I received the following email today from someone who needs to remain anonymous. However, I trust them and their opinion and wanted to share their thoughts with you here as a way to continue our discussion.

While I don’t agree with all of this, it does spark an interesting chain of thought.

Larry

P.S. I did not write this, nor did I ask it to be written. I have obtained permission to share it with you.

- – -

Apple says that FCP X is about the future of NLE. After thinking about it, I think they are right.

It’s not just about the GUI or features per se… but the fact that our culture is going mobile and our work along with it. A new generation is growing up and moving them from iMovie to FCPX will be easy. Also the new generation will invent their own workflows and their own content and their own way of doing things. Apple may have jumped the gun in a way that made it impossible for a percentage of the current editing community to go along, but those folks are not the future. Not in the same way a 16-year-old iMovie whiz is.

Look at the big picture. Sales of standard PCs have fallen while portable products have been flying off the shelves. This is no fad, it’s the future.

Watch as the system requirements for NLE on the Apple side look more and more lean. Apple owns both hardware and OS, my bet is that they will leverage that to guarantee they are ahead of the curve in performance requiring smaller and smaller hardware overhead. It’s in this way, as the new generation of editors comes up, FCP will take back it’s place as the de facto platform for any level of project. I’m absolutely convinced (as is Apple) that sooner than you think, a teenager today will be working on an episode of “Extreme _____ Makeover” using an iPad__ with lots of storage on board. I already saw someone using an iPad as a 2nd display for FCP X and how some functions were already touch screen enabled. Those pissed off edit suite owners may be pissed off at what Apple has done, but just wait till all those up-and-coming digital kids start to see those very expensive edit suites as dinosaur grave yards.

That’s where Apple is headed and a powerful, sleek FCP that uses iCloud technology along with all the other new technologies is where the future really is. Does anyone remember those $250,000 edit suites that got replaced by a $1,300.00 Final Cut Studio, back in the day? Well, Apple is doing it again with one major change, this time they are obsoleting themselves before someone else does.

It really is the future, or at least it’s headed in that direction.

One of the problems of being in the middle is that I can see both sides. I don’t necessarily agree with them, but I can appreciate their point of view.

My blog this morning – Who’s Accountable – touched a nerve because, in addition to the people that commented directly on the blog, I’ve also had several private conversations with Apple and people who are very, very upset with Apple.

What’s become obvious over the last week, is that the way the Final Cut Pro X launch was handled has totally overshadowed the features of Final Cut Pro X.

Over the last several days, I’ve been consumed with trying to decide what to do – stay with Final Cut or move to another platform. If I switch, what do I switch to? What advice should I give to others trying to make the same choice?

As my office will attest, all this internal debating has not made me a pleasant person to be around.

Let me share my thinking with you — then, you can decide for yourself whether you agree or disagree.

First, let me say that I think the launch of Final Cut Pro X was very badly handled. As I’ve written, I don’t think Apple needed to cancel Final Cut Studio (3) as abruptly and coldly as they did. They should have given us more time to make an orderly transition. They were thinking as a technology company, not as editors managing a decade of assets.

Canceling Final Cut Server, even though it was incompatible with Final Cut Pro X, has unnecessarily jeopardized companies building a business on that platform.

Apple never does things accidentally, so they will disagree with me. Probably strongly disagree… I remember a remark one of the people at Apple told me before the launch, in that they were expecting a lot of controversy over the new version of Final Cut Pro.

Well, we can certainly agree about that.

I also think that Apple seriously erred in not providing a conversion utility between Final Cut Pro 7 and FCP X. The one-two punch of canceling FCS (3) and an inability to convert old projects dominated the discussion far more than the merits of FCP X.

Apple will disagree, but the launch did not take the feelings and passion of editors properly into account. And damage was done.

On the other hand, there are some very cool new features in Final Cut Pro X. Some editors are writing and telling me how much they are enjoying the new program. (Just as other editors are writing to tell me, at length, why they are moving to Avid or Adobe.)

