or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Google tells Microsoft to take down unofficial YouTube app from Windows Phone store due to lack of ads [u]
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Google tells Microsoft to take down unofficial YouTube app from Windows Phone store due to lack...

post #1 of 50
Thread Starter 
Google's YouTube on Wednesday sent a cease and desist letter to Microsoft requesting the company remove the made-for-Windows Phone YouTube client app from its store, citing a number of reasons for the takedown, one of which being an inability to garner advertising revenue.

Update: In a statement obtained by The Verge, Microsoft responded to Google's cease and desist order, saying, "We?d be more than happy to include advertising but need Google to provide us access to the necessary APIs. In light of Larry Page?s comments today calling for more interoperability and less negativity, we look forward to solving this matter together for our mutual customers."

YouTube App Windows Phone


According to the letter, obtained by The Verge, YouTube claims the Microsoft-authored client prevents ads from playing, allows users to download content, and plays back videos on mobile devices even when such actions are marked as restricted by content creators.

"These features directly harm our content creators and clearly violate our Terms of Service," YouTube's Director of Global Platform Partnerships Francisco Varela wrote to Windows Phone Apps and Store GM Todd Brix. "Content creators make money on YouTube by monetizing their content through advertising. Unfortunately, by blocking advertising and allowing downloads of videos, your application cuts off a valuable ongoing revenue source for creators, and causes harm to the thriving content ecosystem on YouTube."

Microsoft reportedly created the app without input from Google or YouTube, and instituted the features without the companies' consent. YouTube's official apps on the Android and iOS mobile platforms, as well as its main Internet portal, do not support the download of videos or ad skipping.

Put into context, the letter represents a larger problem between the two tech giants. On stage at today's Google I/O conference, CEO Larry Page said certain players in the industry are restricting innovation. More pointedly, Page told an audience member that "we struggle with people like Microsoft," The Verge noted.

Microsoft in April took a swing at Google's Android operating system with an ad campaign, dubbed "Scroogled," in which the audience was reminded that their personal information is shared with developers each time an app is downloaded.

YouTube demanded that Microsoft remove the app by May 22, but as of this writing it has yet to be taken down.

post #2 of 50
Microsoft supposedly values others intellectual property. After all they sued everyone under the sun who uses Android for "stealing their intellectual property", yet here they show their true colors and get caught stealing others intellectual property. Typical Microsoft.
post #3 of 50
"According to the letter, obtained by The Verge, YouTube claims the Microsoft-authored client prevents ads from playing, allows users to download content, and plays back videos on mobile devices even when such actions are marked as restricted by content creators. "

Ok so, didn't MS create the client from either reverse engineering the protocol or from protocol specs on how to interface with FB? It sounds to me like the FB access protocol has a bunch of holes in it. For example, how can MS client play content that is supposed to have ad info? Does that mean FB is relying too much on the client to do this for them (i.e. xhtml or something like that)? Also, if a content creator wishes to restrict model devices from it's content, why is this the job of the model device to do so? Shouldn't this be blocked at the server? And if they cannot do that (i.e. they don't know the device), then how can they provide this feature? Does this mean that the only valid FB client is the FB client and no one else can create one? I dont' see how they can dictate this as long as MS didn't obtain the protocol by illegal means.

Just my 2 cents
post #4 of 50
Puts in perspective why Apple no longer bundles Google Maps and YouTube with every iOS device.
post #5 of 50

I don't even like Microsoft but I don't see where they stole anything in this case.  They created their own app that accesses a public website and filters the ads.  How is this different from using ad block plugins?  Google is really the hypocrite here.  They want to protect their platforms while their whole even today was aimed at leveraging Apple's to suit their needs.  Their actions will be their undoing.  

post #6 of 50
Now that's what I call EVIL to the core.

What ever happened to "OPEN".
post #7 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


Microsoft reportedly created the app without input from Google or YouTube, and instituted the features without the companies' consent. YouTube's official apps on the Android and iOS mobile platforms, as well as its main Internet portal, do not support the download of videos or ad skipping.

Put into context, the letter represents a larger problem between the two tech giants. On stage at today's Google I/O conference, CEO Larry Page said certain players in the industry are restricting innovation. More pointedly, Page told an audience member that "we struggle with people like Microsoft," The Verge noted.
 

 

What about companies like Oracle who "struggle with people like" Google?

 

Google wants "open and free" but not when it affects them.

