Jump to content
PHL

UWW asks Dan Sweeney to stop tweeting out clips of their matches

Recommended Posts

wrestling content has never been more abundant and available, much of it free

basketball and any other sport that is orders of magnitude more popular than wrestling is always going to be more easy to follow than wrestling. now try following a different sport on wrestling's level without paying for any subscriptions!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, JasonBryant said:


You do know I’ve generated more than just podcast content that’s been ripped off - it’s been happening since 1997. Written, broadcast, video, audio, stuff from my preview guides, almanacs, lists - and guess what, the “grow the sport” line has been thrown at me when I ask for my stuff to be taken down because I spent the time and money creating it. It may be contextually different but it’s the same thing. You’re saying taking someone else’s stuff for personal financial gain is fine if some thinks it “helps the sport?”

It’s like the guys who ripped all my old InterMat Premium Service stuff and posted it years ago, claiming the stuff I did wasn’t proprietary and charging for it was “not growing the sport” as a defense.

No, I'm saying taking any of your stuff is wrong.  UWW is a non profit entity whose entire purpose is to grow the sport. That's completely different from somebody pirating your material or even clipping a flowrestling/ESPN match. I don't understand why it bothers you that somebody is making technique videos from UWW matches. His videos are very useful for young wrestlers and coaches-that's something that benefits UWW directly.  Having the highest level technique in the world available for video breakdowns to anybody (even people without the $$ to afford subscriptions) is very important for development of the sport.  We claim that we want everybody, no matter income/wealth/economic status to be able to wrestle.  Yet the governing body is going after somebody who produces free technique content-that is a huge problem and I can't believe that you don't recognize it. 

 

Why does UWW care about recognition? They are not independent journalists or a for profit company.  They are a non profit governing body for the sport and should encourage anything that grows the sport.  It screams of pettiness to me what they are doing.

Edited by Billyhoyle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don’t think UWW is asking for much if all they’re asking for is credit. Real people had to record those things and set those streams up.

Using a camera is a lot more work than y’all want to make it out to be! Eric & JB asking for credit to United World Wrestling is growing the sport, especially with the amount of people in the Quote Retweets and replies saying they didn’t even know it was a thing!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, moodybooty said:

I really don’t think UWW is asking for much if all they’re asking for is credit. Real people had to record those things and set those streams up.

Using a camera is a lot more work than y’all want to make it out to be! Eric & JB asking for credit to United World Wrestling is growing the sport, especially with the amount of people in the Quote Retweets and replies saying they didn’t even know it was a thing!

But why would Eric care that somebody is clipping UWW events to make technique videos? How does that matter at all for the mission of UWW? Why not just message this youtuber and demand credit rather than try to shut him down (and I don't understand why they really care about getting credit for a youtube video when they are literally the organization that controls the sport around the entire world).  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The guy was warned a third party was going to start taking his stuff down. That’s where this came from folks. We are so quick to trust and latch on to something that’s cool rather than if it’s gone through the proper channels that we can’t seem to understand the core of someone else’s business was taking stuff that wasn’t theirs to begin with.

Let’s have “Oh, but it’s cool and it grows the sport” show up as a defense in a copyright lawsuit - I’m not a lawyer, but don’t think that’ll hold up. Our sport though, cool supplants ownership. Part of working with someone is reaching out to ask permission first - rather than asking forgiveness and hoping to forge a relationship after. Some of these breakdown clips are same day content and cleary aimed at traffic for a channel, taking a key moment of a match that could still be paywalled and driving traffic to it.

Good for the sport or not, there’s still common courtesies and practices that absolutely need to be followed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't believe people are against copyright laws...no one is saying what Dan is doing isn't cool and great content, but he stole it...period.  And how hard is it to just give the UWW credit??  Why can't Dan do that?  Arguing against the group that is getting screwed seems like twisted logic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, JasonBryant said:

The guy was warned a third party was going to start taking his stuff down. That’s where this came from folks. We are so quick to trust and latch on to something that’s cool rather than if it’s gone through the proper channels that we can’t seem to understand the core of someone else’s business was taking stuff that wasn’t theirs to begin with.

Let’s have “Oh, but it’s cool and it grows the sport” show up as a defense in a copyright lawsuit - I’m not a lawyer, but don’t think that’ll hold up. Our sport though, cool supplants ownership. Part of working with someone is reaching out to ask permission first - rather than asking forgiveness and hoping to forge a relationship after. Some of these breakdown clips are same day content and cleary aimed at traffic for a channel, taking a key moment of a match that could still be paywalled and driving traffic to it.

Good for the sport or not, there’s still common courtesies and practices that absolutely need to be followed.