There’s a lot of passion on both sides. And both sides have some truth behind them.

But, let’s look at a few more points:

* Apple said in their presentation at NAB that FCP X redefines video editing for the next ten years. There is lots of additional development planned.

* Apple told me that because FCP X is distributed via the App Store, they can update the program much more frequently than when it was sold as a package on DVD.

* Apple wrote in their FAQ that they are already working on adding new features, such as XML and multicam, to the product and releasing updates quickly.

* Apple has stressed that FCP X is designed to provide a feature set for professionals, and not just as an upgrade for iMovie. (I am not saying they MET the needs of professionals, but a look at the architecture of FCP X reveals features that no iMovie user would ever need.)

* However, it is also self-evident that Apple needed to provide a clear and consistent upgrade path to iMovie users who were totally lost trying to understand how Final Cut Express works. Apple feels that it is possible for one product to meet both needs.

As I wrote in an earlier blog – Moving Forward – the first rule of business is to stay in business. All of us should keep an eye on our options. Check out what Avid, Adobe, and Media 100 are offering. If you feel you can’t wait, then switch.

But I would also suggest that many of us would benefit by taking a deep breath and giving Apple a chance to live up to their promises for the program.

Final Cut Studio (3) still works.

It took Avid, Adobe, and Apple many years to evolve their programs to their current feature set. I’m willing to give Apple a few months to get their act together and fix what’s broken with FCP X.

I’m going to stay with Final Cut Pro for a while. Work at learning the new version. Give feedback to Apple on what they need to do to improve things. And share what I learn with you.

Final Cut Pro X has a lot of exciting potential – but, for many of us, that potential is not yet realized.

The burden is on Apple to deliver on their promises, update the program quickly, and repair the damage they did during the launch. The proof is in the program.

If they succeed, great. If not, Avid and Adobe will still be around in six months.

Larry

Like many of you, I’ve been losing sleep this last week trying to figure out what’s going to happen to my business after the debacle of the Final Cut Pro X launch.

I read in a blog last night that Steve Jobs has gotten involved in this mess and that “really great things will be happening really soon.”

So my first question is: “Why does Steve Jobs need to get directly involved in what is essentially a straight-forward upgrade to one of their well-established products?”

And this led me to a bigger thought: “Who’s Accountable?”

As I woke up this morning, I had a day-dream of Phil Schiller, VP of Worldwide Marketing, appearing on my podcast, the Digital Production Buzz, to answer questions from listeners.

(In reality, this will never happen. Apple stopped giving on-the-record interviews, with the exception of Mr. Jobs, many years ago.)

So, imagining that Mr. Schiller were on the program, here are the questions I would ask:

1. What was the benefit to Apple of immediately canceling Final Cut Studio (3) with the release of a brand-new and untested product; when there was no technical reason (according to Apple) to do so?

2. Why did Apple feel it was necessary to alienate one of their most passionate fan bases with this release; were professional users that expendable?

3. What responsibility does Apple have when canceling a product to companies that built businesses around those products in terms of notification and support?

4. Conversely, what does Apple require of its vendors, when a supplier to Apple decides to modify a manufacturing method?

5. What is the benefit to Apple for assuming a strict rule of silence whenever something goes wrong? (A short period for research is understandable, but not when it stretches for weeks. The number one rule of PR is communication – but, apparently, not for Apple.)

6. Conversely, what would Apple’s reaction be if one of its vendors, say FoxConn, refused to talk to Apple when something went wrong, such as an explosion?

7. Why is Apple unwilling to provide a general roadmap to those products it considers “professional”?

8. Conversely, what would Apple’s reaction be if Intel refused to tell it about new chips it was developing?

9. Trust is a very tricky thing. It takes time to create and can be destroyed in an instant. Does Apple perceive the extent to which it has breached this trust and what will Apple do to recover from it?

Not one of these questions deals with the features of a product. They deal with the moral character of a company.

