  
Just wait until it all happens automatically by just watching those shows. How are those companies going to make money ?    
+kris cobbaert  Actually, most of the piracy going on now doesnt use iPhones or the like, it's all done directly through a computer, usually streamed live. The companies that are affected aren't losing any money nor any sleep over it. They persue and take down what they can, knowing they cant possibly get it all. That's ok, as it really doesn't affect their bottom dollar. They are still making enormous amounts of money on it and those people likely weren't going to pay for it anyway.

In relation to Google Glass media ending up inevitably online, the only real issue is going to be people feeling like it's an invasion of their privacy. Unfortunately, if those people knew how little privacy exists anymore, they would likely have bouts with depression. There is really very little privacy to anyone anymore and while that doesn't really affect me as I understand it and have come to terms with it, it greatly affects others who haven't.

Despite the privacy concerns, it is quite interesting to me to see what really takes place in the day of someone's life. Research has been and is being done on this very subject. They are finding that, if we make a record of everything that happens in a day, it can greatly help us to see what important things as well as subtle nuances our brain chooses to forget or not record itself. Often times even details of a short conversation are lost by the brain and these recordings may eventually help us understand why.
This is a bit like the record industry when people started to copy and share music. For the record industry to stay relevant, they had and still have to offer some type of value added. iTunes helped here with their 99 cent. simple and easy downloads.  

There is no competing with thousands of people wearing devices that will just get smaller over time, and that will stream live. The big broadcasters have to offer a better experience whatever that might look like.   
I agree with +Michael Roberts, but hasten to add that Steve Jobs had to fight vociferously with the major record labels to get them to sign onto iTunes, and then again to get them to agree to charging 99 cents for downloaded singles. And the recording and movie industries have long, inglorious histories of fearing and fighting almost every major technological advance, from sound in movies to home video recorders and players to online entertainment. Sometimes, evolution is waiting for a bunch of nervous old guys (and they're almost always mostly guys) to get the heck out of the way...