Why doesn’t UWW pay Mr. Sweeney for providing a valuable service — namely, keeping people engaged with its obscure product?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, JasonBryant said:


Free is not a business model for long term gains.

False. Most major developments on the internet were made through a free exchange until it was monetized. The difference is that at that point hundreds of millions were using the net. It looks like we have chosen to cash in on something now, create an oligopoly to serve a niche for modest gains and a so so product.  Unless you believe that we have tapped out interest and its a good idea to squeeze out cash from the few interested, it doesnt appear like putting our finite content behind a paywall is a good plan for long-term growth. 

I think we underestimate our potential. Wrestling is a combat sport, 6-7 minutes long and easily watchable on phones, touchscreens and laptops. I personally dont think its time to limit access, but I do understand why people want to make money.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, dman115 said:

Can't believe people are against copyright laws...no one is saying what Dan is doing isn't cool and great content, but he stole it...period.  And how hard is it to just give the UWW credit??  Why can't Dan do that?  Arguing against the group that is getting screwed seems like twisted logic.

But why should UWW care about somebody making technique videos or crediting them?  UWW is not a for profit entity or a journalistic outlet.  They are a governing body for the sport.  Just because you can legally enforce a copyright claim doesn't mean that you should. It's exactly because his content is great that they should absolutely let him keep doing it.  And his content isn't even that great for wrestling fans (I don't watch it)-it's more aimed at people currently wrestling trying to learn new technique.  That's why it's so pathetic that UWW cares enough about such a small time youtuber to flag his content on 3rd party websites.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man this is absolutely false thinking, ie., to think everything should remain "free".  Where do you think the stuff for wrestling comes from?  Do you think camera's are free?  Do you think editing software is free?  Do you think web design is free?  Do you think people's time is "free"?  Or do those things not matter??  And if you think all these things should just be "free", get your arses out there and create it for free than...the rest of us will wait to see how the most perfect wrestling product will be produced by you...for "free"....and we will wait...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, dman115 said:

Man this is absolutely false thinking, ie., to think everything should remain "free".  Where do you think the stuff for wrestling comes from?  Do you think camera's are free?  Do you think editing software is free?  Do you think web design is free?  Do you think people's time is "free"?  Or do those things not matter??  And if you think all these things should just be "free", get your arses out there and create it for free than...the rest of us will wait to see how the most perfect wrestling product will be produced by you...for "free"....and we will wait...

How did we ever manage before Flo got the rights to distribute UWW video in the USA?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Billyhoyle said:

But why should UWW care about somebody making technique videos or crediting them?  UWW is not a for profit entity or a journalistic outlet.  They are a governing body for the sport.  Just because you can legally enforce a copyright claim doesn't mean that you should. It's exactly because his content is great that they should absolutely let him keep doing it.  And his content isn't even that great for wrestling fans (I don't watch it)-it's more aimed at people currently wrestling trying to learn new technique.  That's why it's so pathetic that UWW cares enough about such a small time youtuber to flag his content on 3rd party websites.  

It's not pathetic to expect someone to simply give you credit for content they didn't produce...why is that so bad of the UWW?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Mike Parrish said:

How did we ever manage before Flo got the rights to distribute UWW video in the USA?

Who is the "we" in this?  You weren't part of Flo creating content at a cost.  They weren't doing it for "free" on their end.  At some point you have to get paid for your time and for the service you provide.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, dman115 said:

Man this is absolutely false thinking, ie., to think everything should remain "free".  Where do you think the stuff for wrestling comes from?  Do you think camera's are free?  Do you think editing software is free?  Do you think web design is free?  Do you think people's time is "free"?  Or do those things not matter??  And if you think all these things should just be "free", get your arses out there and create it for free than...the rest of us will wait to see how the most perfect wrestling product will be produced by you...for "free"....and we will wait...

I dont think things should be free all the time. I would be careful not to fully cash in before your investment has matured. Make sense?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, dman115 said:

It's not pathetic to expect someone to simply give you credit for content they didn't produce...why is that so bad of the UWW?  

I agree completely if an individual is asking for credit or a company. But why does the non profit governing body of the sport around the world care about a random youtuber crediting that organization for a technique video.  It's extremely petty and beneath them. That's what I don't understand-is there some type of underlying vitriol behind the scenes?  Or are they just that aggressive with making sure only UWW can make technique content from UWW matches?  If it's the latter, it runs counter to the entire purpose of their organization.  

