tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5383512304639632735.post3818707570976399095..comments2024-01-23T07:34:52.253-08:00Comments on Copyrights & Campaigns: Did YouTube users actually have 'permission' to upload Warner Music Group songs?Ben Sheffnerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06477793715765992689noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5383512304639632735.post-31007260529811361562009-02-12T08:53:00.000-08:002009-02-12T08:53:00.000-08:00What would seem to matter is how did WMG and YouTu...What would seem to matter is how did WMG and YouTube interpret the agreement. From the September 2006 press release from YouTube:<BR/><BR/>NEW YORK, NY and SAN MATEO, Calif. - September 18, 2006 -YouTube, Inc., a consumer media company for people to watch and share original videos through a Web experience, and Warner Music Group Corp. (NYSE: WMG), one of the world's leading global music companies, today announced an agreement to distribute on YouTube the library of music videos from WMG's world-renowned roster of artists as well as behind-the-scenes footage, artist interviews, original programming and other special content. In a first-of-its-kind arrangement, YouTube users will be able to incorporate music from WMG's recorded music catalog into the videos they create and upload onto YouTube...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5383512304639632735.post-801369663731600352009-01-28T09:02:00.000-08:002009-01-28T09:02:00.000-08:00From what I understand, YouTube replies to DMCA ta...From what I understand, YouTube replies to DMCA takedown notices. I think if YouTube removes a video, it's b/c it violates the TOS (for example, a video that contains nudity) but not for copyright infringement. In my case, my video was removed after Universal filed a DMCA takedown with YouTube (I then sent a counternotice). It took YouTube 6 weeks to review my video but they did reinstate it. So they have some hand and some say, just not in the ways some users believe.Stephaniehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18127448645515191294noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5383512304639632735.post-76935841510522446272009-01-27T16:30:00.000-08:002009-01-27T16:30:00.000-08:00Mr. Credibility:I didn't mean to imply by using th...Mr. Credibility:<BR/><BR/>I didn't mean to imply by using the word "case" that WMG had filed a lawsuit -- it appears all they did was send a DMCA takedown notice to YouTube over Vidal's video.<BR/><BR/>You're right -- YouTube has every right to unilaterally remove anyone's video (unless they specifically contracted to keep it up). But what happened here appears to be that WMG demanded that YouTube remove Vidal's video -- it wasn't YouTube's unilateral move.Ben Sheffnerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06477793715765992689noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5383512304639632735.post-2710727643310664222009-01-27T15:54:00.000-08:002009-01-27T15:54:00.000-08:00I got confused when you said "the *case* of Corey ...I got confused when you said "the *case* of Corey Vidal." I thought you meant that there was a legal case over this, but no. It seems like the issues you raise would be germane if Warner sued Vidal and/or YouTube to have the video taken down, but if YouTube unilaterally removed the video to avoid the possibility of trouble, isn't that their prerogative? <BR/><BR/>Also, it sounds like the video is a parody of the music involved, so it might be fair use.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5383512304639632735.post-79589250864767164252009-01-27T14:05:00.000-08:002009-01-27T14:05:00.000-08:00It matters. The licensing is similar to mechanica...It matters. The licensing is similar to mechanicals but not quite. The mashup is the fly in the ointment. No one seems to know if the licensing accounted for third parties who add new records of authority. IOW, copyright registration is registration of a name and a fixed form. The proof of record of authority is the fixed form. Mashups may or may not derivative (eg, samples) and it gets into the gray areas of fair use.<BR/><BR/>So yes, the licensing terms matter very much. If WMG and YouTube did not negotiate terms for third party derived works or inclusive works (the record of authority is unaltered but copied into a new frame), then no.<BR/><BR/>This gets into the whole arena of mashups and the business advisability of building indemnified systems over cloud computing without clear licensing with Ts&Cs and QoS.<BR/><BR/>But if the fellow is deriving income from his mashup without verifying that, he is not a very smart businessman and whining won't help.Len Bullardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12001043126774600957noreply@blogger.com