At a conference on Thursday, I was answering questions about user-generated content.

Sean Dodson was blogging the panel, and said:

John Naughton asked whether the current “euphoric wave” for user-generated content was really “just an illusion”. He added that rather give us more freedom, the shift towards amateur content was “actually still under the control of the companies who provide the sites.” He added: “Its not freedom [in] the literal [sense] of the term.” He went on to wonder whether “people are going to wake up and say they are being ripped off?”

James Cridland (Digital Media Virgin Radio) shrugged off the concerns stating that he felt that there exist a set of sufficient rewards for users to continue creating content for big media companies.

I didn’t “shrug off the concerns”. I firstly said that, unlike many websites, we’d taken the decision not to take all copyright in users’ work. We have no control over what the user does with their content; since it’s still their content, ‘creating content for us’. Indeed, as the Virgin Radio terms of use page states:

You retain all copyright in the Messages that you post to our Website. On posting any Messages, you grant to us a non-exclusive [...] licence.

(We need a non-exclusive licence in order to reproduce the work, of course).

I also felt that the rewards that we offer (notably around kudos and recognition) were showing themselves to be good reward for people sharing their content with us.

I didn’t speak on behalf of any other organisation, and was clear to make my comments appear so. Many other companies take all copyright in user content, which I’ve strongly opposed.

Tags: right_of_reply, user_generated_content | Permalink | Comments RSS | Leave a response, or trackback.