Who cares?
The people who spend hundreds of hours carefully creating content for their viewers care [0].
The referenced video is from a photographer who has some pretty strong and reasonable thoughts on this - specifically the features YouTube itself is experimenting with.
Depending on the nature of the AI product, it has the potential to completely sideline creators.
Not saying that’s what Miyagi is doing and it sounds like they’re actually working with creators on this which is good. But the broader point is that such tools need to be thoughtfully implemented.
They put their videos out for public consumption. Not behind a paywall. Once its out there, they lose control of how people interact with it. Should cliff notes and other study guides be banned or regulated?
I don’t find Cliff’s notes to be similar at all. They represent standalone short-form content written by authors that is a purchasable option alongside more in-depth options written by other (or at times the same) authors.
If Cliff’s notes were actually just AI summaries of specific books generated by an unrelated entity and presented in a way that allowed the reader to avoid purchasing the underlying content, that’d be a very different scenario.
In the linked example, YouTube is essentially doing the latter. The product launched in this thread sits in a greyer area I think, but still raises some questions about content ownership and how creators will react to these new kinds of tools and modes of consumption.
Whether or not it’s strictly legal is a different conversation than whether or not creators feel comfortable with these emerging options.
> Once its out there, they lose control of how people interact with it.
Sure. But they also have every right to choose to put it behind a paywall if new tools change the calculus that originally made publishing it publicly make sense.