The People at Fox are a bunch of retards i got a Video removed and a strike against my account for putting up a video of the American dad theme Song. While i am not making any money off their work. And yet there are more videos up of the same exact thing and length and a lot more views and yet my video gets taken down.
An accusation of copyright infringement (or ANY accusation, civil or criminal) is under no obligation to consider what defenses the defendant might use. Some defendants choose not to use defenses available to them, for instance, opting for other means.
The burden of putting forth positive defense is ALWAYS on the defendant. Changing that would change part of the basic presumption of our legal system, in that plaintiffs (or prosecutors) would be obligated to defend defendants.
First of all I have a lot of respect for you. You take the initiative and have the guts to make these videos and you end up not coming off really biased you're just pointing out idiots at Fox News. Second of all I am liberal, so it sucked in speech and debate once when i had to do a tag debate going against Obama and his policies. Luckily my opponents had no relevant information, and if they had any information it was incorrect. Wow Longest Comment I have ever written. Off topic Sorry bout that.
I could not imagine the lawyers at Fox wanting to proceed with their copyright infringement claim. It's very clearly fair use, and it would be a waste of their resources, and the energies of any court.
The latter part of that, the fact that it's a waste of energy to have to try, or even defend against, does lend some weight to the idea that there should be some sort of cost incurred for making the claim. Particularly in the event that it is a frivolous claim, which this seems to be.
I think there should be no penalty for "casting a wide net" of accusation as long as long as messages do not cause damages (i.e. through falsified legalese or essentially automated slander). Penalties should be avoided because patents are meant to protect and encourage innovation. The PTO is already backed up and attaining patents is often cost-prohibitive for innovators. Penalties should only be instated for gross negligence that causes damages, and fines channeled to funding/improving the PTO.
If youtube would be fined for false takedowns, the videos would never come back online. But i agree that for example a dmca from a news agency smells of censorship. Specially if they take it down because it attacks them and the bad news they make. The big media should be fined for false dmca. They are just sending them by the millions, lawsuits and wars over a few seconds of material. I have never really hated anything in my life, but since this all started i hate copyright and big media now.
The Music Publishing Rights Collecting Society has claimed copyright to music that I myself composed and performed. Does this mean they are cashing in on my work without my consent or knowledge?
@attovishnu Yes, and it also means that if you let's say post a video of your own music here that they have claimed copyright on it will be taken down, so you are probably not even allowed to post your own music
i think that a false acusation should be treated severly heavy fines aka 50%of companies anual wage per claim then they will only acuse when its realy infringment
Really? Discussing your ability to use a MacDonald's commercial in a satirization is boring? It's kinda cute and it definitely displays creativity and a message however earnest or humorous that message is intended.
If YT removed everything that used other work for commentary or criticism, there wouldn't be much worth matching left.
As a person with a creative investment, you might want to get unbored with a subject that affects you directly.
Funny how they (big companies) prosecute people who violate their copyrights or pirate their IP to the full extent that they are able, but incur little to no repercussions for doing the same (false/poorly thought-out DMCA take-downs) to individual users.
It's even worse than you describe--YouTube itself encourages this by not even doing the basest level of investigation of claims. For example, you can get a takedown notice for a single low resolution frame, something not even Wikipedia will freak out over. There's a reason why people who use fairuse often seem to gravitate towards using BlipTV as their main location, even if they retain videos here.
I got a copyright notice and had a video removed today. All it was was a clip from Family guy that I thought was really funny and wanted to share the joy. There's a bunch of audio versions of it and one bad quality where someone filmed their screen so I felt like stepping up for the masses. :) I think FOX should thank me for the free advertising?
I hate FOX I got such a notice from them today. I hate the rich. Nothing in there ownership is through hard work but instead through theft. The Rich make war on the Earth...
Ok.... if a human being cannot distinguish a cartoon from a news video we are screwed.... where are the parents of the children guilding and teaching the child in what is right and wrong.... lazy parents hoping the government will raise the kids for them are the most at fault here.... and yes i think it should cost 100 million dollars to file an accusation.... maybe that will in turn make the company take a step back and anazlyze the situation....
@TheProudAmerican777 Your a conservative and you DIDN'T melt from watching LiberalViewer? Are you American, or a conservative from a liberal country like Canada (I live there) Where even the conservitives are liberal compaired to tha US?
They should make a rule of falsely filing a DMCA. The rule would be that they get fined a certain amount of money. Filing a DMCA is serious and the person filing it really needs to know that it is in the wrong.
@TearsOfWar1: There *is* a "punishment" provision for filing DMCA takedown notices both frivolously and in bad faith. It's in the 500's of the DMCA itself. Sections 502 through 512 cover most of this.
Point A. The DMCA should include a fine for Failing to check that the video IS fair use worthy (i.e., the one in question.)
Point B. The DMCA should include a stipulation that places like Youtube must double check that it isn't Fair Use material, or be subject to the same fine they face if they fail to remove stuff that actually is a copyright violation.
Some levels the DMCA is one of the worst Copyright regulations ever written.
(Keep fighting those DMCA when your in the Right LiberalViewer!)
YES! There should be harsh penalties for filing DMCAs that are shown to be indefensible for relatively obvious reasons (i.e. fair use, being completely bogus claims, etc).
Maybe THAT will stop it's use as a hammer against free speech. -_-'
Just send them a bill of your work hours about your time with this issue and phone the secretary who gave you the mail, that you don't want to be bothered anymore. If that doesn't help, find their home adresses and send them a letter, saying: leave me alone.
Straight from the constitution - "America The government may not curtail the speech of companies only individuals, especially individuals of little financial means." to clarify, if a billion dollar co. sues you you won't be able to defend yourself so you lose. If Fox uses your material (all networks steal material everyday) and you need to be rich to sue them. for true parity you would have to fine based on the losers wealth - so if fox paid 100 milliion a violation you would pay 7.32 cents.
Might want to note when you refer to fox news ratings, that their key demos are the elderly who don't know how to change the channel and take comfort in the hate speech, and the uneducated who could care less about the news and just want to pretend how they feel is how all the world feels.
I mean, fox pointed it out themselves, they are worried their viewers can't differentiate between their fake news program, and a fake news cartoon. That's powerful stupid.
So you're calling Fox out for finally doing what CNN, MSNBC, NBC, CBS, ABC, and Headline News did a long time ago?
Sheesh. You Fox haters are delusional. When are you guys going to realize that your pathetic smears aren't working? Have you seen the ratings? People aren't stupid. They know real news when they see it. BTW since 1/3 of Fox's viewers are dems, that means Fox's democratic viewership alone is more than MSNBC's total viewership.
Are you trying to make the argument that "because everyone else does it, it's okay"?
Personally, any time that I watch Fox news, it's for the entertainment value. Like the Colbert Report or the Daily Show. It's much easier on the brain to imagine that the people on Fox are just engaging in satire than it is to be fully aware of how ridiculously slanted and biased they are.