As consumers, we are held accountable through license agreements, laws, and regulation.

But who holds corporations accountable?

The sad part is that no one holds corporations accountable. We will never learn these answers. And the damage that’s been done will be irreparable.

Larry

Well, the last two weeks certainly have been tumultuous. But this weekend is a good time to take stock and figure out where we go from here.

Over the years I’ve learned that Apple does not follow the market, it tries to lead the market. And, with megahits like the iMac, iPod, iPhone, and iPad, it is impossible to ignore their success.

However, it isn’t always successful, which is why we find ourselves in the position we are in now. And, keep in mind that it is US, not Apple, that are in a difficult position. Apple’s DNA (and vast bank account) insulates them from clamor and controversy in the marketplace.

Yesterday, as I was thinking about this blog, I sent an email to my contacts at Apple asking if they would either announce a timetable of when we could see the next “major release” of Final Cut Pro X, or whether Apple was considering re-releasing Final Cut Studio (3) to the market.

Apple did not respond to my email; which I’ve also learned is an answer in itself.

So, the decision is not up to Apple, they have already told us what they are going to do. The decision is up to us – how will we respond?

THE MARKET

Apple has opened up a huge new market to video editing – I call it the “middle market” – people that need more than iMovie, but don’t need the vast capabilities of Final Cut Studio (3).

This is a good thing, I think, because ultimately it will give many of us work as these users push up against the barriers of FCP X and need to accomplish tasks that can’t currently be met with FCP X.

I remember the desktop publishing wars of the 1980’s. Graphics designers did not go away when our computers starting displaying fonts and images. What happened was that the graphics design tools got better and designers with creativity and skill got more work.

The situation is the same today. Creativity and story-telling are still in demand, but the audience and tools continue to evolve.

OUR CHOICE

As I see it, we all have three choices:

1. Convert to Final Cut Pro X
2. Do nothing, at least for a while
3. Switch to a different editing program

CONVERTING

For single editor shops that work exclusively with tapeless formats and principally output to files, Final Cut Pro X is very attractive.

I am getting many emails each day from people that are working with it and are pleased with their results.

For non-mission-critical projects, the current version of FCP X may meet your needs.

ABSTAINING

As I’ve written for years, however, even if Apple released an all-singing, all-dancing, rock-star of a program, I would still counsel waiting until a dot One release.

This is especially true for large shops, edit houses with massive amounts of existing material that they need to repurpose, or editors working on deadlines that cannot be missed.

Apple’s emphasis on secrecy during development in order to maximize surprise at launch means that the initial release of a product is almost never stable enough for serious use.

As examples, FCP 4.0 didn’t stabilize until version 4.0.2, FCP 5 took until version 5.0.4 and, some would argue, 5.1.4 to become solid. FCP 6 took until version 6.0.2 (with four more versions after that), and FCP 7 is currently sitting at version 7.0.3. (And the sordid history of QuickTime releases and bug fixes is best left for a mature audience…)

As I’ve written many times in the past, waiting before upgrading is never a mistake. I tend to wait a few months before upgrading my production gear. However, at the same time, I will upgrade my testing gear to the latest version – and start to learn it – as soon as it is released.

There is no harm in waiting until FCP X starts to stabilize.

SWITCHING

The wild card in this whole equation is the cancellation of Final Cut Studio (3). Our decisions would be a lot easier if Apple had not forced our hand.

First, I am deeply saddened that Apple’s vaunted engineering prowess is unable to code a conversion utility from FCP 7 to FCP X. However, they say they can’t, so I believe them. (And, even if they can, they won’t; which works out to the same thing.)

This means that if you have a large number of FCP 7 projects that you have even a remote possibility of needing in the future, you would be foolish NOT to purchase a product that can read them.

Whether you go with Avid Media Composer and Automatic Duck, or Adobe Production Premium, you, your company, your media and your projects have a far greater priority than the political and emotional issues of supporting, or not supporting, the latest release of Final Cut Pro.

Protect yourself first.

