NickDisk Reloaded Forum Index NickDisk Reloaded
Welcome to the new new NickDisk board
 
RegisterRegister
FAQFAQ SearchSearch Log inLog in
Nickdisk Reloaded fanart galleriesNickdisk Reloaded fanart galleries

Suspended by YouTube? Wha...?

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    NickDisk Reloaded Forum Index -> The Outside World
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
SpiderBraids
Good Enough
Good Enough


Joined: 14 Apr 2006
Posts: 168
Location: Thailand

PostPosted: Thu Sep 18, 2008 3:37 am    Post subject: Suspended by YouTube? Wha...? Reply with quote

I was suspended from YouTube for a 3rd party copyright claim. While I do admit to using the clips from the party in question, I remixed them with different music, like an AMV, so it shouldn't be considered infringing. Apparently, when it comes to copyright at YT, this much is clear: Home videos you made are okay. Uploading episodes is not. Where is the line, people?

_________________
Save Hey Arnold! Or rather, its second movie.
Go here and/or here (preferably, both).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Mike2000
On Fire
On Fire


Joined: 22 Apr 2006
Posts: 722
Location: Mexico City, MX

PostPosted: Thu Sep 18, 2008 5:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Guess you answered yourself. As long as you're using material that was once part of a copyrighted stuff, it remains copyrighted even if you modify it, edit it, mix it, change it, etc.

Viacom made it quite clearly about a year ago, remember? When they got in this "get down all our stuff" drive. Guess the same goes for most other big studios.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SpiderBraids
Good Enough
Good Enough


Joined: 14 Apr 2006
Posts: 168
Location: Thailand

PostPosted: Thu Sep 18, 2008 9:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mike2000 wrote:
Guess you answered yourself. As long as you're using material that was once part of a copyrighted stuff, it remains copyrighted even if you modify it, edit it, mix it, change it, etc.


That's a bit high and dry, isn't it? If I understand the fair use issue correctly, "transformative" use is considered fair game, as opposed to derivative, and regardless of where the line between the two (really, where is it?) I'm convinced that my video is of the former. It's not like I uploaded an episode or anything.

_________________
Save Hey Arnold! Or rather, its second movie.
Go here and/or here (preferably, both).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Mike2000
On Fire
On Fire


Joined: 22 Apr 2006
Posts: 722
Location: Mexico City, MX

PostPosted: Thu Sep 18, 2008 11:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The issue of "fair use" is rather complex. Quoting Wikipedia:

Quote:
Fair use is a doctrine in United States copyright law that allows limited use of copyrighted material without requiring permission from the rights holders, such as use for scholarship or review. It provides for the legal, non-licensed citation or incorporation of copyrighted material in another author's work under a four-factor balancing test. It is based on free speech rights provided by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. The term "fair use" is unique to the United States, and recently to Israel and the UK as well; a similar principle, fair dealing, exists in some other common law jurisdictions. Civil law jurisdictions have other limitations and exceptions to copyright.


Now this statement has at least two limitants to the definition of fair use that affect derivative works like fan videos and such: one, is the extent of the material used in the derivative video, and two, that the doctrine of fair use is not a part of every country's civil law, it is specific from the U.S., though some other countries have their own versions of it.

Now, in the case you mention, remember that Youtube has been threatened with civil and legal action several times in the past, because it allowed (and still does) its users to post lots of videos amounting to many hours of copyrighted material, and the key problem here is that Youtube does get a profit from those videos (the advertisments it sells that appear embedded in their pages), while that profit is not translated to the copyright holders. Since there's a profit involved here, the fair use doctrine is not applicable.

As for where's the line between derivative and transformative... One of the balancing factors that determine wether a work is fair use or not is the "amount and substantiality" of the copyrighted stuff used to create it. You mention that you used clips from videos but changed the music. Quote:

Quote:
...The third factor assesses the quantity or percentage of the original copyrighted work that has been imported into the new work. In general, the less that is used in relation to the whole, e.g., a few sentences of a text for a book review, the more likely that the sample will be considered fair use... Conversely, in Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc. v. Nation Enters, the use of less than 400 words from President Ford's memoir by a political opinion magazine was interpreted as infringement because those few words represented "the heart of the book" and were, as such, substantial.

Before 1991, sampling in certain genres of music was accepted practice and such copyright considerations as these were viewed as largely irrelevant. The strict decision against rapper Biz Markie's appropriation of a Gilbert O'Sullivan song in the case Grand Upright Music, Ltd. v. Warner Bros. Records, Inc. changed practices and opinions overnight. Samples now had to be licensed, as long as they rose "to a level of legally cognizable appropriation."...



Another aspect to be taken in consideration is the "effect upon work's value", and that's another argument most likely used by copyright owners to make Youtube remove videos like yours: basically it states that, in the opinion of the copyright owner, the derivative work reduces or affects the value of his work, and thus it does not represent a fair use of his stuff.


So, in short, if you used clips long enough to be recognizable as part of an episode, or clips of a copyrighted song to musicalize your video, it could be alleged that the video contains "legally cognizable appropriation" of copyrighted stuff (both the video clips and the music), and that it "affects the value of the copyrighted work" and thus it does not constitute a "fair use" of their copyrighted stuff. Add to that that Youtube is very jittery about all the threats of legal action it has received regarding copyright infringements by its users, and you see why they take the approach of removing everything they find that could be remotely considered a copyright violation, without going case-by-case evaluating if it constitutes fair use or not.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tom
Unchained
Unchained


Joined: 13 Apr 2006
Posts: 943
Location: Leeds, UK

PostPosted: Fri Sep 19, 2008 2:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Or Translated: Viacom are douches.

_________________
*~*~*~You Can't Stop the Beat~*~*~*
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Mike2000
On Fire
On Fire


Joined: 22 Apr 2006
Posts: 722
Location: Mexico City, MX

PostPosted: Fri Sep 19, 2008 3:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

yep, in short. Tire la langue Rire
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jarjar23
Unchained
Unchained


Joined: 13 Apr 2006
Posts: 933
Location: New Jersey, USA

PostPosted: Wed Sep 24, 2008 8:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wow...first Toonzone now Youtube. :X
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    NickDisk Reloaded Forum Index -> The Outside World All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group