YouTube to go down the tube?

[liuzhou]

According to this article, from the end of January, all video hosting sites must be state owned to be accessible in China.

Is this the beginning of the end?

[outcast]

The last time they tried to block youtube there was something of an uproar (IIRC) so they turned around and unblocked it.

[roddy]

This is much more aimed at domestic video sites and bringing them under regulatory control [edit - having read the regulations, they're going to need to be state controlled or state-owned] rather than overseas providers. The Guardian and others are sticking 'Youtube' into their headlines as people click on things with 'Youtube' in the headline. I haven't read the regulations in detail (they're here if you want to) but I'll wager there's nothing about blocking overseas content in them. It's all about licensing, and therefore controlling, domestic online video providers.

Youtube has been blocked before, and may well be blocked again, but whether or not that happens has very little to do with the new regulations. One effect it will have is make it much more problematic for overseas video sites to set up operations in China.

[gato]

　　第二条 在中华人民共和国境内向公众提供互联网（含移动互联网，以下简称互联网）视听节目服务活动，适用本规定。

The regulation says providing audio/video within China, so if the YouTube servers are outside of PRC (which for this purpose, does not include HK and Taiwan), then it's arguable that they do not fall within the scope of this new regulation. But then again, the government doesn't need any regulation to use the Great Fire Wall to block foreign sites.

Roddy's right, it's targeted more towards domestic audio-video sites. The definition in the regulation is broad enough to include podcasts (like anti-wave), personal blogs and flash animation sites.

http://www.mii.gov.cn/art/2007/12/29/art_521_35606.html

两部委联合下发互联网视听新规 视频网站踩上生死线吗

　　“什么是主持、访谈、报道类视听服务，什么又是‘时政类视听节目’？个人不得转载哪怕来自CCTV的一段新闻？不得整合来自湖南卫视和凤凰卫视的对同一新闻事件的两段报道视频后上载到视频网站？”有业内人士指出：“中国文化的一大特色就是喜欢‘反波’，如果我要用手机拍一段菜市场买菜还价的小视频并配上一条评论曰‘北京本月菜价持续上涨猪肉已达30元一斤’这算不算时政新闻？“反波”之类podcasting的节目以后还能不能做？”

　　此外，其它问题还包括“现在基本上所有的个人空间、主页、博客服务都向个人提供音频/视频上载服务，是不是它们都必须取得《许可证》，或者停掉这类服务？”以及“服务器在境外的视频网站大约不属于“在中国境内从事服务”，那么它们将遭遇怎样的命运？”等。

　　因此也有不少业内人士和记者表示，“上述规定可能还只是政府在向市场进行的一次试水，看看市场会有什么反应，而以后执行的方面可能会有更开放的政策。”

　　《互联网视听节目服务管理规定》相关要点

　　第一，“制作、编辑、集成并通过互联网向公众提供视音频节目，以及为他人提供上载传播视听节目服务的活动”都属互联网视听节目服务，在中国境内从事此服务适用该规定；

　　第二，广电总局负主要管理责任，信产部只是“依据电信行业管理职责”实施监管；

　　第三，从事此服务需取得广电管理部门核发的《信息网络传播视听节目许可证》(以下简称《许可证》)或履行备案手续；

　　第四，从事此服务必要条件第一条“具备法人资格，为国有独资或国有控股单位，且在申请之日前三年内无违法违规记录”；

　　第五，从事主持、访谈、报道类视听服务，还需广播电视节目制作经营许可证和互联网新闻信息服务许可证，从事自办网络剧(片)类服务，还需广播电视节目制作经营许可证；

　　第六，未持有《许可证》的单位不得为个人提供上载传播视听节目服务。互联网视听节目服务单位不得允许个人上载时政类视听新闻节目，在提供播客、视频分享等上载传播视听节目服务时，应当提示上载者不得上载违反本规定的视听节目。任何单位和个人不得转播、链接、聚合、集成非法的广播电视频道、视听节目网站的节目；

　　第七，广播电影电视主管部门可依法对互联网视听节目服务单位进行实地检查，县级以上广播电影电视主管部门即可对一系列违规行为予以警告、责令改正，可并处3万元以下罚款。

[roddy]

In a move apparently aimed at YouTube and scores of other smaller rivals, the Chinese authorities announced that all video-sharing websites must have official government approval before they can be accessed by Chinese surfers.

This is nonsense. If this was true then the Guardian itself wouldn't be accessible until it applies for a 互联网新闻信息服务许可证。