Btw, regarding your "People aren't stupid" comment, after the reelection of W, you couldn't prove it by me.
Of course I do. Glenn Beck is hilarious (even better than O'Reilly).
Conservative on gun control and abortion, liberal on gay marriage, conservative on taxes and most gov't expansion, liberal on healthcare reform.
That's me, right there. I'd never begrudge a person their right to make an idiot of themselves with unfounded assumptions, but I always reserve the right to correct such assumptions as best I can.
do you actuallyhave a life. or do you sit in a little room by yourself with tin foil over the windows. with a tin foil antenna hat. scanning the internet.
i think anytime anything that revolves around education & awareness of something that doesn't make money in the usa is considered an attack on the powerful like people in the usa aren't tired of rich,spoiled,dumb heirs telling people what to do and what to say and what not to say i think fox news doesn't like being outsmarted and are taking like sore losers!
There could be a requirement of an escrowed amount of money that the DMCA claimant is willing to risk if his claim is shown to be abusive. Additionally, there should be a more automated way of detecting and removing users who have flagrantly misused the DMCA process, no matter who the claimant is. So if Fox removes a bunch of videos with 'Fox News' or Simpsons in the title, even if it contains none of their footage, they'd lose THEIR channel.
So, Fox News is pretty much admitting that their pundits are two-dimensional, cartoonish parodies of actual news people, which is why they are afraid their readers can't tell the difference.
Its mess like this from the right wing nut cases that has slowly brainwashed many ppl into believing they have no clue or sense of common sense- WTF ppl cant tell the diff. between the Simpson's spoof vs the real Fox news WHAT THE FU*K
Just another right wing nut tactic to further distract ppl from how the GOP always has been
@TheAfroQween: Even the Fox viewing audience can tell the difference. It's the opinion of the Fox News leadership that feels people are that shallow. Look at Rupert Murdochs opinion of people. Fox News ir GOP/Right Wing because that's what Rupert Murdoch is. They're media whorse and would happily hire and feature any yellow dog journalists from any political party, or note at all, if it results in market share and pulls in advertisers.
Ooh, "fox police" Hannity and Beck come to house with billy clubs.
I actually took that from Keith Olbermann's thing on the video "watch?v=_bz4QWn6JAY" but I had to change it from Hannity and Colmbs to Hannity and Beck because Alan Colbms is no longer on FOX News.
there should be something like a deposit system for filing DMCA that is small for single events but would get costly on wide spread automated ones. Also a heavy "Fair Use" violation fine, those who would use the DMCA process as a venue for censorship.
DMCA's needs a buffer to make it harder for any individual to just randomly file one, yet at the same time deserve the purpose of the DMCA.
straygypsy : All countries of this continent made a common citizenship ? didn't noticed that :p
brocks13 : As a citizen of Belgium (french part), I am laughing loud listenning to you.. There is not many media television more partial then French television.. (except Belgium's) but as most the people of our countries, you seems to be completely blind. No offense.
As a citizen of France I find it incredibly hilarious that such a blatantly bias station filled with one- minded pundits is able to stay on the air. In my country Fox would be dethroned in a day due to its insurmountable bias and fact distortion.
Ur absolutely right. I live in Germany and I can tell u that if people like rush limbaugh were to have a show over here, they'd probably already be on trial as demagogues! Apart from that, no one in Germany, France, or anywhere in western europe (except mayb Britain) would ever watch/listen to it!
great analysis. I saw that video when you uploaded it, and there should be no doubt about the legitimacy of its content. If that video is actually removed, I'd have some very serious concerns about whether net neutrality exists even now.
Making it more costly for inaccurate copyright infringement. Wouldn't that be like making it more costly for people who file frivolous lawsuits? Such as the woman who stubbed her toe suing the bank it happened at, or the family that sued 32 entities, and didn't pursue legal action against the killer?
Threats (like this threat to sue) is the first refuge of people caught out. FOX wanted to see if they could make you run and hide. (They also want to delay people seeing your video by conning UT into removing it for a time.) They might sue, if they don't think you can handle it. It's a harassment tactic. After all, they have the funds to spend, you probably don't. Call the law school at Yale and see if they want to get involved. Then try the ACLU.
If that is their argument, can't you just write a program to identify every post everywhere that uses the word liberal and viewer in any combination warrants a DMCA? Can we all do that? How many requests of that nature would they need to get before THEY decided they needed to change their own rules.
Well, as much as you punch Fox in the face (not that they''re your only target--they're just such a big one lol) I'm surprised that they haven't tried to stop you more often...
Terrific ! Healthcare is nearly through, economies holding waiting for the next wave of Republican caused bank collapses. You know that it hits next summer right ? That's right , these loans dont trigger till then.
Mostly I would agree with you in that fair use is inherently a good thing if the material is used reasonably, and for the benefit of the public. It is unikely that Fox will sue, although I imagine they would exercise their capacity to remove the video in question.
I think given the nature of the whole "wide net"/ "cost effective" strategy they seem to employ, the only way to hit them is at the bottom line. So, fines or fees is totally the right way to go. Maybe even rulings that require retractions and/or apologies to the parties involved, so it forces them to look at it from a corporate image or public relations angle.
And I think you've been batting a thousand so far, so I have faith that you'll come out o.k. regardless of if there is a suit or not.
I don't understand. I thought it was a federal offense to file a false DMCA? You have something great going for you--you're a lawyer, you can write and submit your own briefs. In many ways, I see you as a free-speech activist. Despite their money and power, if they're wrong, they're wrong. You did copy-infringe at all. I think any judge could see that. Perhaps, Fox itself needs to be sued for these false DMCA's, to make it so costly they won't file them anymore. Balance is needed!
I was reading some of the PM's you have on your website. You are a patient soul. How you and Pap keep spending time explaining things to wingnuts that just don't have clue and don't want to, absolutely amazes me.
.
Your explanations are clear and his are evasive or deflective. Nice work!
Is FOX Noise like having the FOX watch over the hen house where they attack and eat the poor hens that are the livelihood of the farmer who is stimulating the local economy forcing the local farmer out of business so a foreigner from Australian can import cheap labor eggs and the money goes out of the local economy to Australian?.
Oh baloney, HTWW is a loser, like Coulters a loser. Not one of his facts were true and no delivery, no matter how emphatic makes bullshit into truth. Sorry, he's a clown.
Arrest Rupert Murdoch, waterboard him till he confesses to anything, who cares what , it would take 5 minutes to break him. Shut down Fox and arrest everyone there as co conspirators, send them to Gitmo, especially Malkin , she is a must. Not at all, I think under waterboarding we can pretty much get Rupert to confessing he flew the planes into the WTC.
It's never going to happen and you want to know why? Because there are more people out there that want some truth in their reporting then you are willing to admit or accept. The proof is in the ratings of both Fox and all the other networks. If the majority of people didn't prefer Fox they wouldn't be doing as well as they are.