Edited by Billyhoyle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In wrestling, the complaints began immediately when Tom Owens launched InterMat’s Premium Service started charging around $3 a month (34.95 a year) in 1995. Any and all wrestling factions that tried to create an economy or cash flow to pay deserving people to grow the sport hit resistance. People paid for wrestling content since AWN was launched in the late 1950s. It’s why they survived - they had money coming in. They would have died shortly after launch if they wouldn’t have had subs. A lot of websites that are free for wrestling have come and gone. In podcasting, there’s no shortage of companies that launched with “free” as their pitch and they were lucky to last 8 months without being bought or being backed by another round of VC money. Most had neither to fall back on.

 

Flo was free at first, but then came the VC money wanted an ROI because this isn’t a charity. We don’t have the infrastructure to be advertising supported like the big sports. We have to pay for ourselves. For years there was resistance to even that - and copyright violations have been rampant in this sport since I got into it.

 

Free, in our sport, is a recipe for a short lifespan. When it’s time to pay, except with Flo, the fans ran for the hills. It’s like it’s no longer good for the sport if you have to pay for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, dman115 said:

Who is the "we" in this?  You weren't part of Flo creating content at a cost.  They weren't doing it for "free" on their end.  At some point you have to get paid for your time and for the service you provide.

Allow me to clarify for you.

How did the public consumers of UWW wrestling content manage before Flo bought the rights from UWW?
ProTip: It's a rhetorical question.

How is Flo's 'service' any better than the free one provided by UWW?
How does anyone in the US benefit, outside of Flo, from this change?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Drake_Mallard said:

I dont think things should be free all the time. I would be careful not to fully cash in before your investment has matured. Make sense?  

Of course...to a point...but who gets to determine when something has matured and can be monetized?  Yep...the customer.  And if the customer is willing to pay for it, why not charge for it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, dman115 said:

Who is the "we" in this?  You weren't part of Flo creating content at a cost.  They weren't doing it for "free" on their end.  At some point you have to get paid for your time and for the service you provide.

You are aware that across many sports, flo has been criticized for monopolizing the content and offering a ****ty product, right? I think we are asking that our governing bodies be a bit more forward thinking than just giving it up to the highest bidder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, JasonBryant said:

In wrestling, the complaints began immediately when Tom Owens launched InterMat’s Premium Service started charging around $3 a month (34.95 a year). Any and all wrestling factions that tried to create an economy or cash flow to pay deserving people to grow the sport hit resistance. People paid for wrestling content since AWN was launched in the late 1950s. It’s why they survived - they had money coming in. They would have died shortly after launch if they wouldn’t have had subs. A lot of websites that are free for wrestling have come and gone. In podcasting, there’s no shortage of companies that launched with “free” as their pitch and they were lucky to last 8 months without being bought or being backed by another round of VC money. Most had neither to fall back on.

Flo was free at first, but then came the VC money wanted an ROI because this isn’t a charity. We don’t have the infrastructure to be advertising supported like the big sports. We have to pay for ourselves. For years there was resistance to even that - and copyright violations have been rampant in this sport since I got into it.

Free, in our sport, is a recipe for a short lifespan. When it’s time to pay, except with Flo, the fans ran for the hills. It’s like it’s no longer good for the sport if you have to pay for it.

Ok, but UWW is non for profit and the governing body of the sport-they are not trying to make money. Your logic applies to your content, rokfin, flo, etc.  But not UWW. 

Somebody from Flo has already posted here saying they are not the ones enforcing this. 

Edited by Billyhoyle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, dman115 said:

Of course...to a point...but who gets to determine when something has matured and can be monetized?  Yep...the customer.  And if the customer is willing to pay for it, why not charge for it?

.... and I am not saying someone shouldnt make money. I am saying that it appears like we could be sacrificing long term growth for short term gains. Its atleast worth considering. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Drake_Mallard said:

.... and I am not saying someone shouldnt make money. I am saying that it appears like we could be sacrificing long term growth for short term gains. Its atleast worth considering. 

UWW could not make money if they wanted to.  There are no investors, shareholders, etc. That's why this is so illogical.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why doesn’t UWW pay Mr. Sweeney for providing a valuable service — namely, keeping people engaged with its obscure product?

1. Reward the outfit that’s been making (small) revenue by taking content with a job? Outside the box, but happens with hackers and cyber security commonly.
2. Great, then that content should then be posted on UWWs channel.
3. or DPS can license the videos and then be free to monetize.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Billyhoyle said:

UWW could not make money if they wanted to.  There are no investors, shareholders, etc. That's why this is so illogical.  

Are you familiar with how non-profits work??  It isn't as simple as saying "they could not make money if they wanted to"...that is utterly false.  They need to make money to pay for everything they do...including salaries.  Who pays for the travel to all the events?  Who pays for the camera's?  Who pays for the marketing?  Etc....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...