Pick the software you are most comfortable working with. Hire an assistant editor to have them do tests to see how well your projects transfer from FCP 7 into it.

Both Avid and Adobe are running “Switcher” campaigns — which doesn’t surprise me. If I were doing their marketing I would do exactly the same thing. Take advantage of this special pricing – protect your assets.

Apple says FCP 7 will run on Lion. However, it would be foolish to expect it to run on every operating system in the future. At some point, you will need to convert your assets. The best time to do so is now while all your projects, media, and the software you are using is current.

Whether you want to convert your whole operation to a new platform depends upon many different factors; cost not the least of them.

But the first rule of business is to stay in business. Protect yourself. Make sure you can get access to your assets in the future.

LARRY’S RECOMMENDATION

For new Final Cut users, purchase FCP X and enjoy it. It has many good things to recommend it.

For existing Final Cut 7 users, it is too early to know what FCP X is really going to be. But it is also way too risky to bet the ranch on it.

Download FCP X and learn it, but be very cautious putting it into serious production.

I recommend you create a system for converting your FCP 7 assets to either Avid or Adobe.

Then, wait and see what Apple does with the next release of FCP X. For me, the next release, not the current one, will set the direction for the future.

But protect yourself now.

CONCLUSION

This event gives all of us a chance to stop and reflect on who we are and what we do.

The core of what I do, personally, is to train, teach, and inform. I do this across a wide variety of products and using a wide variety of media. My core value does not change with this update.

What changes are the subjects that I teach. And, as we all know, technology is a constantly evolving mix of old and new products.

Think about what YOU do – are you a Final Cut editor, OR are you an editor that uses Final Cut? Are you defined by the technology you use or the stories that you tell?

As you are deciding whether to convert, abstain, or switch, spend a few minutes thinking about who you are, what you do, and how you want to earn a living.

In the past, religious wars were fought over Apple vs. Avid. The new war is FCP 7 vs. FCP X. Like all wars, these battles create a flurry of impressive fireworks, but leave a bloody trail of destruction in their wake. And very rarely do they settle anything. Old tensions still simmer.

So, let’s slow down and take stock. Apple has given us an opportunity to make a choice. They aren’t going to change their direction, so we need to decide if we are comfortable where they are taking us.

And that choice is different for each one of us.

Let me know what you think.

Larry

My email has been filled with such a sense of loss in recent days; a deeply loved member of the family died unexpectedly before their time.

“Such a loss.” “What a waste.” “So unnecessary.” “They will be missed.”

The words are well meant, but don’t assuage the hurt.

They are gone, and they’re never coming back.

- – -

It tears my heart to read emails from people who built their lives around something – only suddenly to discover it’s gone. What do you do when the center of your life is missing?

What can I possible say that will comfort them? Mere words seem so… inadequate.

- – -

The silence, after the fact, is deafening. No reassurance, no apology, no remorse. “Building for the future!” “Good times are still to come!” “Not really that important.” Phrases that ring insincere and hollow at this moment of pain. At the depth of what’s missing. At the depth of what’s been done.

How can you love again when your heart is missing?

- – -

Clearly, this is not a time to give up. To sink into the black oblivion of self-destructive what-ifs. There is still hope for the future – though at the moment it may be hard to see.

In two years, I’m sure, we’ll be past this. In two years, I’m sure, we’ll look back on this as a bad memory. In two years, I’m sure, we’ll say that things are better. But they won’t be the same.

Because we still need to live through the next two years.

- – -

When someone we love dies, we move on. We make new friends. And we discover those who have been with us a long time to whom we have not properly paid attention. We continue our lives, and attempt to rebuild.

But that does not deny the sadness, the anger, and the loss. Or the memories of what was.

And it was so unnecessary.

Larry

I’ve been inundated with comments on my two most recent blogs on the release of Final Cut Pro X:

#1: Ain’t Nothing Like It in the World

#2: Apple’s Challenges (with FCP X)

Late last night, Apple published an FAQ answering some of the questions that have been raised during this discussion. Notice that for the first time, they are using words like “not yet” and “coming this summer.”

