Implying that watermarks mean I’m claiming ownership of the videos is such a dumb malicious takeaway.
The owners are the networks and the copyright holders — an imbecile could see that, and it goes without saying. I don’t even use the term “my videos” to describe anything I post, but rather “my uploads”. I also stopped using ‘thieves’ and opted for “reposters” so my displeasure is more plain and less open to interpretation. Retorts like “NiNaKaW mO rIn NaMan YaN” won’t apply because no one is accusing anyone a thief but rather for reposting — I’m the direct source of what you posted, not the networks/ad agencies, even though they created it.
So, with semantics out of the way:
The reason for watermarks is to track sources.
Did ABS-CBN create the 1982 City 2 station ID? Absolutely. But they weren’t the ones who made it possible for you to see it again after 40+ years, and it actually remains to be seen if they had a copy at all. It’s kinda like Halley’s Comet — Edmond Halley wasn’t the first to discover it, but it was named after him for reintroducing it to the world. Besides, if I’m doing my thesis or a media person working on a piece about archiving, I want to be able to talk to the person who found it and how, not some kid with no meaningful knowledge or contributions who just snip away on a cellphone using Clideo. It’s also preferable that all discussions about the discovery happen in one place and not spread across a dozen copies.
But I hear you. I understand the frustration with the watermarks. I said it before last year that I hate them for precisely the reasons mentioned by some viewers, and then some.
Unfortunately they ended up being reposted and the wrong sources were being credited. Celebrities like Giselle Sanchez, Heidi Hocson, Jay Manalo, Ryan Eigenmann, and others would end up thanking the wrong person. Heck, even Radyo 630 (who technically own TV Patrol by virtue of being an ABS-CBN subsidiary) credited the guy who reposted my first iPhone upload.
The double whammy here is that these pages are eligible for monetization and been making money from the traffic it brought. I’m not earning from this, never will be, and haven’t made a cent. The stars from FB given to me in kind (roughly equivalent to about P23) remain in stasis. I’m fine with that as this was never intended to be a cash cow anyway — but at the same time, I don’t think it’s fair that I’m doing the hard work of finding/buying/cleaning tapes and digitizing them while others profit or reap praise from it.
As for the “obnoxious” watermarks, that’s a recent development and is typically used only with select uploads. Some pages have been using AI erasers to “remove” the logo. Here is one such page doing it:
This necessitated using moving watermarks to counteract it. I thought that was a decent compromise than the big permanent text in the center that others use. Not surprisingly, reposters were upset with this move as it made it difficult for them to repost and so resort to astroturfing the comments section. Hence why I laugh at them. Most of the followers sympathize with the move while there are some legit gripes from those unfamiliar with why I do it.
Implying that watermarks mean I’m claiming ownership of the videos is such a dumb malicious takeaway.
The owners are the networks and the copyright holders — an imbecile could see that, and it goes without saying. I don’t even use the term “my videos” to describe anything I post, but rather “my uploads”. I also stopped using ‘thieves’ and opted for “reposters” so my displeasure is more plain and less open to interpretation. Retorts like “NiNaKaW mO rIn NaMan YaN” won’t apply because no one is accusing anyone a thief but rather for reposting — I’m the direct source of what you posted, not the networks/ad agencies, even though they created it.
So, with semantics out of the way:
The reason for watermarks is to track sources.
Did ABS-CBN create the 1982 City 2 station ID? Absolutely. But they weren’t the ones who made it possible for you to see it again after 40+ years, and it actually remains to be seen if they had a copy at all. It’s kinda like Halley’s Comet — Edmond Halley wasn’t the first to discover it, but it was named after him for reintroducing it to the world. Besides, if I’m doing my thesis or a media person working on a piece about archiving, I want to be able to talk to the person who found it and how, not some kid with no meaningful knowledge or contributions who just snip away on a cellphone using Clideo. It’s also preferable that all discussions about the discovery happen in one place and not spread across a dozen copies.
But I hear you. I understand the frustration with the watermarks. I said it before last year that I hate them for precisely the reasons mentioned by some viewers, and then some.
In fact, my first few months of uploads didn’t have watermarks.
Unfortunately they ended up being reposted and the wrong sources were being credited. Celebrities like Giselle Sanchez, Heidi Hocson, Jay Manalo, Ryan Eigenmann, and others would end up thanking the wrong person. Heck, even Radyo 630 (who technically own TV Patrol by virtue of being an ABS-CBN subsidiary) credited the guy who reposted my first iPhone upload.
The double whammy here is that these pages are eligible for monetization and been making money from the traffic it brought. I’m not earning from this, never will be, and haven’t made a cent. The stars from FB given to me in kind (roughly equivalent to about P23) remain in stasis. I’m fine with that as this was never intended to be a cash cow anyway — but at the same time, I don’t think it’s fair that I’m doing the hard work of finding/buying/cleaning tapes and digitizing them while others profit or reap praise from it.
As for the “obnoxious” watermarks, that’s a recent development and is typically used only with select uploads. Some pages have been using AI erasers to “remove” the logo. Here is one such page doing it:
This necessitated using moving watermarks to counteract it. I thought that was a decent compromise than the big permanent text in the center that others use. Not surprisingly, reposters were upset with this move as it made it difficult for them to repost and so resort to astroturfing the comments section. Hence why I laugh at them. Most of the followers sympathize with the move while there are some legit gripes from those unfamiliar with why I do it.