Added: 4 years ago
From: nalts
Views: 18,627
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (343)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • This is about as outrageous as singers and bands wanting a performance tax passed so the radio stations have to pay a tax to play their music. When will people stop biting the hand that feeds them?

  • As an amateur photographer, but photographer none the less, you should always put your name on your photo. So I fault her. That song was awesome, and had so many views, and you can tell those guys worked hard to make the video they did. If she doesn't want her photos taken without credit she needs to watermark them or something. That's her fault.

  • being a photographer I understand about people stealing my pictures. oh yes it's stealing. you can get up to a $250,000 fine. it's no different than downloading movies and music off the web without paying for it. if they would have asked BEFORE!!!! they posted them, it might not have been a problem.

  • I agree; she's getting proper credit, so it's perfectly fine.

    And this is said by a photographer who has had her photos used without credit (a link back and an e-mail to me is my policy) and is quite upset about it *grumble*

  • I have had my photographs turned into derivatives that ended up on mousepads, t-shirts, thongs, an 8x8 foot mural in Chicago, and even commemorative coins. I have never pursued legal action, and I only attempted to resolve the issue with people who were affixing value to my work (or derivatives) and turning a profit. I *kind of* sympathize with Lane, but honestly, from experience, I think her actions are ultimately frivolous. Nothing wrong with demanding credit, but know where you're from.

  • The picture is and probably was worth less than a dollar if she's lucky! Give her a buck...That may help with the tremendous attorney fees!

  • lol i no wot u mean and its up to 324,658 now

  • YES! This video wins. Lane Hartwell had a choice to either accept the free marketing or engage in lawsuits. She chose to damage her image by complaining about a YouTube video. I had never heard of her until this ordeal. Now, I've been introduced to her as a whiner. Smooth move, Lane.

  • sigh, no subs

  • getmorereviewsdotcom/?p=16

    Good article on freedom of the internet (world wide web) and where it is headed

  • After going to her website and reading all the winey posts im lmao.After giving her credit she still "B!!!"! If anyone wants the internet to be like televison and FCC and big brother ruled keep being silent.Google how the internet started and how it was from the start and you will know what i mean.Sorry Nalts touchy subject for us Old Schoolers ; )

  • Sorry! post photos on internet, (flickr or wherever) "its free game and pickins" 99% of people that have been here since internet was born still believe this!Internet content was made to be "FREE" and should always be that way. Good video Nalts

  • Oh Shit! Soooo what you are saying, is that there are "You Tube" Rules.Can I claim ignorance?

  • TOS. Did you not read them when you signed up? Cause you had to agree to them at that time.

  • Yes of coarse , I was being sarcastic. :-)

  • haha u'll get spanked!

  • Pretty much..just because she can..It's not right but,,

  • As long as somebody isn't claiming the pic as their own, what's the big deal? I can understand if the RichterScales said "look at this picture we took." But to give the guy credit and he still pitches a fit? Seriously, get out of elementary school, sir.

  • Sorry, the photographer in question is a woman. So forgive all my mistaken gender references above. Still, doesn't change what I said, ma'am.

  • it was a girl, not a guy

  • Hence the second comment. You know, the one right above yours.

    Thanks though.

  • It did not show... Man YT needs to fix these crazy comments.

  • Ain't that the truth!

  • Ok..I had a video slideshow yanked from youtube due to Prince having a tight ass crack..they were my own pics with me singing "nothing compares 2 u"..I made no money..I just wanted people to be more aware of the "choking game"..you can find it on myspace..My question is..How do I get permission from Tiny Man himself?

  • you don't, unfortunately. That's what the creative commons guys are trying to fix though (won't work, but the notion is nice)

  • Well, I shall debate against you. These people do this because they aren't thinking! Ill go and tear down a video for the publicity, no. They don't need a reason. They are pissed because they thought that posting their photos on the web keeps them safe. Not really. Still, no thoughs in these peoples mind.

  • Good for you Nalts - fighting for the underdog! I agree and fully support the cause!

  • SHES A FU@KIN BITCH

  • It wasn't even an amazing photo.

  • You're right!

  • isnt all this hubbub just giving her more of what she wants? ATTENTION!

  • Wow--I just watched "Here Comes Another Bubble": not only was it well produced, it was an insightful set o' lyrics well performed by some top-class singers. That photographer hack should have gotten the hint and viewed her credits along side this video as maybe her first in on a respectable segment of her industry for the first time in her measly career.

  • DON'T BE SUCH A GREEDY GUS

  • would you chill please???