@darliegoddess, I never thought about it that way, but it must be why I watch the lame stream media from time to time. Show me a person under the age of 30 who is a conservative and I will show you a person with no heart, show me a person over the age of 50 who is not a conservative and I will show you a person with no brain.
I'm a conservative, Fox is not conservative. They are extremist Christian Terrorists devoted to corporate welfare, a presidential dictatorship, the torture and murder of all non Christians . Murdoch needs to be arrested, tried and hung for crimes against humanity in the intended promotion of lies to commit an illegal war.
She me a conservative and I guarantee they are not a Fox viewer.
liberals and obama supporters are enemies to the constitution, that is the closest thing to political affiliation i claim, the constitution. but the people who consider themselves liberals, are just plain idiotic whack jobs. liberalism is socialism, and socilism is a disease to freedom, and i plan to take care of that disease. but yes liberals are sheeps, thats why they want to be told what to do and have GOV give everything to them so they dont have to think
the only way to stop the big guys from intimidating the little guys is to penalize them.. and make the penalties much much more severe. Penalties need to severely cripple the company, just as lawyer fees severely cripple any average american.
I dont understand why companies fight for less exposure. The reason google is the titan they are today is because of their "dont be evil" motto. Customer satisfaction came before profits... and turns out that business model actually works
what rival companies have they pushed out of the market? Google tends to take on the juggernauts and their monopolies like microsoft.
Google often pushes net neutrality and open source. Their acceptance by the general internet community is exactly what made them the business they are today. I have used many google services, from google, to youtube, to gmail, to google maps, to google chrome... and they have never once fired a pop ad, or banner ad my way, nor tried to charge me a dime.
meh i should say they have been doing youtube advertising, but that was to prevent all the copyright lawsuits they were getting and trying to encourage said companies to use advertising rather than pull their content... it was not out of greed.
Look. OK. Google is nothing short of a ad. company with a search engine. You want examples of companies they squeezed out of the market;
Yahoo, Excite, Altavista, Lycos, Dogpile, Infoseek, MetaCrawler, and All The Web.
The old top players had an even split. But since Google monetized search results (charging for top status) it's become super rich. This capital allows it to predatorily give valuable products for FREE to remove it's competitors from the market. It's simple really!
first of all those companies were all the big guys on the block when google entered the market. If i remember correctly google tried to sell their company to alta vista originally, but they werent interested.
And google refused to give top search results to big spenders... thats why they created a separate "featured results" category. Because they needed a revenue model to entice investors... but they didnt want to do banner ads or compromise their search results for profit.
the reason google beat them all, is because they delivered superior search results... and they even tried to sell their more accurate search engine to all the big guys you just named back in the day when they were a small startup.
But none of those search engines wanted to buy them... because they viewed google as a puny competitor with nothing to offer.
It's like British Airways in the 1980's. They fly in the ointment was a company called Laker airways. Laker started running Atlantic flights for 1/2 that of BA.
So BA cut their prices to compete, to the point where every flight ran at a loss. Safe in the knowledge that their pockets ran deeper than Laker. Result, Laker goes out of business.
However, UK law strictly prohibits predatory pricing. Laker sued BA (and other carriers) for $50m and won. BA later had to pay a further £8m.
I dont have a clue what you are talking about... we are talking about the dawn of the internet when 1 smart computer programmer could create the greatest product on the market.
That start of the internet? What?! Have you any idea what you're talking about? Seriously.
The "internet" has been around since the 60's. It was made commercial available in 1988. Google started in 1998 and only got really going from later 1999 onwards.
And it was TWO smart computer programmers at Google. Larry Page and Sergey Brin. Larry started the research, but without Brin, it would have died at death.
OMG you've not idea what you're talking about. Bye then.
you misspelled a word in your other post, so i think that invalidates you first.
Is this the current standard we hold people to? first of all i stated a principle that at the dawn of the internet, a single programmer could have the most advanced product. I never even said google. I was stating the setting.
It also doesnt take much intellect to know i meant the start of the commercial internet boom. I remember chatting on university mainframes. There were no companies back then.
I apologise, I assumed as it was the subject of our conversation that you meant Google. To be honest, I wasn't really giving it my full attention.
As for "you misspelled a word in your other post, so i think that invalidates you first." - that's just childish. Don't.
"I remember chatting on university mainframes" - Me too, in 1986-89 at Portsmouth, then 90-92 at UAE. Then I did a stint working at Nottingham Trent... got bored. Started own company.
cant stop waving genitals, these bad girls just got a rhythm down.
I dont even know if you mispelled something, i just know everyone does... and i felt it was up to snuff with your method of invalidating my argument, so i rolled with it.
As someone who has been online so long you should know google took a rapidly different approach to business than most companies. And google WAS the little guy back when all those search engines were around.
Well, Google had a better revenue model that allowed greater investment capitalisation. In 2006 they made $10 billion alone.
Yahoo, Excite etc had terrible capital models. They relied on regular capital investor injection and banner advertising in order to maintain a profile. The numbers just didn't add up.
It also helped that Google was marketed so brilliantly, turning itself into a verb.
"cant stop waving genitals, these bad girls just got a rhythm down." - ha!
It's just a conversation. You have an opinion and I wanted to know what it was. For once, it didn't get down to trading personal insults! A relief, I can tell you.
Nobody is really right or wrong.
Unlike some (not you - clearly) I don't consider YouTube as a stalking ground for a good argument.
Been nice chatting. Hope you feel less exhausted soon.
Anyway, my original point (a day ago now) was that Google portrays itself as being holier-than-thou, when the reality is that they don't shy away from aggressive business practice.
I mean they stole AdSense from Yahoo (had to settle out of court on that one).
They bought their rival DoubleClick for $3.1 billion.
They tried to do a deal with Yahoo. But antitrust (monopoly) rules kicked in.
I'm not saying I don't like Google. Just don't think they are fantastic as advertised :-)
Couldn't there be a way of requiring people to consider - and show evidence of consideration - fair use in relation to the material in question before filing? That would make more sense to me.
1) yes I believe there should be a law along with proper punishments against such broad netting of copyright infringement without justification.
2) There is a strong wind blowing in your favor, persistence and determination can win out against any corporation. Never give up and trust your instincts! (if you know what that is from you are truly awesome)
k so did you find those congressional districts yet?
ah i know maybe they're in one of those extra 7 states Obama visited during the campaign
and i could care less what HTWW says, same as fox news or LV or TYT or any other mouthpiece for whom ever it is they are propagating, look at facts and use commonsence ok more taxes on you and I, therefore you work the same amount make less money, your labor isnt worth much?
how do you feel about involuntary servitude? your working your way to it now
you should almost never believe what you see on tv. The same goes for the internet however. Millions of people stay at home everyday and become dumber by soaking up stuff on the internet. Anything that is done for entertainment purposes is likely to be misleading or tampered with. Example. NBA officials lol
Oh they should def increase the amount of difficulty it takes to file a claim/put up a penalty, make it cost more than the max possible profit your losing on the accused party and this bs about videos being taken down will disappear.
