Live data from Hacker News

Pirated Courses on Udemy

medium.com

121–130 of 254 posts

Re: Pirated Courses on Udemy

#121
post #34

You can go after Udemy. They're not just a hosting service. They claim ownership of the content . "Each of our 35,000+ courses is taught by an expert instructor". Many courses are paid. If Udemy charges for access to the course, they lose the DMCA safe harbor. Then they're liable for full copyright damages. This may even be criminal copyright infringment under 18 U.S. Code § 2319 (Criminal infringement of a copyright…

I expect it's true that they lose safe harbor, but I couldn't find anything saying that. Are you just guessing?

Re: Pirated Courses on Udemy

#122
post #27

Did he even try to contact Udemy support and get a response? It would seem like the thing to do before writing a hit piece. I interviewed at Udemy, but ended up taking a position somewhere else, yet they struck me as good people trying to make a good product. I don't like piracy and the author has been wronged, but this blog post is unfair.

Yes, I did. As did Troy. No reponse (now as then). You entirely miss the point of the article - it's not about piracy, it's about a marketplace for pirated goods. That's what Udemy does. Sorry if I'm not nice about it.

Maybe there's no response because you tried to contact them over thanksgiving and not because of malice.

Re: Pirated Courses on Udemy

#123
post #85

Lol you people are really amazing. No sense of irony? Really? Hey guess what, Silicon Valley has been doing this for nearly 20 years to other people. Funny how the HN crowd gets riled up when it happens to programmers. Movies cost tens of millions to make and employ hundreds if not thousands. Tv shows are maybe an order of magnitude smaller, records maybe one more. Any of those media products blow these aggrieved pro…

> It’s a price of doing business. > But I had never seen a business actually profiting from piracy. The author acknowledges that piracy is "normal", but is drawing the line at directly profiting. YouTube and Napster didn't charge consumers for pirated content. > I guess "move fast and break things" is a great motto until it's your stuff getting broken. I hate "move fast break things" but this critique doesn't make an…

YouTube absolutely makes money off of pirated content. They shows ads on top of it.

Re: Pirated Courses on Udemy

#124
post #85

Lol you people are really amazing. No sense of irony? Really? Hey guess what, Silicon Valley has been doing this for nearly 20 years to other people. Funny how the HN crowd gets riled up when it happens to programmers. Movies cost tens of millions to make and employ hundreds if not thousands. Tv shows are maybe an order of magnitude smaller, records maybe one more. Any of those media products blow these aggrieved pro…

I did not notice Napster, Youtube or their users selling the content.

YouTube wasn't directly selling content, but they were selling ad impressions on top of the content. Is that substantially different?

Re: Pirated Courses on Udemy

#125
post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

^This. I cringe every time I hear someone say X is democratizing Y or that X is the "sharing economy". These are unregulated (near) monopoly markets. Craigslist was democratizing. "Freebie" mailing lists and swap meets are the "sharing economy". Services like AirBnB are doing everything they possibly can to disconnect people (and keep them disconnected). You aren't even permitted to screen your own clients, they are…

So if platforms like udemy, app store, uber, etc. eventually gained monopolistic position (which makes business sense) and then adversely taking advantage from it in the long run, what is an alternative model? Transferring them to a blockain'esque infrastructure of public good? I'm seriously interested in a techno-organizational evolution of the platform model.

I don't know. I've put a lot of thought into it, but this is a Herculean task (like David versus Goliath). Hopefully there are better minds out there who can come up with something. Blockchains and distributed platforms like Etherium look really promising. So does OpenBazaar [1]. There was also an article on the topic recently posted to HN [2]. It has a great quote, "Uber’s big bet is global monopoly or bust.".

[1]: https://openbazaar.org/

[2]: https://medium.com/dark-mountain/how-platform-coops-can-beat...

Re: Pirated Courses on Udemy

#126
post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did not notice Napster, Youtube or their users selling the content.

YouTube wasn't directly selling content, but they were selling ad impressions on top of the content. Is that substantially different?