I recommend you read this.

http://www.apple.com/finalcutpro/faq/

Also, yesterday I heard a reasonably substantial rumor that Apple has decided to re-release Final Cut Studio (3) back into the market. I checked with my sources at Apple and was told this was NOT true.

I still think this is a serious mistake and urge Apple to reconsider – it does not hurt the launch of FCP X to also sell Final Cut Studio (3).

By the way, I want to reiterate something I said last night at the LAFCPUG meeting – it is way too early to make any final decisions on Final Cut Pro. FCP X is in its infancy. Apple IS listening to the discussion. To my way of thinking, Apple totally blew the launch of FCP X and needs to move quickly to fix things. Before you make any final decisions for yourself or your company, wait a bit. My suggestion is a month.

At the end of that time, passions will have cooled, Apple will have time to respond, and we will all have time to think. It is always better to make decisions with a cool head after thinking about it for a while.

The situation many editors find themselves in is difficult, but not hopeless. Give this a little time to play out.

I’ll have more later this week – still trying to wade through all the email — thanks to everyone for writing.

I am always interested in your comments.

Larry

P.S. By the way, I read every email and every comment, but I am just buried in trying to answer them all. I’m sorry if I haven’t gotten to yours yet.

Since Apple launched Final Cut Pro X last Tuesday, I’ve had more than 3,500 emails that range from “I’m enjoying FCP X and creating useful projects,” to “FCP X will destroy my ability to make a living.” (And, ah, far worse, I’m sad to say.)

When I first saw Final Cut X, I was excited by its potential, but warned Apple that this release would be intensely polarizing to the editing community. It does not give me pleasure to see that I was right.

Worse, Apple has alienated the very people who can make a very visible statement as to the inadequacy of the program. No clearer example can be found than the public ridicule of FCP X on the Conan O’Brien show.

Or, as David Pogue wrote in his New York Times blog: “…let me be clear on this point — I think Apple blew it.”

With the possible exception of the launch of MobileMe, I can’t think of an Apple product launch which has spun more wildly out of control than this one. Apple did not just blow this launch, they went out of their way to alienate their key customer base.

Which is a shame, because FCP X has such great potential — but now, Apple has to concentrate on damage control, rather than getting people excited about the new program.

After the launch, Apple compounded their problems with three extremely poorly timed moves:

1. Canceling Final Cut Studio (3) and pulling all existing product from the market. This is devastating to shops that can’t use Final Cut Pro X. The two applications can co-exist on the same system — killing FCP 7 will not boost sales of FCP X to those shops that can’t run it. All it does is set up a black market for FCP 7.

2. Not providing – then publicly stating (thru David Pogue’s New York Times blog) that they do not plan to provide – a conversion utility from FCP 7 to FCP X. Not only does this render a HUGE number of past projects inaccessible, it sets up the obvious conclusion that if Apple is willing to discontinue support for legacy applications with no warning, what’s to prevent them from doing so again in the future? Every time you watch a movie that is more than 6 months old, you are dealing with legacy assets. Not providing a conversion utility is completely inexcusable.

3. Leaving the support for interchange formats – XML, EDL, OMF and others – to third-parties; or not supporting them at all. Yes, the video and film industry needs to move into the current century. However, Hollywood is very reluctant to change what works. Meeting deadlines is far more important than adopting new technology. Apple’s walled garden approach is totally at odds with the nature of post-production, where the editing system is the hub around which a wide variety of other applications revolve. On any editing project I routinely run 5-10 other programs simultaneously — only three of which are from Apple. I am constantly moving data between programs. This, combined with a lack of support for network-based storage, highlight grave development decisions in determining what features to include in the program.

NOTE: Apple told Pogue that they are working on providing the specs for their XML API. This is essential for any third-party developer to access conversion “hooks” in the program. David didn’t report that they mentioned when this would be available, however.