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #8 of 50
The title for this article should have read:

"Microsoft Inputs/Outputs Google and Google doesn't like it".
post #9 of 50
The only thing I think is fishy is the ability to download; otherwise, I'm guessing the app merely accesses the web, re-skins it, and blocks ads. Didn't think that's illegal.
post #10 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by sambira View Post

"According to the letter, obtained by The Verge, YouTube claims the Microsoft-authored client prevents ads from playing, allows users to download content, and plays back videos on mobile devices even when such actions are marked as restricted by content creators. "

Ok so, didn't MS create the client from either reverse engineering the protocol or from protocol specs on how to interface with FB? It sounds to me like the FB access protocol has a bunch of holes in it. For example, how can MS client play content that is supposed to have ad info? Does that mean FB is relying too much on the client to do this for them (i.e. xhtml or something like that)? Also, if a content creator wishes to restrict model devices from it's content, why is this the job of the model device to do so? Shouldn't this be blocked at the server? And if they cannot do that (i.e. they don't know the device), then how can they provide this feature? Does this mean that the only valid FB client is the FB client and no one else can create one? I dont' see how they can dictate this as long as MS didn't obtain the protocol by illegal means.

Just my 2 cents

FB?
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #11 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pendergast View Post

The only thing I think is fishy is the ability to download; otherwise, I'm guessing the app merely accesses the web, re-skins it, and blocks ads. Didn't think that's illegal.

 

It's not illegal, but it's against the terms that Google lays out for developers which interface with YouTube from what I'm understanding. It appears that Microsoft is:

 

1) Blocking ads that show on devices. This is a no-no because it blocks ad revenue that Google would receive, along with ad revenue that content creators that upload the videos would receive

2) Allows downloading of videos. I think everyone can pretty much agree that this is not allowed

3) It allows content that is not intended for mobile devices (i.e. smartphones) to be played back on said devices. Google, for whatever reasons, blocks certain content from mobile devices. I know that in some cases, you can watch movies and certain TV shows on YouTube via the desktop app, but those same movies aren't available to view on an iPhone or Galaxy S4 for example due to restrictions put in place (by let's say Fox or ABC or Disney).

 

This isn't some end-user installing third-party tools to hack away to disable ads. This is a well-known company with big-boy pants doing stupid s**t that is against Google's T&Cs.

 

Microsoft is just saying, "F**k it, I don't care"

post #12 of 50
I had a good chuckle about this story.

I seem to remember not too long ago Google doing something similar with news content. Admittedly it wasn't through an app.


Oh. Wait a minute...
"Never ask a man what type of computer he
uses. If its a mac, he will tell you, if not, why
embaress him?" Tom Clancy.
Reply
"Never ask a man what type of computer he
uses. If its a mac, he will tell you, if not, why
embaress him?" Tom Clancy.
Reply
post #13 of 50
Originally Posted by nagromme View Post
Puts in perspective why Apple no longer bundles Google Maps and YouTube with every iOS device.

 

But anyone lucky enough to have iOS 5 (or any Mac) gets to have it without ads!

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #14 of 50

They aren't stealing intellectual property. At worst, they are using a service without abiding to a terms of use... with those terms of use are "thou must show our advertising". Personally, I hate ads and I hope YouTube dies a nice death. I'm really tired of all the ads.

post #15 of 50

Microsoft's responded, saying they'd be happy to include ads, but Google hasn't provided them with the API's in order to do so. http://www.theverge.com/2013/5/15/4334956/microsoft-responds-to-youtube-windows-phone-takedown-notice

post #16 of 50

It sounds like Microsoft made YouTube a pleasant experience, like it used to be...

"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
post #17 of 50
Hmm, seems like M$ has a good version of YouTube! 1wink.gif lol
post #18 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkichline View Post

They aren't stealing intellectual property. At worst, they are using a service without abiding to a terms of use... with those terms of use are "thou must show our advertising". Personally, I hate ads and I hope YouTube dies a nice death. I'm really tired of all the ads.
A five second or 15 second ad before a video is not going to kill you. How the hell do you think sites like AI get money?

You don't want to look at ads, stop going to YouTube and stop freeloading content off the Internet with adblockers.
post #19 of 50
By this logic, Google should ban in-browser ad blockers. "For Inability to garner ad revenues."

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #20 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by genovelle View Post

I don't even like Microsoft but I don't see where they stole anything in this case.  They created their own app that accesses a public website and filters the ads.  How is this different from using ad block plugins?  Google is really the hypocrite here.  They want to protect their platforms while their whole even today was aimed at leveraging Apple's to suit their needs.  Their actions will be their undoing.  