That's fairly slippery ground. Let's imagine for a moment that youtube would not have any ads at all. That would not make the copyright infringement any less (they'd be running at an even more massive loss but that's besides the point).

But if they sold the content then it would be direct profiting from piracy and that's a pretty simple affair when it comes to the legal side of things as it allows a much more direct assessment of the damages. No longer can the defendant claim that 'those copies would not have been sold to the viewers' because those copies are sold to the viewers, so the other party has you over a barrel when it comes to proving 'lost income due to reduced sales'.

But whether or not they profited directly from the content or not is actually immaterial to whether or not copyright infringement occurred. It did and charging for access would not make a difference there, income from advertising is just as clearly profiting.

I suspect that if they had charged for the content that youtube would never have gotten as big as it did so clearly the fact that they infringed left, right and center on copyrights and did not charge for the access to that content (and still do...) was what made them successful.

So I'd say yes, it was substantially different, but not in a legal sense.

I don't think youtube would have been alive for both legal reasons (they'd have been hit much harder and earlier) and for reasons related to not being able to achieve the scale they did if they had charged for the content.

Re: Pirated Courses on Udemy

#127
post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anything realy. Udemy has a terrible signal to noise ratio, and they do scummy stuff like what's going on here. Read a respected book, try Udacity or Coursera, or ask the community what course is good.

I don't know why kids these days are so down on programming ebooks. I have a ton of them in a Dropbox folder, and they're my main source of learning new programming languages. Sure, they date fast, can't be updated fast, and aren't interactive. They're old school now that we're in the era of MOOCs. But you can still learn a lot if you know what to look for, know how to skim, and know which books are good. Alternative…

>ebooks

...or old-style internet tutorials formatted as static mostly-HTML webpages.

Or what about printed books. After reading that kind of internet tutorial I got K&R and some less memorable C++ book from the local library.

Re: Pirated Courses on Udemy

#128
post #3

Udemy really is one of the worst platforms imaginable for instructors. They will even brand your videos without your consent by adding Udemy logo watermarks to every video. If you guys want to hear another horror story about Udemy, take a skim through: http://blog.nickjanetakis.com/post/133482093993/less-than-24... (note: the above post is a few days old) Someone really needs to step up and create a more reasonable c…

There is edx, coursera, etc.

Re: Pirated Courses on Udemy

#130
post #85

Lol you people are really amazing. No sense of irony? Really? Hey guess what, Silicon Valley has been doing this for nearly 20 years to other people. Funny how the HN crowd gets riled up when it happens to programmers. Movies cost tens of millions to make and employ hundreds if not thousands. Tv shows are maybe an order of magnitude smaller, records maybe one more. Any of those media products blow these aggrieved pro…

While it doesn't change the point of your comment, I saw a different ironic thing: how can people even think they can sell videos on-line and capture most of the viewers?

It's like The First and Only Iron Law of the Internet: if you post it, it will be copied and it will be distributed free. I understand that movie studios or record labels may be doing stuff the way they were always doing stuff, but an individual, especially a tech-minded one, expecting to earn money on selling videos in XXI century? Seriously? I mean, you can have any business model you like, but the real world is not obliged to comply.

So that's practical point - you don't get to set up a permanent passive income for yourself just because you publish a series of videos. Some people like to believe that (I've been personally convincing one such person recently to stop thinking along these lines and instead treat educational videos as a loss leader, and use those to sell webinars and/or personal tutoring instead). But I have also a general point to make:

In general, for some reason people imagine that just because they make something and start to sell it, they get to have full control over its life cycle. They don't, they never did. If you make a new widget, it'll get cloned by your competition. If you try to prevent it with $RANDOM_LEGAL_QUIRK, the Chinese will clone it anyway and good luck chasing them down. It's how it was since the dawn of time. And it's good, that's how stuff is supposed to work - this way new things join the shared wealth of humanity.

You're not entitled to capture all value from what you make. You get to only capture some. Expecting more is just plain, textbook greed.

And as a society, we should be nice enough to ensure you're capturing enough value for yourself.

Post reply on HN