  • She should be happy that someone liked her work enough to use them..my kids take better pictures with their cell phones...she sucks as a photographer

  • you're missing the meaning of the expression "double standard".

  • Make a video about rants on 2 girls 1 cup!!!!!

  • It's too bad lane hartwell is a pretty bad photographer. Lane should be happy for any kind of exposure she could get because the pictures just really aren't that impressive. Sigh, annoying photographers give us good ones a bad name. Dammit nalts! You're making us looking bad, hahaha. Anyway. Good video.

  • yeah, i'm sure your polaroid work is amazing.

  • I wish youtube could do something to make it okay to use materials (music, photos, etc.) like this with the stipulation that it be kept in it's original form, is not done to make a profit, and that the materials are not used in a negative way towards the original artist. I do agree that my hope is that these original artists see it as free publicity from fans!

    If anyone can help make this change, you stirring up the conversation again might help it! :D

  • I like toast :)

  • Oh okay,.. okay,.. now I getting where you're coming from!,.. agree!,.. Livewire- :P

  • Rofl!!!  Genious marketing!

  • PART II

    That is the law. Fair Use is a defense to limit exposure for media being sued by business. IN this case there is a small media outlet and a small business at odds.

    Lane Hartwell has done us a favor by making the application of the law clear to individual media creators. You've been advised of the possibilities.

    Fight the law if you wish but understand the consequences. You'll probably need a lawyer if they have deep pockets.

  • She has the right to do what she did.

    The Richter Scales have the right to use Fair Use as a defense. But the resolution ends up in court. Most lawyers would advise she let the issue go because the financial damage is slight.

    The lesson for creatives is to use openly licensed images, or ask permission first or forge ahead with the option of the DMCA and needing legal assistance if the injured party seeks damages or compensation.

  • Thanks for letting us know about this, Nalts. Lane is just being petty. I read her statement and she actually is planning on sending an invoice to the group for the use of her photograph! Since they didn't make any money, I wonder how much the invoice will be for. Petty, petty, petty. Some of the other photographers were just fine with it, actually flattered.

  • and yet at least 4 other photographers whose work was used were not fine with it (see ramona rosales, who echoes hartwell's sentiments).

    the band didn't make any money argument is ridiculous as well. these are guys who work for pixar, apple, and other tech giants. one of the band members recently just received a multi-million dollar deal for his company.

    you're ignorant if you believe these are starving musicians. they were just plain lazy and knew they were doing the wrong thing.

  • As far as I know, posting the picture didn't lead to any of those deals.

    The money argument is indeed valid. We're not talking about how well off the band is, we're talking about whether posting the video led to any money.

  • Thanks for clarifying the money issue. It doesn't matter if they're wealthy.  They didn't make money because of Lane Hartwell!

  • I have always felt that YouTube users should be able to use music(and pictures) as long as there is no profit being made from the use of the material. I believe that YouTube users could actually revive the careers of many long forgotten musicians. I mean, how many teenagers will ever hear "Purple Rain" by Prince or "Mannish Boy" by Muddy Waters on their own? Is there even one teenager out there who knows who David Bowie is?

  • Thats pretty funny. How much did she expect from that fat you tube check these non partners were getting off of the video?

  • Kill the sideburns!

    MY GAWD YOU ARE 40!!! NOT THE LOOK FOR YOU!

  • The Streisand Effect strikes again!

  • "But i know better,

    becuase i'll get SPANKED!"

  • What really galls me is that Hartwell shoots for Wired. EIC Chris Anderson is a very smart guy, and a strong advocate of free culture. He should just fire Hartwell outright. A prestigious publication like Wired should have nothing to do with a greedy ignoramus like Hartwell.

  • Pixar,Google,Paypal &Apple should fire the Richters they employ for attention whoring & intent to harm.

    Taking others copyrighted images and slapping them together into some cheesy self promotional video seems awful greedy to me. Especially greedy & laughable, considering the band's stance as starving musicians who can't sell albums. Poor poor guys. Individually, it's likely they each make more money in a month than Hartwell makes in a year.

    But they don't sell any albums :~(  boo hoo.

  • Viral video vigilantism! :)

  • OK, step back, bigger picture: this is only worth discussing because becoming comfortable with this sort of give-and-take (and not friggin' SUING cuz you can) helps create a supportive, symbiotic environment for YouTubiots to cross-reference each other into an entirely new and exciting Frontier of Creativity!

    Gawd, wait! I gotta stop to masturbate!

