RE: YouTube Desperation...!

Gimmeabreakman asked YouTube to help right a wrong, to preserve justice, to preserve our own freedom to enjoy YouTube. I'm all for that kind of thing.

As usual, I just have a couple of questions first...

Movie referenced: Commandments (NOT The Ten Commandments...not at all...)

Universal Pictures, 1997, rated R, Aiden Quinn, Courtney Cox, Anthony LaPaglia

This video is in no way connected to, nor is it an endorsement of, the movie Commandments.

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• SeanBedlam
• Gimmeabreakman
• ButterZoned
• copyright
• infringement
• movie
• save
• the
• whales

[felinoid]

Fair use permits using a small clip of copyright material. One line out of a movie falls under fair use. Also you can't copyright one line.

The "How often people run a fowl of the law" thing is the movie writers opinion and I think it's untrue.

[ButterZoned]

I'm glad to know that info about fair use- thank you! I think you can copyright one line, though - Laura Ingraham said she wished she had before the Dixie Chicks took off with, "Shut up and sing!"

[trgoblin]

Most copyright owners have given up worrying about YouTube. Infact, many brand managers and marketing people realize now, that allowing infringements on YouTube might actually be good for the sale of products and brand awareness.

This issue is really about implementing a process to protect content creators from unreasonable attacks. But what troubles me most about this case, is we really don't know the REAL reason this happenned. Their is only the reason everyone thinks is the reason.

[ButterZoned]

I see what you mean about the free advertising we give musical artists, movies and TV shows. It seems in the interest of saving money and effort (and, perhaps getting to all the other stuff we want them to...) YouTube has implemented a policy of "guilty until you can prove you're innocent."

[vitalfinds]

It would be hard to believe and incredibly disappointing to think that repeating a line could be subjected to copyright infringement.

[ButterZoned]

I thought so too! Apparently they can - Laura Ingraham really wished she'd copywrited "shut up and sing" but she didn't and the Dixie Chicks took it. According to felinoid, fair use permits a small clip of a larger chunk of copywrited material.

[falconlem]

Yes, but without a Google to back them .. how fast could that happen. ?

[ButterZoned]

Hi falconlem, yes, I think it's in the agreement that YouTube can deny service for any reason, but if they do it for no good reason, it actually can make people dislike them and hesitate to join with them. If someone high profile enough had a just grievance, fickle public opinion could turn and they would be excoriated and another company could become the new "YouTube".

[ButterZoned]

Hi aj, yes it's hard to know right now exactly what happened with SeanBedlam, but it's obvious this system is too easily manipulated by haters. With the sheer volume of videos, you're right that the copyright owners don't probably care unless a violation's blatant or you're making money off their stuff. I wasn't able to reply to your message, but I did get the request about honor killings and am thinking about it.

[falconlem]

I think what it comes down to is that they can kick all of us off or ban our ID anytime they want. Sometimes I think its just whoever they hired for 8 bucks an hour gets to feeling their oats and clicks the button. That's technology, it cuts both ways.