 

"Inaddition to violating those provisions of the Terms of Service, your application also uses YouTube’s protected trademarks in ways that likely confuse consumers as to the source of the application and whether it is affiliated with or approved by YouTube. The YouTube API Branding Guidelines (https://developers.google.com/youtube/branding) state that you may never use the YouTube logo or theYouTube name in conjunction with the overall name or description of your application, product or service." 

post #21 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mazda 3s View Post


A five second or 15 second ad before a video is not going to kill you. ...

 

There are many many things that won't "kill you" that are still reprehensible, awful, nasty etc. IMO anyone who puts up with advertising is a fool of gigantic proportions.  

 

Personally I'm offended (and sometimes enraged) by the fact that one often gets a 30 second ad in font of a web video clip that is itself only a minute long.  If they did that on TV an hour long show would be 30 minutes or less.  It's already pretty outrageous that it's only 50 minutes now.  

 

Adverts are nasty and advertising is an entire industry based on deception.  Adverts are full of lies and half truths, they're usually misogynistic, sexist, violent or insensitive in a variety of other ways.  

post #22 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkichline View Post

They aren't stealing intellectual property. ...

 

Yes, they are. 

 

"Inaddition to violating those provisions of the Terms of Service, your application also uses YouTube’s protected trademarks in ways that likely confuse consumers as to the source of the application and whether it is affiliated with or approved by YouTube. The YouTube API Branding Guidelines (https://developers.google.com/youtube/branding) state that you may never use the YouTube logo or theYouTube name in conjunction with the overall name or description of your application, product or service." 

post #23 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

There are many many things that won't "kill you" that are still reprehensible, awful, nasty etc. IMO anyone who puts up with advertising is a fool of gigantic proportions.  

Personally I'm offended (and sometimes enraged) by the fact that one often gets a 30 second ad in font of a web video clip that is itself only a minute long.  If they did that on TV an hour long show would be 30 minutes or less.  It's already pretty outrageous that it's only 50 minutes now.  

Adverts are nasty and advertising is an entire industry based on deception.  Adverts are full of lies and half truths, they're usually misogynistic, sexist, violent or insensitive in a variety of other ways.  

If you hate ads so much, do you use Adblock on AppleInsider?
post #24 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mazda 3s View Post

Microsoft is just saying, "F**k it, I don't care"

 

Just like Google said when they reverse engineered Java and created Dalvik.

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #25 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mazda 3s View Post


If you hate ads so much, do you use Adblock on AppleInsider?

 

Does Google allow Adblock in the Chrome web store?

 

Google removed this (link now dead):-

 

Chrome Web Store - Downloadify

Download every spotify song for free

 

If Google is prepared to dish it out they should also be prepared to take it.

 

Microsoft should rebadge and rename their application to "Bing TV" and be done with the copyright claims.

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #26 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

Adverts are nasty and advertising is an entire industry based on deception.  

During the trial period some cases of serious injury or death have occurred. If you experience death, stop taking the medication immediately and consult a mortician.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #27 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

Adverts are nasty and advertising is an entire industry based on deception.  Adverts are full of lies and half truths, they're usually misogynistic, sexist, violent or insensitive in a variety of other ways.  
Quite a generalization. I think you left out the word 'bad' a couple of places. If you made something you thought you could sell would you be a terrible person if told people about it? I too find a lot of advertising very annoying and demeaning, as well as endorsing stereotypes, but generally I'd qualify that as 'bad' advertising. Another issue is where advertising appears, and how intrusive it is. But to advertise ones goods is not inherently evil.
post #28 of 50

Well, now the shoe's on the other foot.  I seem to recall Google trying to build a TV platform by scraping "free" web feeds from the broadcast networks, only to cry foul when the networks began blocking those feeds from Google TV devices.  Apparently, the networks didn't care to hand a valuable treasure trove of user data over to Google without getting something in return.  Everybody just wants to get paid for their content, but Google's entire business model centers around devaluing everybody else's services by subsidizing their own offerings with ads and trying every angle to distribute content without paying for it.
 

post #29 of 50

I like the Microsoft's answer lol.gif.

 

Anyway, this Google's whining shows that they are really full of crap with their so-called innovations...They are vultures earning money from ineffective adverts and not from quality products or services. They are inflating price of products you pay for. Same as FB.

post #30 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pendergast View Post

The only thing I think is fishy is the ability to download; otherwise, I'm guessing the app merely accesses the web, re-skins it, and blocks ads. Didn't think that's illegal.


