YouTube Issued Copyright Claims Against Miracle of Sound

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT
 

Fanghawk:
INDMUSIC was taking 20% of my ad revenue from those videos without my consent for even claiming them.

Well isn't that... suspicious.

"Legitimate" scamming at its finest.

vxicepickxv:

Agayek:
Youtube copyright bullshit strikes again. God I wish they'd figure that shit out already.

It's not YouTube's fault entirely. It's actually ancient copyright law that makes this such as clusterfuck. I know that not everyone who posts on YouTube has knowledge of international copyright law, which means the most harsh laws must apply to any international corporation, and Google is one.

Google handled it wrong, but it needs to be fixed before it can go back to being good.

I think you've hit the nail on the head here. The whole copyright and patent system isn't working. It was meant to protect IP so the originator of said IP could expect a reasonable return on their creative efforts. But thanks to extremely short sighted changes to the laws involved, IP has become a hot property worth a lot to those that hold it, often even more then the use of that IP to create a product is worth.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Term_Extension_Act is just one example.

As far as I'm concerned copyrights should only cover the life of the originator so they can see return for their efforts. As it stands now corporations buy up IP and then charge a arm and a leg for said IP so it's in their best interests to vigorously defend any infringement.
The whole problem is that major IP holders threaten to get Youtube shut down for copyright infringement and Google set up the current take down system as a cost effective method to protect IP for them. But with any system they're are unintended loopholes which produce undesirable results. Google has to rework it's take down system to account for those loopholes, even if it means that it will cost them more to implement. If they don't Youtube will fall prey to another more user friendly site. That's just how the internet works, and Google of all people should know that.

Neronium:

TizzytheTormentor:

Indeed, other content creators are speaking out against it, like Angry Joe, this new automated system is not working as it should and its punishing people for nothing.

The thing is, this system is not new. No, this system has been in place since 2009. The only thing is that before people would join MCNs and the MCNs would protect them against this kind of shit. Now they don't, and basically people are now paying these MCNs just to be treated as regular members of YouTube again. It's really annoying and is why I really am trying to move to only Game Anyone. Nintendo is being one of the worst offenders with this shit, waiting 30 days so then people can't monetize for those 30 days, then reinstating the claim again and getting them in a forever loop.

So basically the system was tweaked and now its punishing everyone?

And that's why I buy my music from bandcamp.

Gezzer:
I think you've hit the nail on the head here. The whole copyright and patent system isn't working. It was meant to protect IP so the originator of said IP could expect a reasonable return on their creative efforts. But thanks to extremely short sighted changes to the laws involved, IP has become a hot property worth a lot to those that hold it, often even more then the use of that IP to create a product is worth.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Term_Extension_Act is just one example.

As far as I'm concerned copyrights should only cover the life of the originator so they can see return for their efforts. As it stands now corporations buy up IP and then charge a arm and a leg for said IP so it's in their best interests to vigorously defend any infringement.
The whole problem is that major IP holders threaten to get Youtube shut down for copyright infringement and Google set up the current take down system as a cost effective method to protect IP for them. But with any system they're are unintended loopholes which produce undesirable results. Google has to rework it's take down system to account for those loopholes, even if it means that it will cost them more to implement. If they don't Youtube will fall prey to another more user friendly site. That's just how the internet works, and Google of all people should know that.

It's not so much the existence of copyright that's the problem (though personally, and speaking as someone who doesn't actually own any copyrights, I think we should go back to the original form which only lasted until 25 years after first publication and could not be renewed). The problem is that fair use is hyper restrictive and the default assumption when the question arises is that something has violated copyright. We need to revise the laws to expand the application if not the letter of fair use to include more and broader categories, and the law should really shift the burden of proof onto the copyright holders.

TizzytheTormentor:

So basically the system was tweaked and now its punishing everyone?

More or less yes, and those who just so happen to be partnered with MCNs are screwed even more because they are often times locked in with that MCN. Mainly because they have to sign legal contracts to work for them and a contract is automatically renewed unless the MCN decides not to or unless you submit that you wish to not renew it a certain number of days, weeks, or months before you contract is up for renewal.

Dr.Awkward:
So technology and automation is supposed to solve problems and reduce costs, huh?

For Google, it does, I'm sure. It's everyone else who gets the shaft. As I'm sure they intended. They offloaded the work to everyone else--including the artists--and then they rolled around their money bins until they were all tuckered out.

*face palm* OK, there's a word for what YouTube is doing right now. HHHMMM... If only there was a video to express my thoughts.

OH, WAIT!

YouTube/Google, you douche-bags better learn to play nice with the rest of the Internet or start circling the wagons. Cause, sooner or later, the majority of the planet is going to fuck your shit up beyond repair.

