[iamshs]

Except, Microsoft did not strip ads from the videos. They said yesterday that they will be happy to serve ads if Google lets them access. And please, let the legal departments decide if it is a clear violation or not. Do not take a decision on your own.

I think you are the one who is astro-turfing here, if i apply the finger pointing criteria to you too. It is better if you reply to the argument leaving your personal preferences neatly tucked in.

[bjustin]

Microsoft is flagrantly violating YouTube's terms of service. Saying they would serve ads if YouTube had an API for it is like me using your obviously not public WiFi and saying I would pay for it if you let me.

[cooldeal]

Comparison fail.

What Google's been saying from 3 years while dragging it's feet is that Windows Phone does not have enough users to make an app for, but now their claim is that so many people are using the Microsoft Youtube App for Windows Phone that it's hurting the content creators. Huh? Why can't they monetize them by making an app and show twice as many ads in it just to spite WP users? No, they won't. They want to disadvantage Windows Phone compared to Android. Vimeo has had a Windows Phone app from a long time, and Google' can't afford to make one? And you believe them?

Why don't they come out with the real reason then, like Apple, Facebook, Twitter, Microsoft, Skype, do about closing down things and eat up the bad press? Why beat around the bush and play delay tactics and hide behind facts? Oh, they want to protect their clean image of being "open" and "do no evil". This is a ploy by Microsoft to force Google to tell the public exactly why they refuse to make a Youtube app and even ban Microsoft from doing so.

How can Windows Phone have so few users that use YouTube that it's not worth monetizing and have so many users that use Microsoft's new app that it's hurting Google and content creator revenue? Why not agree to allow MS to show Google ads and make money since they don't have to spend the money to create the app but can take the profits?

[pi18n]

1. Google is not obliged to create an app for any platform. Regardless of user count. WTF.

2. Microsoft is obliged to follow the ToS on websites they are pulling data from. Regardless of user count.

I'd love to see Google forced to admit what they are doing also, though.

[capo]

http://readwrite.com/2013/05/09/microsoft-youtube-app-rule-b...

They built an unauthorized app and now they are complaining that the app is unauthorized.

[Dylan16807]

HTTP baby!

Trying to enforce a client side rule of 'no downloading' when every web browser in the world can download should be disregarded and mocked heartily.

[iamshs]

I am happy that the customers are getting access to the most widely used video site. I will let the companies dunk it out as to what is unauthorized or what is not. MS responded to it already, and said they are will be happy to work towards betterment of mutual customers on a day where Larry page loathed negativity among companies. Or something to that effect.

[pi18n]

They're abusing the patent system to extort money from Android device manufacturers and they have to gall to completely ignore requirements in a ToS.

I'm looking forward to the day when Microsoft is completely irrelevant. They should just shut down everything except for the research and Xbox departments now.

[iamshs]

Ok love, they will listen to you and shut everything down. What else will make you happy? Motorola actually proving useful to Google?

[pi18n]

Of course they will shut it all down. Eventually they'll be forced to when nobody cares about them anymore.