  • First: no, you can't cure a lisp, but we fans find it endearing, so... get over it.

    Two: yes yes YES, she's got the right, that's not the question. It's her toy, she has the right to scream and cry if it's "used". The point is, she suffered no harm; in fact, she was, if anything, complimented and publicized. To choose to "sue" just cuz you can... it's a cold, Hillary-esque reaction.

  • fact 1) hillary is downright sexy. beneath that crinkled exterior lies a heart of gold...and a nice set of chesticles.

    fact 2) no one has been sued. nobody. nadie.

  • can you cure a lisp?

  • I don't think its fair everyone is getting down on her. She was more than likely offended that the picture was used without her permission and didn't want them to get away with doing that. I don't see how it can be public domain when she owns the picture. It was on the internet to display it, not to have it used without permission. Its extreme what she's doing, but we don't know exactly what happened between her and the band. Its all hearsay.

  • Perhapth you're an idiot Thelleck Thtache.

    Anyway. Nice vid Nalts. Whiners like her and SelleckStache are more annoying than mailed fruitcake.

    -merc

  • I can assure you, this mongoloid knows about as much about the richter scales issue as you know about comedy (mailed fruitcake?).

    Trust me, I'm funnier than you. And a better dancer.

  • Gotcha, so because he has a speech impediment that must mean he's an idiot! Brilliant, you sir are a scholar and gentlemen, I suggest that you go submit your findings to the Nobel Foundation immediately, then shoot yourself in the head, thus removing you from the gene pool.

  • no, his idiocy shines like a windshield that has been freshly squeegeed by a homeless person at a gas station.

    the lisp just gives us another reason to laugh at him. he also looks like he may be adopted.

  • haha we just bourght a dog and at the start of your video i thought that it was the dog no offense.

  • I'd offer Lane Hartwell 10 cents...and that's just so she'll stop trying to take photographs.

  • molding national geographics, nice analogy..happy holidays to you and yours.

  • Hey nalts i got a great prank u and spencer could do. let me know if u want to hear it

  • i hate it when you watch a video, and the name changes! and you click it again thinking its a different video and it turns out to be this..... still 5* why change the name 3 times?

  • If they sold DVD's using this image then yeah, I think there's a problem. It's not really the amount of money made off the image, just the fact that money was made.

  • What if you take a copyrighted photograph and alter it using GIMP or Photoshop? If you manipulate it enough, then it will hardly look like the original. Many copyrighted pictures are of public places or of celebrities... how much manipulation would it take of one of those images to avoid copyright infringement?

  • You wouldn't be ablt to avoid copyright infringement even by altering. Just take your own photos and you won't have a problem. Some photographers actually digimarc them so no one else can use them (embed a code into the photo that proves they own them).

  • *dashes off to violate international copyright laws*

  • Lol

  • Mr. Nalts you are a fool. To educate yourself on this topic just a little would have taken half the time of making this vid. Not as much fun, I'm sure, but still. You are simply wrong about this.

  • I'm disappointed Nalts. It's great that you are all for the little guy but what you told everyone to do...

  • ja, sometimes Kevin takes my breath away, too. But holy hell, Lane Hartwell will soon be a household name and have Nalts and his minions to thank!

    (Lane who? I mean honestly, had YOU ever heard of her?)

  • It's still wrong to bully people, even if she started it.

  • Lane who? If I don't know her she has no reason to behave eccentricly. LOL If you put yourself out there you have to deal w/the consequences, both sides.. but you're right, she's behaving pety & immature.

  • QUOTE FROM THE BE-UTCH!

    I have to say that I'm very disappointed with the members of the band I negotiated with in good faith. .

    I will be sending the band an invoice for their use of my image in the first version of the video. I hope they pay it as I'll use the money to pay my lawyer.

    Sincerely,

    Lane Hartwell

  • I feel for them. I listed an auction on eBay and it was pulled because another seller whined that I was using their auction description. I'm guessing they got theirs from the same website I found mine. The other seller didn't seem to mind that he was using copyrited photos in his listings though.

  • I will share a beer with you

    Not iTS all mine

    Ice cold too

    NIIIIIIIIIIIIICE

  • You know, those noises you made at the beginning of this video were really sexy. If you're a sheep.

  • she's not suing, but she did send them an invoice for compensation. :-\

  • bah humbug

  • Have you seen this one, nalts?

    watch?v=zWeN8Cy-gNg

    it doesn't have the pics, but the song is perfect.

  • Kevin, you've kicked ass and taken a few names with this video. The person in question is out of THEIR MIND!!

