Evanescence, Seether and Creed videos no longer available

Locked
User avatar
[Mike of the Desert]
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2003 5:56 am
Status: Lonely
Location: Earth -> Europe -> Italy -> Rome -> Cerveteri -> Sasso -> Home -> Mike's Room
Contact:
Org Profile

Post by [Mike of the Desert] » Wed Nov 16, 2005 10:55 am


yes I was thinking of includeing a petition, but I doubt the bands want to hear that. The company, yes, but I as a band would be like 'this is what we pay our agent for!' a
Yes it would be exactly like that. ;\
About the other suggestion.. It would be a solution but nearly impossible to do, in the end no one would go out buying a CD (for example for a different version of Imaginary, Immortal etc etc.) only to view an amv. In the end we can only hope that announce the video in the forums to be permitted, that would be the best solution, like RolltheStampede said, we could simply find another host for the video, that should not be a problem. We should pay, anyway, but sincerely not that much that could be a problem, I think.
ImageImage
Image

User avatar
Infinity Squared
Mr. Poopy Pants
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 10:07 pm
Status: Shutting Down
Location: Australia
Contact:
Org Profile

Post by Infinity Squared » Wed Nov 16, 2005 11:08 am

Hmm... well, a lot of stuff has been said in this thread already, and I might have missed it but what if a suggestion like this occurs:

You made a video done to a song to one of these 3. Now, what you do is, you put it up on your profile, basically put it in the catalog... but you never upload the video. As far as it goes, that should still be ok...

Now, what if you put in your video catalog entry "If you want to see this orgasmically awesome Evanescence video, PM me and I'll send you a link" will that be viewed as still in breach of whatever the cease and desist notice said?

Anyway, that's just me trying to find a loophole...
Image

User avatar
jubjub2
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 10:21 pm
Org Profile

Post by jubjub2 » Wed Nov 16, 2005 11:52 am

Most of what I would have said has already been covered... But I did want to thank Phade for dealing so well with this situation. I'm sure the resulting ulcers will heal with time. ;)

User avatar
DaCoolGohan
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2001 5:46 am
Status: I am the only one around here...
Location: Cincinnati, Oho
Org Profile

Post by DaCoolGohan » Wed Nov 16, 2005 12:02 pm

bum wrote:Why? Do you refuse to support an artist just because a record label decided to protect there copyright in a way which members of this site see as wrong?
Yeah just because you aren't allowed to distro a video with these songs in them, doesn't mean you shouldn't support the artists if you like them. I really doubt that the actual Artist wanted to crack down on us, hell they make barely any money from Album Sales, they make it on their concerts and their mechandise sales, such as T-Shirts, Hats and such. Just because you may think what the Record Company did was wrong, still support an artist you like.

User avatar
x_rex30
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2001 4:30 pm
Org Profile

Post by x_rex30 » Wed Nov 16, 2005 12:04 pm

dacoolgohan wrote:
bum wrote:Why? Do you refuse to support an artist just because a record label decided to protect there copyright in a way which members of this site see as wrong?
Yeah just because you aren't allowed to distro a video with these songs in them, doesn't mean you shouldn't support the artists if you like them. I really doubt that the actual Artist wanted to crack down on us, hell they make barely any money from Album Sales, they make it on their concerts and their mechandise sales, such as T-Shirts, Hats and such. Just because you may think what the Record Company did was wrong, still support an artist you like.
Ah yes. Well said.

User avatar
Zahmira
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2003 10:21 pm
Location: Waterloo, Ontario
Org Profile

Post by Zahmira » Wed Nov 16, 2005 12:12 pm

I don't post much, but I felt that I would get involved here.

My understanding of US law is not the greatest, but I seem to recall that a site is not responsible for content that it links to. If that is the case than indirect links to these videos would be fine, but the person hosting them would need to be aware of what could happen.

User avatar
temaranight
Joined: Tue Mar 19, 2002 5:51 pm
Location: Gulf Coast
Contact:
Org Profile

Post by temaranight » Wed Nov 16, 2005 12:15 pm

As it was said before..we all knew it had to happen sooner or later. And as it was also stated before, be thankful that it was only removing links from the site, and not removing the money in Phade's wallet and/or ours in a lawsuit.
Were they in the wrong? Were we in the right? Vice versa? Who knows, the debate could could on forever. I for one am not worried about it, and just thankful it happened with as little pain as possible as it did and with the org itself remaining online.

A big thank you to Phade for handling the situation so well, even if it did nearly cause him a massive stroke in the process... =p
Image

User avatar
DaCoolGohan
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2001 5:46 am
Status: I am the only one around here...
Location: Cincinnati, Oho
Org Profile

Post by DaCoolGohan » Wed Nov 16, 2005 12:15 pm

Yeah thats pretty much the deal, as long as you are not hosting the videos on your site you are in the clear for now.

User avatar
Rozard
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2001 10:39 pm
Org Profile

Post by Rozard » Wed Nov 16, 2005 12:26 pm

I agree with what RollTheStampede and MisterFurious have said for the most part. Life is still going to go on. Just because you can't upload/link videos using these three artists doesn't mean you can't edit AMVs with these three artists. Like I said earlier, AMV distribution existed before the Org was here. Also, I think that the only reason, or at least the main reason, that Wind-Up Records acted was that it was brought to their attention, and that AMVs were thought to be affiliated with the record label and the artist. I don't see this as the beginning of the end. I see it as only a knee-jerk reaction. It was something they legally were obligated to do. It's my thinking that this is also why only those three artists were asked to be removed, when there are other artists on the label, but weren't mentioned in this e-mail to the label. I seriously doubt there is a massive RIAA conspiricy now to put everyone in jail or anything. We all need to pretend to lie down and take a breather. We're blowing this out of proportion.

Scintilla: I'm not entirely positive. Like I said, if anyone could correct any of my information, feel free to do so. Brad brought up a great point about the music not being altered. That hadn't even crossed my mind. Anyhow, I need to get going to broadcast my internet radio program (wow, shameless), so I looked this site up. I'm going to read it once I get home, but if anyone else would like to read it and figure out what is legal about DVD ripping, feel free to do so. Of course, that site might not have all the answers.

As everyone else is doing, I would like to give my appriciation to Phade. You've done what many of us couldn't, not only in dealing with the record label lawyers, but running this site in general. You're truly a great man for doing so.
Image
RichLather: We are guests of this forum, and as such we do not make the rules.
BishounenStalker The freedom to suck is what makes the Internet rock.

User avatar
Zahmira
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2003 10:21 pm
Location: Waterloo, Ontario
Org Profile

Post by Zahmira » Wed Nov 16, 2005 12:34 pm

I forgot to mention in my post how much I appreaciate everything that Phade has done. Thanks, man!

Locked

Return to “Site Announcements”