The People at Fox are a bunch of retards i got a Video removed and a strike against my account for putting up a video of the American dad theme Song. While i am not making any money off their work. And yet there are more videos up of the same exact thing and length and a lot more views and yet my video gets taken down.
eldest808 2 weeks ago
yep you going to prison have fun lool jokes
Hi675445 3 weeks ago
I really think the viewers of Faux 'news' isn't able to differientiate between cartoons and the real world.
BelieveNoGod 3 months ago
"Fox News" is an oxymoron
YoWhatUpMike 4 months ago
@YoWhatUpMike And all their commentators are frigging morons unlike rush an oxy addict and a frigging moron.
almostcapecod 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@YoWhatUpMike And all their commentators are frigging morons unlike rush an oxy addict and a frigging moron.
almostcapecod 4 months ago
your voice is annoying
gandhi1178 6 months ago
@gandhi1178 your comment is annoying
gamerguy322 6 months ago
An accusation of copyright infringement (or ANY accusation, civil or criminal) is under no obligation to consider what defenses the defendant might use. Some defendants choose not to use defenses available to them, for instance, opting for other means.
The burden of putting forth positive defense is ALWAYS on the defendant. Changing that would change part of the basic presumption of our legal system, in that plaintiffs (or prosecutors) would be obligated to defend defendants.
izaakb 6 months ago
First of all I have a lot of respect for you. You take the initiative and have the guts to make these videos and you end up not coming off really biased you're just pointing out idiots at Fox News. Second of all I am liberal, so it sucked in speech and debate once when i had to do a tag debate going against Obama and his policies. Luckily my opponents had no relevant information, and if they had any information it was incorrect. Wow Longest Comment I have ever written. Off topic Sorry bout that.
BardockHazar 6 months ago
I could not imagine the lawyers at Fox wanting to proceed with their copyright infringement claim. It's very clearly fair use, and it would be a waste of their resources, and the energies of any court.
The latter part of that, the fact that it's a waste of energy to have to try, or even defend against, does lend some weight to the idea that there should be some sort of cost incurred for making the claim. Particularly in the event that it is a frivolous claim, which this seems to be.
totallyunderpowered 7 months ago
no its fair use,. they already got paid for that episode and control pirated materials as it leaks,. so why go after a you-tuber?
Sindrake 7 months ago
I think there should be no penalty for "casting a wide net" of accusation as long as long as messages do not cause damages (i.e. through falsified legalese or essentially automated slander). Penalties should be avoided because patents are meant to protect and encourage innovation. The PTO is already backed up and attaining patents is often cost-prohibitive for innovators. Penalties should only be instated for gross negligence that causes damages, and fines channeled to funding/improving the PTO.
utdrich 7 months ago
keed doing this
KypHeM 9 months ago
If youtube would be fined for false takedowns, the videos would never come back online. But i agree that for example a dmca from a news agency smells of censorship. Specially if they take it down because it attacks them and the bad news they make. The big media should be fined for false dmca. They are just sending them by the millions, lawsuits and wars over a few seconds of material. I have never really hated anything in my life, but since this all started i hate copyright and big media now.
UnlistedAccount 9 months ago
The Music Publishing Rights Collecting Society has claimed copyright to music that I myself composed and performed. Does this mean they are cashing in on my work without my consent or knowledge?
attovishnu 1 year ago
@attovishnu Probably.
SamPD2 11 months ago
@attovishnu Yes, and it also means that if you let's say post a video of your own music here that they have claimed copyright on it will be taken down, so you are probably not even allowed to post your own music
crhistiania 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
You would like to cum surrounded by my sister benaughtyman.info
jayanianjani 1 year ago
@007superfan21 lol I know you were joking but I'm sure he didn't send the take-down notice personally.
bp56789 1 year ago
i think that a false acusation should be treated severly heavy fines aka 50%of companies anual wage per claim then they will only acuse when its realy infringment
TheAlexagius 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Naughty women need to be your wife mworld5.info
BobbiFreddiec 1 year ago
Sorry LV but there is very little that is more boring than people talking about fair use.
dragonsder 1 year ago
@dragonsder
Really? Discussing your ability to use a MacDonald's commercial in a satirization is boring? It's kinda cute and it definitely displays creativity and a message however earnest or humorous that message is intended.
If YT removed everything that used other work for commentary or criticism, there wouldn't be much worth matching left.
As a person with a creative investment, you might want to get unbored with a subject that affects you directly.
DeathofSpeech 1 year ago
@DeathofSpeech
sorry, I didn't realize how important this video was to you.
dragonsder 1 year ago
@dragonsder
You don't realize how much, what it represents means to you.
Well, unless your content with being told to sit down, shut up, and don't criticize.
DeathofSpeech 1 year ago
omg sooooo boring
berbobloo 1 year ago
Funny how they (big companies) prosecute people who violate their copyrights or pirate their IP to the full extent that they are able, but incur little to no repercussions for doing the same (false/poorly thought-out DMCA take-downs) to individual users.
HMMMMMMMMM
bonanzaguy04 1 year ago
Liberals should get the gas.
Stealthpaw1 1 year ago
It's even worse than you describe--YouTube itself encourages this by not even doing the basest level of investigation of claims. For example, you can get a takedown notice for a single low resolution frame, something not even Wikipedia will freak out over. There's a reason why people who use fairuse often seem to gravitate towards using BlipTV as their main location, even if they retain videos here.
trlkly 1 year ago
I got a copyright notice and had a video removed today. All it was was a clip from Family guy that I thought was really funny and wanted to share the joy. There's a bunch of audio versions of it and one bad quality where someone filmed their screen so I felt like stepping up for the masses. :) I think FOX should thank me for the free advertising?
Akabackalooka 1 year ago
I hate FOX I got such a notice from them today. I hate the rich. Nothing in there ownership is through hard work but instead through theft. The Rich make war on the Earth...
oc5nsli341nforce4 1 year ago
Ok.... if a human being cannot distinguish a cartoon from a news video we are screwed.... where are the parents of the children guilding and teaching the child in what is right and wrong.... lazy parents hoping the government will raise the kids for them are the most at fault here.... and yes i think it should cost 100 million dollars to file an accusation.... maybe that will in turn make the company take a step back and anazlyze the situation....
budi2b 1 year ago
I'm a conservative and speaking for the YouTube Poop Consituence, FUCK DMCA LAWS!
TheProudAmerican777 1 year ago
@TheProudAmerican777 Your a conservative and you DIDN'T melt from watching LiberalViewer? Are you American, or a conservative from a liberal country like Canada (I live there) Where even the conservitives are liberal compaired to tha US?
dave19941000 1 year ago
@dave19941000 I'm pure American, and proud of it :)
The Reason why I didn't melt the way you claim fellow conservatives is because I think that in general DMCA laws are being abused everywhere.
In short its a matter of Sprit of the Law Vs Letter of the Law :).