Nothing really fishy about the downloading. You have to download the video to view it to begin with, this is simply saving the stream to to a file easily. People used to do the same thing by fishing through their browser cache years ago when video streaming was still a new thing. There are a dozen Firefox extensions that will allow you to save videos or audio streams from websites, including YouTube.

post #31 of 50

MS should not have to take down their YouTube Client.

Google scans everybody's sites on the web and creates links to their data.

MS Should fight for an OPEN & FREE internet.

The MS Client is actually nicer than Google's own client.

 

Yes indeed, I remember GoogleTV doing the same thing with broadcaster's open content.

Look at all the Twitter clients available... You don't see Twitter complaining.


Edited by AppleSauce007 - 5/15/13 at 11:35pm
post #32 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by bullhead View Post

Microsoft supposedly values others intellectual property. After all they sued everyone under the sun who uses Android for "stealing their intellectual property", yet here they show their true colors and get caught stealing others intellectual property. Typical Microsoft.
More like typical Google who claim they promote open standards.
post #33 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleSauce007 View Post

Now that's what I call EVIL to the core.

What ever happened to "OPEN".

They're open as long as they're being paid. I use a Flash blocker on Youtube to get MP4 video loading in Quicktime and I've noticed on a few occasions that the video won't load. If I right-click and restore Flash, it works fine but there's an advert in there that wouldn't show with the MP4 version. It's not a problem that they do that as that's how they monetize content but I don't think they are open enough with their fans about the fact that their number one priority is advertising and when an open standard like HTML 5 doesn't let them monetize content or protect it via DRM, they'll favour proprietary formats like Flash.

It's the fans who go on about Android and Larry Page comes out and says Android actually isn't critical to their success - what's important is that people use their services, whether that's via their own OS or someone else's. The reason Android exists most likely is that Google realised that without smartphones targeting low-end customers (which Apple won't do as they have a minimum quality bar), they'd lose out to someone like Microsoft who certainly wouldn't promote their services. Android fans dismiss the idea that Samsung will drop Android in favour of Tizen because customers won't buy the hardware. If Android was so important, how come Samsung is making 95% of all the profit?:

http://www.engadget.com/2013/05/16/samsung-estimated-to-make-95-percent-of-android-device-profits/

People are buying Samsung for the hardware not for Android and that's propping up the entire eco-system. If they drop Android, customers will still buy Samsung for the hardware. Tizen runs Android apps through a compatibility layer but gradually, Samsung will convince people to shop at the Samsung app store. That means Android profitability, especially for developers, plummets.
post #34 of 50

Coming here to read about news from Apple, I find Google, M$, and a lot of Samsung stuff instead.

 

Oh well! Still hoping for a change! 1hmm.gif

post #35 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleSauce007 View Post

MS should not have to take down their YouTube Client.

Google scans everybody's sites on the web and creates links to their data.

MS Should fight for an OPEN & FREE internet.

The MS Client is actually nicer than Google's own client.

 

Yes indeed, I remember GoogleTV doing the same thing with broadcaster's open content.

Look at all the Twitter clients available... You don't see Twitter complaining.

 

right. no company, not even IBM, has done as much as Microsoft to cripple innovation and stifle interoperability.  Why doesn't Microsoft open its IM protocol, directx, exchange protocols, office formats (the ISO xml nonsense they bribed their way through committee is not open in any way shape or form), etc... so Google and others can interop with them?  

post #36 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crosslad View Post


More like typical Google who claim they promote open standards.

 

what protocols has microsoft opened up?  have they shared their IM protocol with everyone?  have they shared exchange protocols with everyone?  how about their proprietary patent crippled office file formats?  Again, the ISO "standard" is worthless with its undocument tags like: "<doAsWord95>"  why didnt Microsoft use the existing ODF formats which were already ISO standards?   How about Microsoft open DirectX?

post #37 of 50
I think it is great that MS gives Google a taste of it's own medicine.
post #38 of 50
P.s. I use McTube on my iPad which also lets you cache videos and eliminates Google ads. It does have ads of its own but they are minimally intrusive.
post #39 of 50
Looks like google leaned on the mctube developer. There is now an "update" to mctube that removes the cache feature. There is an "update" I'll never make.
post #40 of 50
Way to go, Microsoft! Lets see how Google likes getting scroogled!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Google tells Microsoft to take down unofficial YouTube app from Windows Phone store due to lack of ads [u]