During the week, working at the Mount Aloysius College Office of Undergraduate and Graduate Admissions (the office itself lacks severely the prestige its name suggests), playing Magic: The Gathering, “shopping victoriously” on eBay for cards to build effective decks for the aforementioned game, and being a bum leaves me with little time to maintain my knowledge of and ‘blog about current events.
To potentially remedy my ignorance of current events (and to earn another seven dollars and fifteen cents each week), I agreed recently to aid Mount Aloysius further by ‘blogging on its Web site about events and occurrences around campus. Assuming I manage to maintain the weekly schedule on which the college asks that I post, I should have no difficulty maintaining my personal ‘blog on the side. In the end, ‘blogging might encourage me to listen to/read/watch the news for ‘blog material.
Until then, I intend to catch news stories via the “Web Clip” feature of Gmail, an e-mail client by Google, just as I have been for the past few weeks.
Yesterday, I noticed a link to an International Herald Tribune article concerning the legal battle between media conglomerate Viacom and Google-owned YouTube. Despite my anticipation of such an occurrence, I had no knowledge of the current situation before reading the article or other subsequent articles regarding the concerns and fears surrounding user privacy.
The result of the case bears great significance to Web sites that thrive on user-submitted content, including ‘blogs. In the grand scheme of it all, I hope the outcome favors YouTube. Although I oppose the idea of posting copyrighted materials, I support the concept of original, user-submitted content, the likes of which might suffer because of a “one bad apple spoils the bunch” sort of scenario. The decision could even affect ‘bloggers who post snippets of popular news articles on their ‘blogs. Fortunately, I’ve only ever posted a few videos that a friend and I produced in our spare time. Otherwise, my ‘blogs have never been notable enough to amass large numbers of readers. For Ben, on the other hand, Viacom’s lying when it says, “[user] information would be safeguarded by a protective order restricting access to the data to outside advisers, who will use it solely to press Viacom’s $1 billion copyright suit against Google.” They will get you, Ben. They will.
Oh, and there’s also this guy. I can only hope that Marty will do something similar in the future.