  • why did you change the name of you video?

  • yeah, it 'tricked' me into watching it again. not that i mind, but i was hopeful for a new one ;)

  • meaningless vengeful suing is a national American disease

  • It`s ridiculous! Sillyness! It`s just youtube for Pete`s sake. I really like the phrase "whining profusely", I have only ever heard "profusely" in reference to bleeding. Whining profusely. I like it.

  • this is why im cranky

  • i think you all should cheak out my vids some are really funny

  • I remember seeing that video last week sometime. Maybe Lane would have given them permission to use the images had they asked first, although sometimes it's easier to ask for forgiveness rather than permission.

  • nalts u were in my dream.. we were makin a utube video in the supermarket, lol and ur wife was chasing all ur kids around, lol

    merry christmas nalts!

  • your sick...

  • Can someone mail me a sock. I've made so many videos with sock puppets using other screen names I've run out.

  • What are you talking about? I killed my mother to get my Dad's box of molding NG mags. That's justifiable homicide.

  • ohh..... they must have dated back to the droopy-titted savages era.... those were some hot photos, in their day.

  • If you were an artist/photographer/etc, you would not think this is "whining". Don't use other people's work. Do your own and you won't have any problems.

  • Did you get a haircut?!

  • I agree, whining gets old!

    Joanie

  • Mikma should be here!

  • From a CNet interview, where she talks about sending an invoice: I can tell you that I used a professional computer program called Fotoquote and calculated the invoice based on usage, the market where the photograph is to be used and various other factors, which are the typical parameters photographers use when pricing an image. From me: Beeautch

  • i'm going to invent a new shade of green and copyright it. if i ever see that shade of green used anywhere at any time, i will sue. even grass and plants don't have the right to use my shade of green. frogs, maybe.

  • I absolutely agree Nalts. I do respect copyright. That being said I believe if you use a picture or a few minutes of music and give credit to the artist AND are making no money whatsoever who does it hurt? If anything the artist gets some exposure and more people see/hear their work.

  • Suppose, for example, you create an original piece of music, and someone uses it (without your permission) in a video that bashes a specific religion... Or suppose you take an original copyrighted photo, and someone else uses it (without your permission) in a video that speaks out against a particular race...

    You're absolutely right. As long as they credit you, then who does it hurt?

    Me? I'd want a law in place that would let me protect my work, just in case. But that's just me.

  • lol you see under her latest pic

    '© All Rights Reserved No Usage Allowed in Any Form Without the Written Consent of Lane Hartwell'

  • I totally agree. Giving credit where credit is due is crucial but if no money was made, the creator of the content should just be satisfied with the exposure.

  • In the beginning, you sounded like a goat.

  • You're dead on, Nalts.

    -End of debate.

  • you own nalts

  • I agree with you.

    I've always supported copyright and the right to be always credited and paid where appropriate, but it should be easier to be allowed to use things.

  • And to those saying "try being a starving artist yourself", well I know a lot of them, and if it weren't for the fact that my husband has a 9-5, I would be one. We are more than happy to let people use things whether they ask us or not as long as they give us credit, and assuming that they aren't making money on it without giving any to us.

  • Cool,I was in this video!

  • But you can see you gave me GERD, right?

  • OOOOOOO Nalts.. you are sooooo bad :D

  • Are you hinting something here...(:-}

  • I'm going to have to investigate this further, but it sounds like the a capella is making amends.

    However, it IS a courtesy to contact a photographer first, before using their images, therefore giving them options to ask what they are being used for and to be able to say yay or nay. I've been asked on occasion to use my images and really appreciate that.

    Still, I understand your point.

  • It's courtesy- there's no getting around that. It's just so darned hard to do when you're doing a collage like this.

  • I'm sure it is...and I'm sure there's a difference between using a very small time artist's original work found on a venue like flickr, and something that's already been seen by millions in a public/professional framework.

    Me...I'm easy to get a hold of :)

    It gets a little murky, but going all litigious especially with someone just trying to break through kind of sucks. Seems to me there could be better ways to work such things out.

  • Then they should either contact the photographer or get an account at a stock photo site... or you know, take the pics themselves.

    Copyright infringement is my biggest pet peeve. There is no excuse for it. It's stealing.

  • did you rename this video?

  • yeah..he renamed it..not sure why..nalts?

  • Can't seem to decide on the right name.

  • I keep changing my mind about the name of it.

  • ah.

  • Geesh. If they went to great lengths to give credit to all of the photographers, why should it even matter? Obviously the a capella group understood that citing is important, it's not as if they deliberatly used the photographer's work.