When I was talking with Apple prior to the launch, they told me that they extensively researched the market to determine what needed to be in the new program. In retrospect, I wonder what people they were talking with.

As I was working with the program, developing my FCP X training series, I often felt that the program was developed for two different audiences. Some features, effects for instance, are clearly geared for the iMovie crowd, while others, like trimming or 4K support, are geared for pros. The program sometimes felt like it wasn’t sure what it wanted to be when it grew up.

In FCP X, Apple got some things amazingly right. But they also got key features amazingly wrong. And if they don’t change course, this software, which has significant potential, is going to spin further and further out of control. At which point, its feature set is irrelevant, its reputation will be set. We’ll be looking at another Mac Cube.

Apple does not normally ever comment on future products – though they did this year, prior to WWDC, because they needed to reset expectations. Because of the visibility of this product into an audience that can cause extensive PR damage to Apple, I suggest that Apple break its usual vow of silence and do three things:

1. Immediately return Final Cut Studio (3) to the market. If it is not compatible with Lion (and I don’t know whether it is or not) label it so. But put it back on store shelves so consumers have the ability to work with the existing version until FCP X is ready for prime time.

2. Fund the development of a conversion utility – either at Apple or thru a 3rd-party – and announce the development with a tentative release date.

3. Publicly announce a road-map for FCP X that just covers the next 3-4 months. Apple needs to be in damage control mode and the best way to defuse the situation is to communicate. Answering the question: “What features will Apple add to FCP X, and when?” will go a long way to calming people down.

I have written in my earlier blog (read it here) that FCP X has a lot of potential, and, for some, it meets their needs very nicely. I still believe that.

I was also pleased to provide training on FCP X so that new and existing users can get up to speed on it quickly.

I don’t mind helping a product develop into its full potential. I enjoy providing feedback and helping people to learn new software. I don’t even mind that FCP X is missing some features; this is to be expected in any new software.

But I mind a great deal being forced to adopt a product because other options are removed, forced to lose access to my legacy projects, and forced to work in the dark concerning when critically needed features will be forthcoming.

This launch has been compared to Coca-Cola launching New Coke – resulting in a humiliating loss of market share.

With Final Cut Pro X, however, the situation is worse — with New Coke, only our ability to sip soda was affected. With Final Cut Pro X, we are talking losing livelihoods.

Let me know what you think,

Larry

There are about 85 emails in my in-box this morning with links to a speech I gave at the April Final Cut Pro User Group about my reactions to Apple’s presentation of Final Cut at NAB.

While I stand by most of my remarks, there was one unfortunate moment where I said, with a special dramatic emphasis for the crowd, that Final Cut Pro X was not ready for professional use.

I believed that then. I don’t believe it now.

When I made that presentation to the LAFCPUG, it was the week after NAB; a week after Apple presented the new version of Final Cut to the world. When I watched that presentation, I was watching it through the prism of my experience with Final Cut Pro 7 and all I knew about the application was what Apple showed on stage in their demo.

How could anything that radically different equal what we already had in Final Cut Pro 7?

I knew this new version was far more than iMovie – but, at that time, I didn’t think it was Final Cut Pro, either.

Its no secret that Apple gave me rare access to the software by inviting me to a demo of an early build of the software in February this year. However, what is not known, is that they also gave me permission to contact their development team to discuss the new version.

After NAB, and after my presentation at that April LAFCPUG meeting, I finally had time to follow-up on Apple’s offer. And I did. A lot.

I peppered them with questions:

• Why did Apple decide to totally reinvent the interface?

• Why did Apple feel they couldn’t simply do an incremental improvement to what we already had?

• Why did they only talk about Final Cut Pro?

• Why did they add the features they did?

• Why did they not mention others?

• What did they view as the future of editing, and who did they see doing the work?

While I can’t tell you what Apple told me until after the NDA lifts with the release of the product, I can tell you that what I learned during those conversations has completely changed my opinion.

