YouTube Muting, Removing Videos Involving Warner Music 202
notseamus writes "In the past few days, YouTube has started muting videos uploaded by users that use 'unauthorized copyrighted music' in response to Warner Music's threat over royalties, and so far appears to target only Warner Music related videos. Ars Technica also reports that after three DMCA notices YouTube will remove a user account, even when it appears to be fair use. Kevin Lee has had video essays — which he believes are fair use — removed from YouTube, and his account disabled before he could file a counter notice."
How to silence anyone on YouTube: (Score:5, Interesting)
It seems it's possible to have anyone's account killed by sending three letters.
Re:Their site, their right. (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:How to silence anyone on YouTube: (Score:5, Interesting)
And indeed people are using this to remove videos they do not like. Example: convict Kent Hovind spread false videos against evolution. With permission to spread. Several people made response videos and these were removed referring to this issue. Pro-God YT user VenomFangX made people file complaints on many anti-him (small 'h', VFX) videos, but went too far by using it as a censorship trick. YT user Thunderf00t, who was wrongly censored, threatened to sue VFX unless VFX made apologies and shut up for a year - watch the forced apologies being uttered on http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_MYyc-PtH4&feature=PlayList&p=4618299B334AB7B9&index=8 [youtube.com]
By the way VFX did not make the one year silence full. He again places his anti-evolution barf, and typically only allows his fans to comment.
Good (Score:3, Interesting)
It's good to see a former big player withdrawing from a market. It just makes that much more room for an independent artist.
Warner reached a peak with the inception of Bugs Bunny. I'll maybe shed a nostalgic tear or something.
Re:How to silence anyone on YouTube: (Score:2, Interesting)
We need a virus that submits bogus DMCA notices. In volumes that require automated responses, Google would be forced to take action. It would ruin YouTube to honor the notices, or they would be forced to ignore the flood of (legit looking) DMCA takedown notices.
Then the unfair power of companies-with-lawyers would be exposed since RIAA DMCA notices would either get special treatment, or ignored like the virus DMCA notices. Google would have to break the DMCA to ignore the spam, since they can't tell if it's legit. Google would get the laws changed once they couldn't play copyright cop.
Time to boycott (Score:5, Interesting)
Something like that happened to one of my own videos. Just a stupid little clip from a video game, but it included some music that apparently it's "wrong" to use. So they deleted the video. I made it easy for them - I deleted the rest. I'm done using YouTube. They're stupid for caving in so easily, but the labels issuing the takedown notices are far, far more stupid. They're slaughtering their single best advertising, and it was free for them. Seriously, they should be PAYING people to use their crap on YouTube. You already know no one (and I mean NO one) is going to use YouTube as an alternative to downloading an MP3. Let's see... choice of $0.99 to download the song and use it on your MP3 player, or have to go to a website, on your computer, and stream the video every time you want to listen to it. Yeah, people were DEFINITELY using YouTube to avoid buying music. Lots of lost sales there, yep!
YouTube is going from great to irrelevant, and it's hurting not only them, but the music labels as well. That's fine, I'm done with them.
What if... (Score:1, Interesting)
Someone would just use one of the botnets to spider every user account in youtube's userbase and post 3+ DCMA takedown reports on it? Show them it's a load of bull what they are doing...
Re:Their site, their right. (Score:4, Interesting)
Anything digital is pirated?
So the short stories I write and post to the internet are pirated?
What about the digital photographs I take?
What about the drawings I make? ...they suck but that's another matter...
Though for the growing bulk, perhaps even majority of useful data you are right that if posted w/o consent of the copyright owner it is "pirated" or put correctly(piracy is a maritime law only!) intellectual property infringement.
As this bulk grows it means that there are more and more creations that can be considered similar to material that is part of someone's intellectual property. In order to relate to other people you have to relate to their experiences and many of those involve IP such as theme parks, brand name items, cartoons etc.
This means that gradually companies owning what amounts to non-expiring IP are taking ownership of society for their own non-personal(corps are not people) gains.
