I believe the biggest problem for PeerTube is copyright. YouTube thrives on user-generated content. I, for example, am involved in the live music scene (I go to concerts). It’s common practice for recordings of concerts to be uploaded to YouTube. This is usually unproblematic until an artist objects to a particular video and demands its removal. Generally, YouTube has agreements with rights holders, so uploading recordings is usually not an issue.
This is different on PeerTube. Here, each instance is liable for its own content. If a user uploads copyrighted material, this can lead to problems for the instance operator or the user. Currently, PeerTube is still small enough that such content is possible. But if PeerTube were to become a real alternative to YouTube, it would become a problem!
Of course, content is also uploaded to YouTube that can cause problems for YouTube. But YouTube has enough lawyers and money to handle that. PeerTube operators, however, do not!
Therefore, in my opinion, the biggest problem is that PeerTube can’t become a major YouTube alternative because users can’t easily upload the same content as on YouTube.
What do you think?
Well, yeah. But I’m also willing to bet that most peertube instances would fall over from excessive traffic long before they hit the “need a lawyer” threshold.
Cant they do some kind of pseudo torrenting backend such that users spread the load? … Which in turn could be tied in with monetisation. Spreading the gold.
The way it federates with each of its own instances seems pretty bad. They seem to have to follow each other first before you get access to other instances from the one you are on?
It’s a defederated network. First one I was told to sign up to by the helpful tool was only federated with two other instances.
Lack of content and discoverability are the big issues. Followed by there being no integrated way to get paid as a creator. I’m not sure why anyone would post anything outside of just a hobby.
PeerTube doesn’t federate with other instances by default and therefore it’s very fragmented.
You should check out the pinned post in this community about which instance to choose.
That’s a gigantic and systemic issue with the platform.
The way it federates with each of its own instances seems pretty bad. They seem to have to follow each other first before you get access to other instances from the one you are on? It’s a defederated network. First one I was told to sign up to by the helpful tool was only federated with two other instances.
OH?! THAT’S why I felt like i never really could find stuff on Peertube. I didn’t realize it doesn’t federate with other instances automatically. Maybe I’ll give it another try with some effort, but it’s certainly no YT replacement… (Not saying it has to be)
Nope, as others mentioned is the content, or better, the lack of it. The lack of monetization could be the main culprit.
The lack of monetization is certainly one reason. On the other hand, YouTube was already successful long before monetization existed.
Yep, but times have changed I’d say. But in reality, yes, there are several reasons, like mentioned search for content. But even if great search was there, it’d go only as far since the lack of content. All in all it feels like catch-22 situation. There is also no support for chromecast devices (or is there) where one would open app on chromecast and roll the videos.
Deep pockets for an extended trust-buying phase let youtube succeed pre-monetization. Way to buy a monopoly.
i think that’s a solvable problem, but would require some centralised entity in order to make agreements
something like the linux foundation for example
i could imagine that central organisation making agreements with rights-holders like content ID (though hopefully better implemented), and also developing software to identify infringing material… they could run a certification program where instances are allowed to host copyright content as long as they also run the content ID mechanism, and pay rights-holders… perhaps they do constant, anonymous validation of the mechanism to ensure compliance… they could also sweeten the deal by mandating defederation from instances that host pirated content, and maintain a list of banned instances (to bring rights holders to the table: support this and we will pay you, and help you make piracy harder to access)… spitballing here - not saying i agree this is in the best interests of the platform, but it might be how it could work
it’s a chicken and an egg problem though: rights holders won’t care to think about it until it’s big enough to be worth it, but it’s going to be difficult to be big enough to be worth it without content (and let’s be honest, with google fighting tooth and nail to remain an effective monopoly)
I think it’s several things.
I think (lack of) ease of self hosting’s the biggest impediment.
I think there are easier ways around the problem you describe. (Though not all universally appealing, e.g. “A.I.”).
The interface may also be insufficiently appealing/usable (especially across federation) may also be a factor.
I don’t think this will be such a big deal.YouRube just have an automated system. If you upload copyrighted content to an instance, doesn’t mean that the site will just get taken down. A DMCA request would be the normal procedure for someone claiming copyright infringement and then the instance would simply just have to comply.
Not everybody is so kind. In Germany, for example, lawyers are quite quick to issue cease-and-desist letters, which always involve costs. I’ve heard of Friendica instances that have already run into legal problems because, for example, copyrighted images were posted/federated. You’re being a bit too naive about that.
I would love to see some examples of that.