Because so many of us base our lives on this software – both creatively and financially – there is a lot of stress whenever a new version comes out. Especially a radically different new version.

I understand, I feel the same stress.

But I no longer feel, as I once thought, that this is a step backward. Based on what I learned during my conversations with Apple, I believe this release provides us with an opportunity for a large step forward.

Now, we just have to wait and see what Apple ships.

For many of us, this will be a giant leap into something truly exciting. There is a lot of news to share and I can’t wait to tell you more about it.

That day can’t come soon enough.

Larry

Bill Frank invited me on his radio show this morning – Brainstormin’ KKZZ AM 1400 – to talk about improving video. His show is geared toward the amateur audience, rather than the pros, so I put together a list of ten tips that beginners and hobbyists can use to improve the quality of their work.

I get a lot of requests for simple things people can do to improve their video – and I suspect you do to – so now I have something to give them.

Larry

- – -

Larry’s Ten Tips For Improving Your Video

1. Don’t edit your home movies – the people in them are too important to you to cut them out. Just enjoy these movies for what they are.

2. Think about what you hate about watching everyone ELSE’S home movies. That’s what you need to get rid of in your movies.
* Shaky, hand-held camera work
* Out of focus shots
* Indecipherable images
* Inaudible audio

3. A good video tells a story – find the story and you’ve found your video. Even a short video can tell a powerful story.

4. The goal is NOT to create a video that YOU want to watch. The goal is to create a video that someone who has never seen it wants to watch.

5. The most important part of your video is the audio.

6. No time you spend lighting is ever wasted.

7. Shorter is always better than longer. Get people interested in your subject first.

8. If you have to use special effects, there’s something wrong with your story. Effects are often a crutch for inadequate performers, story, or concept.

9. We use dialog to tell the story; we use music to tell the emotion.

10. Don’t try to make your video “perfect.” Just focus on making each video you do better than the last one.

This week a vigilant member of our Final Cut Pro community alerted me to a video on YouTube that he thought might be mine – but wasn’t on my site. I clicked the link and went directly to a recently created YouTube channel, that was, in fact, displaying one of my video tutorials as their own. In an effort to hide the tutorial’s identity, the channel owner had cut off my introduction and failed to acknowledge my work. Worse, they had pirated 87 more of my videos, and given them the same treatment! He was promoting them, not as my work, but as his own.

I try to make my materials as widely available as possible, many at no cost. But that doesn’t mean I have given up ownership. Also, some of the videos they had posted were ones that I offer for sale in my store. By him distributing them for free, this deprived me and my company of income.

Piracy, I know, affects all of us. But, this isn’t a rant on piracy, its an illustration of what we did.

Laura, in my office, immediately set to work to figure out how to get the videos taken down. She looked at the YouTube Copyright Infringement instructions. YouTube requires a detailed form to be submitted for EACH infringed video. This presents an almost insurmountable burden when dozens of videos are involved. Laura realized that it would take hours to prepare one form for each of the 88 videos. So, while she pondered a legal solution, she took the path of least resistance and sent a direct message to the channel owner requesting that he remove all 88 videos immediately, and explaining why.

To our amazement, the channel owner complied immediately! All 88 videos were removed and he put up his own Final Cut training.

Several morals apply to this story. One is that polite, direct contact from one person to another is the most efficient means of effective communication. Two is a reminder to everyone that when you make copyrighted material available for free, or download a program from a source like Pirate Bay without paying for it, you are depriving someone of an income, and possibly someone from having a job. As a small business owner the majority of my income comes from the tutorials I sell in my store. I depend on this income to support my company. I love doing my work, but I also love paying my team and my mortgage, with a bit left over to create new products. I can’t do that when items that I sell get distributed for free.

My situation is not unique. All of us work hard to create good products. Sometimes those products get ripped off, which is really demoralizing. But, sometimes, when you ask nicely, these problems can be fixed.

I’ve decided to call that a reason for hope.

Larry