TheProudAmerican777 1 year ago
why do you ask questions when you never seem to respond to the answers
dsdougharty 1 year ago
They should make a rule of falsely filing a DMCA. The rule would be that they get fined a certain amount of money. Filing a DMCA is serious and the person filing it really needs to know that it is in the wrong.
TearsOfWar1 1 year ago
@TearsOfWar1: There *is* a "punishment" provision for filing DMCA takedown notices both frivolously and in bad faith. It's in the 500's of the DMCA itself. Sections 502 through 512 cover most of this.
RyuDarragh 1 year ago
Point A. The DMCA should include a fine for Failing to check that the video IS fair use worthy (i.e., the one in question.)
Point B. The DMCA should include a stipulation that places like Youtube must double check that it isn't Fair Use material, or be subject to the same fine they face if they fail to remove stuff that actually is a copyright violation.
Some levels the DMCA is one of the worst Copyright regulations ever written.
(Keep fighting those DMCA when your in the Right LiberalViewer!)
BurlingtonNorthernRy 1 year ago
How IRONIC, a lame, leftist gimp makes videos attacking the lame, right wing gimps. How original.
SwollenCranium 1 year ago
wow you got a got a DMAC from Pewee Herman LOL
henshinman 1 year ago 2
$10,000 frivolous lawsuit, and court cost
sjcpal 1 year ago
You should have a guest video by Cory Doctorow about this.
pesematology 1 year ago
I think that Fox assumes you will be so scared of them that you will just do what they say. Thank goodness you stand up to them!!!
samala5793 1 year ago
@samala5793: Oh, it gets better. They should be in fear of the MIRROR. No worthy video goes buried for long.
RyuDarragh 1 year ago
YES! There should be harsh penalties for filing DMCAs that are shown to be indefensible for relatively obvious reasons (i.e. fair use, being completely bogus claims, etc).
Maybe THAT will stop it's use as a hammer against free speech. -_-'
Tigranis 1 year ago 2
Just send them a bill of your work hours about your time with this issue and phone the secretary who gave you the mail, that you don't want to be bothered anymore. If that doesn't help, find their home adresses and send them a letter, saying: leave me alone.
elektron2kim 1 year ago
you sound like a robot. not your ideology, just your voice.
deadline27 1 year ago
Straight from the constitution - "America The government may not curtail the speech of companies only individuals, especially individuals of little financial means." to clarify, if a billion dollar co. sues you you won't be able to defend yourself so you lose. If Fox uses your material (all networks steal material everyday) and you need to be rich to sue them. for true parity you would have to fine based on the losers wealth - so if fox paid 100 milliion a violation you would pay 7.32 cents.
johnnyoh21 1 year ago
Might want to note when you refer to fox news ratings, that their key demos are the elderly who don't know how to change the channel and take comfort in the hate speech, and the uneducated who could care less about the news and just want to pretend how they feel is how all the world feels.
I mean, fox pointed it out themselves, they are worried their viewers can't differentiate between their fake news program, and a fake news cartoon. That's powerful stupid.
Darkfirebrand 1 year ago 5
2847 messages in your inbox??? What the fuck??? LMFAO
WCWMondayNitroOnYT 2 years ago
@WCWMondayNitroOnYT Now think about Fred's...
PersiaTeddy95 2 years ago
So you're calling Fox out for finally doing what CNN, MSNBC, NBC, CBS, ABC, and Headline News did a long time ago?
Sheesh. You Fox haters are delusional. When are you guys going to realize that your pathetic smears aren't working? Have you seen the ratings? People aren't stupid. They know real news when they see it. BTW since 1/3 of Fox's viewers are dems, that means Fox's democratic viewership alone is more than MSNBC's total viewership.
And a PPP poll shows most people trust Fox.
Eterna1Soldier 2 years ago
Are you trying to make the argument that "because everyone else does it, it's okay"?
Personally, any time that I watch Fox news, it's for the entertainment value. Like the Colbert Report or the Daily Show. It's much easier on the brain to imagine that the people on Fox are just engaging in satire than it is to be fully aware of how ridiculously slanted and biased they are.
Btw, regarding your "People aren't stupid" comment, after the reelection of W, you couldn't prove it by me.
Bloodninjapirate 1 year ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
"blah blah blah blah blah"
I heard it all before. You don't watch Fox. You are a zombie lib who will believe anyhting the left says.
Eterna1Soldier 1 year ago
Of course I do. Glenn Beck is hilarious (even better than O'Reilly).
Conservative on gun control and abortion, liberal on gay marriage, conservative on taxes and most gov't expansion, liberal on healthcare reform.
That's me, right there. I'd never begrudge a person their right to make an idiot of themselves with unfounded assumptions, but I always reserve the right to correct such assumptions as best I can.
Bloodninjapirate 1 year ago 2
@Eterna1Soldier wow denial is all you've got? brilliant.
TruthSearcher123 1 year ago 2
do you actuallyhave a life. or do you sit in a little room by yourself with tin foil over the windows. with a tin foil antenna hat. scanning the internet.
carl6352 2 years ago
i think anytime anything that revolves around education & awareness of something that doesn't make money in the usa is considered an attack on the powerful like people in the usa aren't tired of rich,spoiled,dumb heirs telling people what to do and what to say and what not to say i think fox news doesn't like being outsmarted and are taking like sore losers!
Supageeksupafreek 2 years ago
There could be a requirement of an escrowed amount of money that the DMCA claimant is willing to risk if his claim is shown to be abusive. Additionally, there should be a more automated way of detecting and removing users who have flagrantly misused the DMCA process, no matter who the claimant is. So if Fox removes a bunch of videos with 'Fox News' or Simpsons in the title, even if it contains none of their footage, they'd lose THEIR channel.
hotlavatube 2 years ago
I didn't have much respect for Fox to begin with.
drche420 2 years ago 41
So, Fox News is pretty much admitting that their pundits are two-dimensional, cartoonish parodies of actual news people, which is why they are afraid their readers can't tell the difference.
artgoat 2 years ago 60
@artgoat I wish I could give you 5 million thumbs up.
HornetFellow 1 year ago
Its mess like this from the right wing nut cases that has slowly brainwashed many ppl into believing they have no clue or sense of common sense- WTF ppl cant tell the diff. between the Simpson's spoof vs the real Fox news WHAT THE FU*K
Just another right wing nut tactic to further distract ppl from how the GOP always has been
TheAfroQween 2 years ago
@TheAfroQween: Even the Fox viewing audience can tell the difference. It's the opinion of the Fox News leadership that feels people are that shallow. Look at Rupert Murdochs opinion of people. Fox News ir GOP/Right Wing because that's what Rupert Murdoch is. They're media whorse and would happily hire and feature any yellow dog journalists from any political party, or note at all, if it results in market share and pulls in advertisers.
RyuDarragh 2 years ago
I realize that sweetie-
TheAfroQween 2 years ago
like ANY legal document submission, there aught to be a fee associated with the DMCA take down notice. or make it free if a lawyer files it for you.