Any Intellectual Property(copyright, patent, trademark etc.) without a reasonably short expiration date is grossly unjust.
Every piece of IP should have an expiration date for when it will enter public domain and once set that date should NOT change even if new laws are passed. Renewable IP dates may be just provided that the renewal process allows for a certain end time for the property holder's rights and the longer the ownership the harder the renewal should be to prove(not to pay for).
Examples of abusive take down requests (Score:4, Interesting)
* Message to Scientology vid DOWN!! - "The video was apparently down due to false DMCA claims made against two other videos, which brought down the whole account." [whyweprotest.net]
* Youtube account permanantly disabled, no reason given. [whyweprotest.net]
* 'We Still Run This' - down (up again) - Copyright claim by Gary Scarf. [whyweprotest.net]
* Tommy Davis videos being pulled [whyweprotest.net]
* A video from the Church0fScientology account removed for TOS violation [whyweprotest.net]
* The 888 video is down now. [whyweprotest.net]
* Onehuman and Gerry Armstrong Vid Censored [whyweprotest.net]
* Scientology Attacks Jedi Anons YouTube - BOTH of the videos that had readings from The Complex were deleted [whyweprotest.net]
* Angry Gay Pope Banned from YouTube - It's the video where Ken Moxon comes out and servers me a TRO [whyweprotest.net]
* flagging a different video of mine for sexual content, but the reason he is doing so, as far as I can discern, is due to comments made regarding the video itself. [whyweprotest.net]
* Is it just me or are about 25k YouTube "Scientology" vidoes missing? [whyweprotest.net]
* That shitbag TomNewton237, owner of XXXXX has flagged my most recent upload and in his shitty blog brags about getting Tori, Mark Bunker and others pulled. [whyweprotest.net]
* Very important videos taken down on Youtube - These videos are very important because they are evidences of fair game caught on tape. [whyweprotest.net]
* DMCA Abuse by Scientology Re-uploaded on Youtube! [whyweprotest.net]
* Report on Kaja Ballo removed from Youtube [whyweprotest.net]
* Another Video removed - "Shawn Lonsdale assaulted by Ron Salevo" [whyweprotest.net]
* Possible new wave of DMCA claims? - ContentFactory America, Inc does not exist. This is the same shit as the American Rights Counsel LLC. [whyweprotest.net]
*
Warner is taking down game videos, too (Score:5, Interesting)
Comment removed (Score:3, Interesting)
Go, go youtube! :D (Score:3, Interesting)
They could have simply taken down the videos, but that is blackballing, is it not? It's easy to forget the thing was even there.
Instead they invent a brand new method of censorship, who's only express purpose is to make it very, very clear that something is being censored.
They are HIGHLIGHTING the problem and they are GENERATING buzz over this fiasco. They are making it clear that they are being legally threatened and demonstrating what the effects of this censorship are. They are doing so under the guise of both serving the requests of T-W and being "kinder and gentler" to users, but really they are inviting users to Get Mad As Hell [youtube.com].
It is counterproductive to be angry at YouTube over this. They will shame TW, the RIAA, and they will back down and this new form of censorship will cease. In the meantime, allow them to make strikes like this on our behalf, and join me in raising some ruckus against the distributers.
Re:Their site, their right. (Score:1, Interesting)
As soon as you upload anything to the internet you've pretty much waived any of your content rights you had.
Now when I say that I don't mean it in the legal sense but in the realistic practical sense. Anything digital is pirated and shared.
We even have karma whores that copy & paste other peoples insightful c0mments.
Re:Their site, their right. (Score:3, Interesting)
I thought this interpretation up the other day feel free to use it.
The apple is content. The farmer consumed the content, made copies and is now sharing those copies with others.
Disturbingly you could relate this to GM crops however I'd like to keep the debate on track. Copyright or the possession of ideas just fundamentally doesn't work.
If we all agree that taking someone's work (music, movie, game, gpl software with no source) making copies and then selling it is wrong then a middle ground and special rules have to be set for which the original creator is rewarded.