FalloutJack:
Pitchforks! Torches and pitchforks! Get 'em here! Get 'em while they're hot!

(Come on, you know this is coming.)

You do know that bats, pipes and boston bashers would be WAY more effective? I mean granted torches will help to see and set them on fire....actually we can keep the torches lol

Neronium:
Snipped for length

It's not so much the existence of copyright that's the problem (though personally, and speaking as someone who doesn't actually own any copyrights, I think we should go back to the original form which only lasted until 25 years after first publication and could not be renewed). The problem is that fair use is hyper restrictive and the default assumption when the question arises is that something has violated copyright. We need to revise the laws to expand the application if not the letter of fair use to include more and broader categories, and the law should really shift the burden of proof onto the copyright holders.

You've got a point. While the definition of fair use could be better defined I also think some of the problem comes from how very valuable those copyrights are. We have a section of the economy where the buying and selling of both copyrights and patents are a big business, which really no longer benefits the originators. I think one of the reasons that fair use is so restricted and IP holders are so ruthless in their defense of their IPs is because of the high worth of those IPs in the marketplace. I think any reduction in the worth of those IPs for corporations without removing the ability of the originators to see good return for their efforts would go a long way to reduce this feeding frenzy like behavior where IP rights are concerned.

Your Fearless Captain:
And that's why I buy my music from bandcamp.

Do you realising that bandcamp has also been abusing Youtube's automated takedown system?

Gezzer:
snip

Think you might have accidentally misquoted me right there. Unless that's one of my older posts. I can't remember that well because I've made so many posts similar to that one that they sort of just meld together in my mind now. XD

This has gotten to the point of pure insanity. When people are getting strikes for their OWN work, there is something very wrong.

Hmmm? Interesting. So it seems that a massive amount of these Youtube Copyright notices, and the principle party in the revenue disruption and redirection is a single entity known as "Indmusic". They are the same outfit that issued notices against several Indie Developers who posted clips of their own games.

I'm thinking it's time to get out the pitchforks. This smells suspiciously like an opportunistic legal firm attempting to copyright squat.

I dunno, they may have a point. Take a closer look at the picture they use in the article.

On Dunne's sleeve is a patch that says 'HS 29'. Clearly, the 'HS' stands for High School, and from that we can deduce that '29' stands for his year of graduation, 1929, MEANING, that Dunne is either some sort of immortal that steals the bodies of younger men in order to be ever alive and youthful, OR he stole that shirt from an actual High School graduate of the class of '29.

Either way, Dunne is a FRAUD, and that's how he stole his own music.

Clearly that's how it is.

He needs to sue google and the publisher for lost revenue, if they didn't have his permission then their liable for this huge fuck up

Didn't Gav tweet that he was waiting for something like this to happen? Man, he's predicting the future!

Neronium:

Gezzer:
snip

Think you might have accidentally misquoted me right there. Unless that's one of my older posts. I can't remember that well because I've made so many posts similar to that one that they sort of just meld together in my mind now. XD

Actually it was my bad. Was trying to respond to Agayek's response to my response to another post and some how got you involved. I think my error came because I'm used to quote buttons being on the bottom of a post not the top. It actually makes more sense when you think about it. You read a post then want to reply to it, not reply and then read, but it's very minor in the long run. I might of quoted you by mistake, then him, and then failed to notice it was your user name when I did my snip. That's what using a WYSIWYG web engine instead of learning to recognize proper syntax will get me. :O)....

When a guy can get strikes against him for his own content, you know you screwed up BAD.

That really does suck.

I've been meaning to buy Level 4 since it came out, now seems like a good time.

Well damn. Sorry to hear about this wankery happening to Gavin, but sadly I can't say I'm surprised. For awhile now Google has mutated into just another evil empire hell bent on domination and it's of little surprise to see their tentacles of evil twisting their way through YouTube as well. Sadly I see only one solution, abandon ship and let the looming iceberg have it's wicked way with both Google and YouTube. Now days there are plenty of workable alternatives so there's no reason to keep supporting the idiots that only want to shit on your head while picking your pocket.

Youtube... Why? Why do you continue to do this?

Oh by the way guys, since there seems to be a lot of Youtubers here... if someone does a claim on one of your videos and you get it revoked, do they still get to keep the cash in between that period where it was being disputed? I'm just wondering if it's a legitimate strategy for some arsewipe company to just lay claims on as many things as they can and get paid for what little time they have the claim on.

Gezzer:
You've got a point. While the definition of fair use could be better defined I also think some of the problem comes from how very valuable those copyrights are. We have a section of the economy where the buying and selling of both copyrights and patents are a big business, which really no longer benefits the originators. I think one of the reasons that fair use is so restricted and IP holders are so ruthless in their defense of their IPs is because of the high worth of those IPs in the marketplace. I think any reduction in the worth of those IPs for corporations without removing the ability of the originators to see good return for their efforts would go a long way to reduce this feeding frenzy like behavior where IP rights are concerned.