WorldOfHumanWreckage 2 years ago
Ooh, "fox police" Hannity and Beck come to house with billy clubs.
I actually took that from Keith Olbermann's thing on the video "watch?v=_bz4QWn6JAY" but I had to change it from Hannity and Colmbs to Hannity and Beck because Alan Colbms is no longer on FOX News.
JoshKeatonFan 2 years ago
there should be something like a deposit system for filing DMCA that is small for single events but would get costly on wide spread automated ones. Also a heavy "Fair Use" violation fine, those who would use the DMCA process as a venue for censorship.
DMCA's needs a buffer to make it harder for any individual to just randomly file one, yet at the same time deserve the purpose of the DMCA.
opaldragon75 2 years ago 6
This comment has received too many negative votes show
No new laws for ANY reason please. A liberal shouldn't ask its government to solve its problems.
Strange as this might sound why not boycott the companies? What is more important watching the Simpsons or our freedom?
WineRage2 2 years ago
straygypsy : All countries of this continent made a common citizenship ? didn't noticed that :p
brocks13 : As a citizen of Belgium (french part), I am laughing loud listenning to you.. There is not many media television more partial then French television.. (except Belgium's) but as most the people of our countries, you seems to be completely blind. No offense.
Fenixd84 2 years ago
As a citizen of France I find it incredibly hilarious that such a blatantly bias station filled with one- minded pundits is able to stay on the air. In my country Fox would be dethroned in a day due to its insurmountable bias and fact distortion.
brocks13 2 years ago 3
As a Citizen of Asia, I find it incredibly hilarious that some dickhead from France is lecturing us about...."politics"
straygypsy 2 years ago
brocks13:
Ur absolutely right. I live in Germany and I can tell u that if people like rush limbaugh were to have a show over here, they'd probably already be on trial as demagogues! Apart from that, no one in Germany, France, or anywhere in western europe (except mayb Britain) would ever watch/listen to it!
outcastofhell 2 years ago
He does not go over MSNBC because this is LIBERALViewer.
Doflingo 2 years ago
they're obviously trolling you
MommiMan 2 years ago 2
We see them trolling, we hating.
combover1277 2 years ago
Why don't you ever analyze MSNBC
brocks13 2 years ago
Because MSNBC does not spread lies so blatently
DMCv3142 2 years ago 2
Because Fox news does enough blasting of MSNBC for their obvious liberal bias for all of us.
Durin0 2 years ago 2
great analysis. I saw that video when you uploaded it, and there should be no doubt about the legitimacy of its content. If that video is actually removed, I'd have some very serious concerns about whether net neutrality exists even now.
Largehippo 2 years ago
great videos but your voice is sooo dreary
lewismurray1 2 years ago
Can you stop arguing with HTWW, the guy is hopelessly ignorant.
theliberalparis 2 years ago
keep on rocking !!!
theliberalparis 2 years ago
Making it more costly for inaccurate copyright infringement. Wouldn't that be like making it more costly for people who file frivolous lawsuits? Such as the woman who stubbed her toe suing the bank it happened at, or the family that sued 32 entities, and didn't pursue legal action against the killer?
TRMerc 2 years ago
Death is the best deterrent.
Voodochild2007 2 years ago
Threats (like this threat to sue) is the first refuge of people caught out. FOX wanted to see if they could make you run and hide. (They also want to delay people seeing your video by conning UT into removing it for a time.) They might sue, if they don't think you can handle it. It's a harassment tactic. After all, they have the funds to spend, you probably don't. Call the law school at Yale and see if they want to get involved. Then try the ACLU.
jwkinraleigh 2 years ago
isnt it possible to countersue if someone unjustly sues you?
tuseroni 2 years ago 2
Liberal viewer FTW!
Codjr 2 years ago
keep it up bud
mekanik187 2 years ago 3
If that is their argument, can't you just write a program to identify every post everywhere that uses the word liberal and viewer in any combination warrants a DMCA? Can we all do that? How many requests of that nature would they need to get before THEY decided they needed to change their own rules.
zippydebrain 2 years ago
Well, as much as you punch Fox in the face (not that they''re your only target--they're just such a big one lol) I'm surprised that they haven't tried to stop you more often...
Keep it REALLY fair and balanced, brother!
tbgenesys 2 years ago 3
Haha, I just found 2 mirrors of your taken down video using Google video and it was really great.
Martinger2775 2 years ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
Ever hear of voice inflection? You reading your script is a snore-fest.
DaytonOhiomomof3 2 years ago
Ever hear of an ad hominem? If you don't have anything to say about the content, then don't bother. Fuck.
Tyrtamus 2 years ago
Your stupidity is astounding. Sad about your election loss.
darliegoddess 2 years ago
Terrific ! Healthcare is nearly through, economies holding waiting for the next wave of Republican caused bank collapses. You know that it hits next summer right ? That's right , these loans dont trigger till then.
darliegoddess 2 years ago
Are you still working on getting that MISSION ACCOMPLISHED?
unity9 2 years ago
Nope, now it's finding Bin Laden and killing him.
darliegoddess 2 years ago
that fuck waffle HTWW is so corrupt and money hungry he has no soul
MinisterKGB 2 years ago
Mostly I would agree with you in that fair use is inherently a good thing if the material is used reasonably, and for the benefit of the public. It is unikely that Fox will sue, although I imagine they would exercise their capacity to remove the video in question.
MyMelancholyDodo 2 years ago
So you bash the bias Fox, while promoting a bias webpage of your own? Whats with liberals and drugs? STAY AWAY FROM CRACK!
jamescgale 2 years ago
I think given the nature of the whole "wide net"/ "cost effective" strategy they seem to employ, the only way to hit them is at the bottom line. So, fines or fees is totally the right way to go. Maybe even rulings that require retractions and/or apologies to the parties involved, so it forces them to look at it from a corporate image or public relations angle.
And I think you've been batting a thousand so far, so I have faith that you'll come out o.k. regardless of if there is a suit or not.
billpasdmf 2 years ago
I don't understand. I thought it was a federal offense to file a false DMCA? You have something great going for you--you're a lawyer, you can write and submit your own briefs. In many ways, I see you as a free-speech activist. Despite their money and power, if they're wrong, they're wrong. You did copy-infringe at all. I think any judge could see that. Perhaps, Fox itself needs to be sued for these false DMCA's, to make it so costly they won't file them anymore. Balance is needed!
keytoothed 2 years ago
I was reading some of the PM's you have on your website. You are a patient soul. How you and Pap keep spending time explaining things to wingnuts that just don't have clue and don't want to, absolutely amazes me.
.
Your explanations are clear and his are evasive or deflective. Nice work!
EscambiaDemocrats 2 years ago
Is FOX Noise like having the FOX watch over the hen house where they attack and eat the poor hens that are the livelihood of the farmer who is stimulating the local economy forcing the local farmer out of business so a foreigner from Australian can import cheap labor eggs and the money goes out of the local economy to Australian?.
