Charlie Bit My Finger video to be taken off YouTube after selling for £500,000

  • ⚙️ Performance issue identified and being addressed.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
1621942948642.png


As one of the original viral videos, the Charlie Bit My Finger clip is a little piece of internet history.

But now the much-loved clip of baby Charlie gnawing on his brother Harry's finger will be taken off YouTube after it was sold for $760,999 (£538,000).

The Davies-Carr family auctioned the clip as an NFT, a non-fungible token.

Bids came into their auction page throughout the weekend, but the price dramatically increased in its final hours on Sunday.

The bidding battle was between two anonymous accounts.

"3fmusic" eventually outbid "mememaster" for the video, which has been watched more than 880 million times since it was put on YouTube in 2007.

The clip had been due to be removed from the video sharing platform on 23 May, following the auction - but at the moment it's still there.

An NFT is like a certificate to say that you own something digital. It means original versions of viral videos, memes or tweets can be sold as if they were art.

It's a lucrative business for those who own viral clips.

The "Disaster Girl Meme" - a picture of a young girl smiling with a fire in the background - was recently sold as an NFT for $473,000 (£341,000).

NFT (non-fungible token) technology is a growing trend in the digital art world.

Grimes, Johnny Depp and even Twitter founder Jack Dorsey have all sold NFTs of their work for large sums.

And the 10-year-old internet meme, Nyan Cat, sold for $580,000 (£409,000) in February.

An NFT is a bit like a collectible certificate of authenticity, but its owner does not actually buy the copyright itself - meaning the artwork the NFT represents can still be shown wherever the original artist or creator chooses.

This means it's an unusual move for the creators of Charlie Bit My Finger to choose to remove their video from YouTube.

Buyers choose to invest in NFTs for a number of reasons, including nostalgia - but whether this turns out to be an investment with long-term potential, or just a temporary craze, remains to be seen.

Sunday's spending spree means the mysterious anonymous bidder will become the owner of the Charlie Bit My Finger clip.

But it also gives them a chance to create some follow-up content.

The auction page says the NFT winner will be given the opportunity to "recreate a hilarious modern-day rendition of the classic clip" that will feature "the original stars, Harry and Charlie".

Now aged 17 and 15, it's the right time for Harry and Charlie to "embrace the next iteration of the internet", the site adds.

The video was uploaded to YouTube by Harry and Charlie's dad, Howard, in 2007, because he couldn't email it to their godparents in America.

The family website says the clip was filmed as "a part of catching random moments as the boys were growing up", and that it "unintentionally went viral".

They haven't said what they're planning on doing with the money.

 
Oh wow, removing something from the common pool for money. Fitting to represent how the Internet is changing.
 



You wouldn't download a car. If you liked it, then SUPPORT THE CREATOR.
 
I don't understand it. You can just download the video or watch a reupload, what exactly do they own? Is it monehy laundering like modern art?
 
I don't understand it. You can just download the video or watch a reupload, what exactly do they own? Is it monehy laundering like modern art?
It's a status symbol. Among rich fags it means "I own this with a useless digital certificate and you don't", among the rest of the people it means "I am severely retarded and paid for something that everyone can own anyway". I can see it being used to scam and launder money but it would be too convoluted and stupid in comparison to many other methods tho.
 
An NFT is a bit like a collectible certificate of authenticity, but its owner does not actually buy the copyright itself - meaning the artwork the NFT represents can still be shown wherever the original artist or creator chooses.
So, then why is the original being taking off youtube? I have a feeling this is going to be the next plague of youtube copyrights, content ID to steal money. You don't even have to be the original creator to sell a NFT, but they'll tell YT they have "ownership" of the clip; and because YT is so retarded they'll believe it.
 
Oh wow, removing something from the common pool for money. Fitting to represent how the Internet is changing.

You wouldn't download a car. If you liked it, then SUPPORT THE CREATOR.

Should have ended the thread after these two posts.

NFT = modern day DRM/Anti-Piracy.

Now that the content is owned, not watching it through a approved channel, is piracy.
 
Wouldn't the family have made more long term if they were getting YT royalties from the video? I know that gravy train won't last forever, and the monetization probably wasn't in place for the first few years the video was up, but it has almost a billion views. There are YT stars who quit their day jobs who have a lot less than 800M views on all their videos combined.

Seems like a short sighted cash in on the part of the family.

Also, is a meme still a meme if you deliberately lock it away from public view?
 
Should have ended the thread after these two posts.

NFT = modern day DRM/Anti-Piracy.

Now that the content is owned, not watching it through a approved channel, is piracy.
Imagine a future where everything is service based and content is hard locked into blockchains.
I can imagine a few people who would be happy to push something like that...
 
This video wasn't funny the first time I saw it. It has not improved.

Everyone should kill themselves.
 
Imagine spending that much money on an ancient unfunny video people lost interest in a month after it came out.
 
Back
Top Bottom