    Rawr.

  • Nice...

  • naughty naughty NALTS!!

    ur inciting a RIOT!!

    catcha later,

    XEM

  • lol trouble maker..

  • Try being a starving artist.

  • I'm sure it's not easy. Ask the a capella group that now has to hire an attorney and has no revenue.

  • I tried it for a while then I latched onto a wealthy man who keeps me safe and warm and HAPPY. So happy in fact I have no inspiration to be creative any more. It works for me. Love to you and your family :O)Dorothyolive

  • Interesting- so happy you have no inspiration to be creative. Help me understand that.

  • I suppose my creativity was inspired by misery.

    Go figure... I was a starving artist Hmmmm

  • you should go for world domination nalts...you have the ability to rally together your fans in a very timely matter... O.O

  • Hey I want those National Geographic magazines back, or Im suing :)

  • hehehe oh nalts you rock

  • nice

    but there seems to be a missing link in the "About This Video" section

  • What a buch of cry babies! Plagerism is The new robosexx urineon unicycle dance...Everyones doin it, yayayayaya!!!!!

  • most people will sue because controversial publicity is better than good word of mouth publicity. usually when someone makes it a point so that all of a specific group of people(or america in americans case) only know about it because its controversial, than they are more likely to get recongized than through the traditional word of mouth and advertising. thats my opinion. you can get a lot more people talking about you or your products that way

  • If you google her name, ask yourself if you'd hire her after seeing the results.

  • ha well i wasn't implying that i would hire her( or i didn't mean to imply that) i just think thats how a lot of businesses are looking at advertisement these days. controversy will make it on the news before good deads do. kinda like the cliche, "good guys win last"

  • people will sue whenever there is even a hint of free money.

  • And even after they took her image out she's STILL suing them because she says they owe her money for using it the first time!

  • Only in America!

  • you should start a fight club

  • I feel like I'm sticking up for the little guy here. I don't like people who antogonize creators. And check techcrunch for a POV on Hartwell's legal case.

  • Wow i Just watched it ...........Its kinda cool

  • A little scotch in that coffeee might help the grumpies.

  • mhmmm you are a smart man nalts!

  • On her flickr account, there's an image of the video when it only had about 230,000 views.

    Here is the comment I left:

    I find it interesting that you are upset about them using -part- of a picture you took without them asking permission, yet in this picture that you've posted on your own account in flckr, it has -part- of the lyrics for their song, as well as the -entire- modified picture that was used in the video.

    Did you ask their permission to post that?

  • okay (-=

  • i like this side of you Nalts

  • hey kevin,,,someone left this comment on my video that i put up as a response to this video,,,,""""Why do you watch his movies if you're gonna just make fun of them?""""",,,kevin, i know you dont think im making fun of you or your video,,,,as i get older, i dont want to be responsible for others hardships,,if someone gets booted from yt for a TOS violation, youre gonna feel really bad,,,all the best to you ,,,,rodney

  • I'll add a disclaimer.

  • o0o0 grr like the grr he he it was soooo funny i amost spit egg nog out mi nose .

  • hmmm, it does seem a bit silly....

  • Copywrite laws were broken. Stop whinning.

  • it's "copyright", not "copywrite".

  • Abuse of laws is as bad as breaking them, mr. worse speller than me.

  • g0at - you have been so grumpy lately - i hope you are OK-maybe its just the holidays

  • i liked the three noises in the beginning...good cause

  • hahhahahah

  • Pet Peeve....Lane's blog. God, I HATE small white type on a black background. It hurts my eyes. The only thing that could make it worse would be red type.

  • Preach it, Nalts. I read in the mid-1990's an article (in TIME, perhaps?) about how this nation had become a nation of whiner's and finger-pointers... that was at least 10 years ago... sad to see it has gotten worse.

  • dude you are so right! ppl these days will argue over the dumbest things! it really is free advertising! some ppl just dnt kno when to suck it up and go on w/ life! Keep it up dude you may just change the world!

  • Ok, I checked all of it out, including all the response vids...I gotta say, I agree with you, Kev, Lane is just full of herself! Her photos are crap! She needs to get over it! BTW, You are beautiful when you are angry! Merry Christmas, Kevmeister!

  • cheer up mr nalts

  • ps)you look funny as oprah!

  • it would apper that I have made a naughty! oops :/

    i said nalty earlier insted of naughty! i laughed my butt off ;)

  • Oh, and Merry Xmas~! Dragon Bogies!