This much I don't disagree with. My point was more that someone owning a copyright wasn't really so much of a problem as how that copyright is applied. I may have misinterpreted your original post.

That said, there's a really easy fix to all the points you bring up: Make copyrights unsaleable. The copyright holder can still grant permission to other entities to use their copyright should they desire (and presumably for money) but the core license can not ever leave the ownership of the original creator. Thus, when the creator dies or the copyright expires, the copyright ceases to exist and the work in question enters the public domain.

This would immediately remove the constant fighting over IP ownership and, quite literally, make it impossible for companies to keep hoarding the stuff.

omega 616:
Ok ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, children of all ages ... Who has had the biggest fuck up? Microsoft with it's xbox 180 or Youtube with all your vids are belong to us? Vote now!

Seriously though, this shit is getting silly. You know that they will stick to there guns though 'cos nobody is competition, so they can implement what they like we have to swallow it. Just how many variations of youtube have there been and nobody has liked any of them ... at first and then we all get used to it, till they change it again.

yep i can say f*** to xbox but not youtube. it is all most the kid that are never getting punished while being an ahole

FalloutJack:
Pitchforks! Torches and pitchforks! Get 'em here! Get 'em while they're hot!

(Come on, you know this is coming.)

Gimme two each!

No but seriously, what the fuck? This is getting a bit too far. Copyright against the own creator just proves that the system is broken to hell. Better get sorted soon, this is going to get a lot of people pissed.

otakon17:
What fucking insanity is this? Okay this is PROOF that this automated system should only be used to check and it takes an ACTUAL person to oversee this shit. Absolute madness this.

And the companies representing artists like Miracle of Sound REALLY, REALLY should have stopped to ask said artists about this crap before launching this kind of stupidity. Could've saved a lot of headaches.

Dr.Awkward:
So technology and automation is supposed to solve problems and reduce costs, huh?

Nope, every single automatized system always means Skynet.

shadowstriker86:

FalloutJack:
Pitchforks! Torches and pitchforks! Get 'em here! Get 'em while they're hot!

(Come on, you know this is coming.)

You do know that bats, pipes and boston bashers would be WAY more effective? I mean granted torches will help to see and set them on fire....actually we can keep the torches lol

Nevah! Torches and pitchforks are TRADITION! Have intrinsic value and conveyed message when used!

(The fuck?? An ACTUAL JOURNALISM coming from Escapists??!)

I mean...

Youtube, you're a visionary.

Jesus, this makes me wish I could unsubscribe from Youtube AGAIN! They should be paying Gav damages for this or something, it's just inexcusable.

Call me cynical but I don't really believe that the company was all that aggrieved to be "accidently" claiming 20% of Mr Dunnes revenue at all, even though he never knew they had been given the rights to make claims "on his behalf". Funny how they don't really respond to the complaints in a timely manner either...

Well, there really need to be significant financial penalties for corporations, so that incompetent activities are discouraged. Otherwise, stupid decisions are simply shrugged off.

We've seen stories where individuals are threatened with lawsuits for considerable sums for supposed copyright infringement, where the expectation is that people will be shocked into quick submission to avoid the "justice" system. Probably a minimum financial penalty for coporations should be in the range of $100-500,000 per infraction, enough to make someone in the rank-and-file understand that they're risking their job by being sloppy.

The CEOs seem to be raking in big cash running companies into the ground. Let's peg additional CEO penalty of 5% of that year's salary & bonuses, period, regardless of contractural arrangement for that CEO's financial compensation. In other words, someone goofs, that CEO feels it, pound for pound. Otherwise, running a large corporation is just a license to game the system and laugh at what they can get away with.

Goodbye YouTube, and hello Vimeo!

Hello? *voice echoes around the website*
Hold on, I see something.. over there *points to the left* is a lack of monetization... over that way *points right* are a bunch of bandwidth caps. And right in front of me... the 13 people currently using Vimeo.

Right, that's why Youtube dominates.

FalloutJack:
Pitchforks! Torches and pitchforks! Get 'em here! Get 'em while they're hot!

(Come on, you know this is coming.)

Put me down for 6 of each. *digs debit card out of his wallet*

On topic:

I was actually just having a discussion about this kind of thing with some friends today. I really feel that technology is being forced into situations where it doesn't necessarily improve the functionality. Like here, clearly a person would be better than an automated system.

It seems like Google is just trying to kill YouTube at this point. They're trying to piss off their biggest moneymakers enough to leave. Makes no God damn sense.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here