JKEJulian 2 years ago
How are you not too embarrassed to continue to make videos? HTWW continues to own you and you still are on here! LOL
mcoop221 2 years ago
@mcoop221
LOL! What a joke ! HTWW sucks !
darliegoddess 2 years ago
Ok. Great retort. Let's say he does. Doesn't take away the fact that he OWNS Liberalviewer every time they go head-to-head.
LV is just another spin machine and HTWW proves it. It's got to be frustrating.
mcoop221 2 years ago
Oh baloney, HTWW is a loser, like Coulters a loser. Not one of his facts were true and no delivery, no matter how emphatic makes bullshit into truth. Sorry, he's a clown.
darliegoddess 2 years ago
Absolutely amazing. Did you research them? LMAO! Typical libtard.
mcoop221 2 years ago
I know that's the best you can do .
darliegoddess 2 years ago
The thing is: Liberalviewer and the rest of the leftist attack machine does just that: Attack the right. Just like the Right has their attack dogs.
in the end, trashing and 'questioning the sanity' of the other person is flat out stupid.
Why not offer alternatives as opposed to fucking USELESS CRITICISM?
I watched ten of LiberalViewer's videos and the fucking stooge offered ZERO in terms of making the world a better place.
moronpaul 2 years ago
Getting rid of Fox is making the world a better place.
darliegoddess 2 years ago
"Getting rid of Fox is making the world a better place."
And how would you propose that. Oh right: Get GOVERNMENT involved. There's no other way to get rid of Fox unless you burn the U.S. Constitution.
You Nazi fuck.
moronpaul 2 years ago
Arrest Rupert Murdoch, waterboard him till he confesses to anything, who cares what , it would take 5 minutes to break him. Shut down Fox and arrest everyone there as co conspirators, send them to Gitmo, especially Malkin , she is a must. Not at all, I think under waterboarding we can pretty much get Rupert to confessing he flew the planes into the WTC.
darliegoddess 2 years ago
"Arrest Rupert Murdoch, waterboard him till he confesses to anything, who cares what ,blah, blah, drone drone..."
So...you don't have any real solutions...just mindless bitching like Liberviewer.
Can't do anything without big Nazi government.
Got it.
moronpaul 2 years ago
@moronpaul Lol! Big Nazi government like Bush Cheney the torturing economy crashing morons !
darliegoddess 2 years ago
"Lol! Big Nazi government like Bush Cheney the torturing economy crashing morons !"
And Obama is doing different?
moronpaul 2 years ago
It's never going to happen and you want to know why? Because there are more people out there that want some truth in their reporting then you are willing to admit or accept. The proof is in the ratings of both Fox and all the other networks. If the majority of people didn't prefer Fox they wouldn't be doing as well as they are.
anooseholay 2 years ago
@anooseholay It's like watching the Al Qeada channel , you want to know what Americas enemies will do next.
darliegoddess 2 years ago
@darliegoddess, I never thought about it that way, but it must be why I watch the lame stream media from time to time. Show me a person under the age of 30 who is a conservative and I will show you a person with no heart, show me a person over the age of 50 who is not a conservative and I will show you a person with no brain.
anooseholay 2 years ago
I'm a conservative, Fox is not conservative. They are extremist Christian Terrorists devoted to corporate welfare, a presidential dictatorship, the torture and murder of all non Christians . Murdoch needs to be arrested, tried and hung for crimes against humanity in the intended promotion of lies to commit an illegal war.
She me a conservative and I guarantee they are not a Fox viewer.
darliegoddess 2 years ago
Republicans are EVIL!
blackkraut76 2 years ago
"Republicans are EVIL!"
If sheeps could speak, that is what they would say.
moronpaul 2 years ago
They speak the truth which is more than Fox does.
darliegoddess 2 years ago
"They speak the truth which is more than Fox does."
And also make good sweaters and roasts!
moronpaul 2 years ago
liberals and obama supporters are enemies to the constitution, that is the closest thing to political affiliation i claim, the constitution. but the people who consider themselves liberals, are just plain idiotic whack jobs. liberalism is socialism, and socilism is a disease to freedom, and i plan to take care of that disease. but yes liberals are sheeps, thats why they want to be told what to do and have GOV give everything to them so they dont have to think
SNIPERSTEVE420 2 years ago
Wow, you're denser than lead...
jursamaj 2 years ago 2
lol, true sheep, but he says im dense
SNIPERSTEVE420 2 years ago
Wow, you're denser than lead...
jursamaj 2 years ago 2
the only way to stop the big guys from intimidating the little guys is to penalize them.. and make the penalties much much more severe. Penalties need to severely cripple the company, just as lawyer fees severely cripple any average american.
I dont understand why companies fight for less exposure. The reason google is the titan they are today is because of their "dont be evil" motto. Customer satisfaction came before profits... and turns out that business model actually works
mark1m 2 years ago
Don't be too sure Google isn't "evil". Their predatory approach to pushing all rival companies out the market is nothing short of monopolist.
ascolti 2 years ago
what rival companies have they pushed out of the market? Google tends to take on the juggernauts and their monopolies like microsoft.
Google often pushes net neutrality and open source. Their acceptance by the general internet community is exactly what made them the business they are today. I have used many google services, from google, to youtube, to gmail, to google maps, to google chrome... and they have never once fired a pop ad, or banner ad my way, nor tried to charge me a dime.
mark1m 2 years ago
meh i should say they have been doing youtube advertising, but that was to prevent all the copyright lawsuits they were getting and trying to encourage said companies to use advertising rather than pull their content... it was not out of greed.
mark1m 2 years ago
Look. OK. Google is nothing short of a ad. company with a search engine. You want examples of companies they squeezed out of the market;
Yahoo, Excite, Altavista, Lycos, Dogpile, Infoseek, MetaCrawler, and All The Web.
The old top players had an even split. But since Google monetized search results (charging for top status) it's become super rich. This capital allows it to predatorily give valuable products for FREE to remove it's competitors from the market. It's simple really!
ascolti 2 years ago
first of all those companies were all the big guys on the block when google entered the market. If i remember correctly google tried to sell their company to alta vista originally, but they werent interested.
And google refused to give top search results to big spenders... thats why they created a separate "featured results" category. Because they needed a revenue model to entice investors... but they didnt want to do banner ads or compromise their search results for profit.
mark1m 2 years ago
the reason google beat them all, is because they delivered superior search results... and they even tried to sell their more accurate search engine to all the big guys you just named back in the day when they were a small startup.
But none of those search engines wanted to buy them... because they viewed google as a puny competitor with nothing to offer.
mark1m 2 years ago
It's like British Airways in the 1980's. They fly in the ointment was a company called Laker airways. Laker started running Atlantic flights for 1/2 that of BA.
So BA cut their prices to compete, to the point where every flight ran at a loss. Safe in the knowledge that their pockets ran deeper than Laker. Result, Laker goes out of business.
