What good is a safeguard that doesn't work? After hearing about the sketchiness of AudibleMagic's copyrighted content filter from the folks over at NeeTeeVee, I'm beginning to wonder why big names like Microsoft have bothered to employ this tool. I posted on Microsoft's move to Audible Magic's content filters a couple of weeks ago, and quite frankly I considered the move to be a sensible one. However, NeeTeeVee was kind enough to put the software to the test by uploading a Daily Show clip, and the results were somewhat surprising:
What's worse is that AudibleMagic has been cleaning up shop with its contracts--MySpace, Break.com, Dailymotion and (eventually) YouTube are just a few of the high profile sites reportedly using the software. Although it's noble of Microsoft and others to put in the effort to police their content, there has to be a more efficient way. Catching content via filters like AudibleMagic is still a good choice, but only if it's done with due vigilance. Of course, with sites like YouTube moving to incorporate in-line advertising with its vids, there already seems to be a potential revenue stream in place. Why content providers like Viacom don't go on the attack and proactively use these sites to syndicate their content (and push their ads) is lost on me.