However, UK law strictly prohibits predatory pricing. Laker sued BA (and other carriers) for $50m and won. BA later had to pay a further £8m.
ascolti 2 years ago
I dont have a clue what you are talking about... we are talking about the dawn of the internet when 1 smart computer programmer could create the greatest product on the market.
mark1m 2 years ago
That start of the internet? What?! Have you any idea what you're talking about? Seriously.
The "internet" has been around since the 60's. It was made commercial available in 1988. Google started in 1998 and only got really going from later 1999 onwards.
And it was TWO smart computer programmers at Google. Larry Page and Sergey Brin. Larry started the research, but without Brin, it would have died at death.
OMG you've not idea what you're talking about. Bye then.
ascolti 2 years ago
you misspelled a word in your other post, so i think that invalidates you first.
Is this the current standard we hold people to? first of all i stated a principle that at the dawn of the internet, a single programmer could have the most advanced product. I never even said google. I was stating the setting.
It also doesnt take much intellect to know i meant the start of the commercial internet boom. I remember chatting on university mainframes. There were no companies back then.
mark1m 2 years ago
I apologise, I assumed as it was the subject of our conversation that you meant Google. To be honest, I wasn't really giving it my full attention.
As for "you misspelled a word in your other post, so i think that invalidates you first." - that's just childish. Don't.
"I remember chatting on university mainframes" - Me too, in 1986-89 at Portsmouth, then 90-92 at UAE. Then I did a stint working at Nottingham Trent... got bored. Started own company.
Can we stop waving our genitals about now?
ascolti 2 years ago
cant stop waving genitals, these bad girls just got a rhythm down.
I dont even know if you mispelled something, i just know everyone does... and i felt it was up to snuff with your method of invalidating my argument, so i rolled with it.
As someone who has been online so long you should know google took a rapidly different approach to business than most companies. And google WAS the little guy back when all those search engines were around.
mark1m 2 years ago
Well, Google had a better revenue model that allowed greater investment capitalisation. In 2006 they made $10 billion alone.
Yahoo, Excite etc had terrible capital models. They relied on regular capital investor injection and banner advertising in order to maintain a profile. The numbers just didn't add up.
It also helped that Google was marketed so brilliantly, turning itself into a verb.
"cant stop waving genitals, these bad girls just got a rhythm down." - ha!
ascolti 2 years ago
lol you win, you beat me on fortitude... for the record i still think im right. I just dont care to argue the point anymore.
Well thats for the time being, ill probably respond to you in the future when im less exhausted. So you win for now.
mark1m 2 years ago
Hey, it's not about winning.
It's just a conversation. You have an opinion and I wanted to know what it was. For once, it didn't get down to trading personal insults! A relief, I can tell you.
Nobody is really right or wrong.
Unlike some (not you - clearly) I don't consider YouTube as a stalking ground for a good argument.
Been nice chatting. Hope you feel less exhausted soon.
Go sleep! :-)
ascolti 2 years ago
Anyway, my original point (a day ago now) was that Google portrays itself as being holier-than-thou, when the reality is that they don't shy away from aggressive business practice.
I mean they stole AdSense from Yahoo (had to settle out of court on that one).
They bought their rival DoubleClick for $3.1 billion.
They tried to do a deal with Yahoo. But antitrust (monopoly) rules kicked in.
I'm not saying I don't like Google. Just don't think they are fantastic as advertised :-)
ascolti 2 years ago
fox was worried its viewers would not be able to differentiate between the cartoon parody and fox's actual new program... has the world gone insane??
Phishywun 2 years ago
Fox news is afraid of a cartoon? AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
xCrazyJayx 2 years ago
LV went to yale? that's interesting, i was rejected by yale. we have a yale connection. what a small world.
JesusIsCumming 2 years ago
You need to get on HTWW.
ThisguyQuake 2 years ago
Did you "GOT" or receive smart guy, lol what do you expect from a guy who can't even hack it as a PD.
ORVX 2 years ago
Couldn't there be a way of requiring people to consider - and show evidence of consideration - fair use in relation to the material in question before filing? That would make more sense to me.
nothinsnew 2 years ago
YOU talk FUNNY!!!!
SippinCoughee 2 years ago
1) yes I believe there should be a law along with proper punishments against such broad netting of copyright infringement without justification.
2) There is a strong wind blowing in your favor, persistence and determination can win out against any corporation. Never give up and trust your instincts! (if you know what that is from you are truly awesome)
Deadlytrick 2 years ago
you have 2847 unread messages
wovelscotch 2 years ago
Don't know and no.
keith92234hotmail 2 years ago
PWNED
Jussimania 2 years ago
They cast a wide net, as you say, in order to try and capitalize on people not knowing their rights OR how the copyright laws work.
knicoal 2 years ago
Recieving a DMCA notice from Fox shows how great LV is debunking their lies. Keep making videos
BakersfieldGamer4u 2 years ago
@BakersfieldGamer4u
actually if you were to lay off the koolaid and try and grasp both sides of the spectrum youll find conservatives got the same treatment
do us a favor and find those mystery congressional districts and save us 18 mil
Rainsdad 2 years ago
@Rainsdad Actually if you stick your head out of HTTW's ass and realise he nothing but a lieing cunt.
BakersfieldGamer4u 2 years ago 2
He sure is that. and his ass must be gaping and very stretchy to accomodate so many heads along with his own.
MarcusCardiff 2 years ago
k so did you find those congressional districts yet?
ah i know maybe they're in one of those extra 7 states Obama visited during the campaign
and i could care less what HTWW says, same as fox news or LV or TYT or any other mouthpiece for whom ever it is they are propagating, look at facts and use commonsence ok more taxes on you and I, therefore you work the same amount make less money, your labor isnt worth much?
how do you feel about involuntary servitude? your working your way to it now
Rainsdad 2 years ago
He is just trying to show people that you can't always believe what you see on TV.
If people didn't questions things we'd still think the world is flat.
djkidchaos 2 years ago
you should almost never believe what you see on tv. The same goes for the internet however. Millions of people stay at home everyday and become dumber by soaking up stuff on the internet. Anything that is done for entertainment purposes is likely to be misleading or tampered with. Example. NBA officials lol
jmd11185 2 years ago
Fuck copyright.
That's the short version, can't be bothered with the long version right now.
Parapon3ra 2 years ago
Oh they should def increase the amount of difficulty it takes to file a claim/put up a penalty, make it cost more than the max possible profit your losing on the accused party and this bs about videos being taken down will disappear.
Sydpart2 2 years ago
Here's an important question. Who gives a shit?
notfromia 2 years ago
people, with heads not up there asses.
fecac 2 years ago
A public spanking or being thrown into stocks!
Onodera1980 2 years ago
Fox complaining? Damn... Fox sucks...
Wrath0fKhan 2 years ago
Fox doesn't suck. They Blow
massdrewski 2 years ago