Some Videos No Longer Available [Follow-up]

This forum is for site announcements. Please go here to read the SITE & FORUM RULES.

Postby Zarxrax » Sat Nov 19, 2005 3:11 pm

afree87 wrote:
celibi87 wrote:Howd he lie???
"If you would like to keep the enforceability of the copyright on your works, you must take measures to defend your copyright if someone infringes upon your copyright according to the law. This is how the laws work."

Just because someone says something that is false, it doesn't mean they are a liar. It can simply mean they are misinformed.
User avatar
Joined: 01 Apr 2001
Location: Concord, NC

Postby aoi_neko » Sat Nov 19, 2005 3:22 pm

A lie? You're quibbling.

Would you be happy if, instead of saying

If you would like to keep the enforceability of the copyright on your works, you must take measures to defend your copyright if someone infringes upon your copyright according to the law. This is how the laws work.

he'd said:

While it isn't "black-letter" law" that selective or sporadic enforcement of copyrights inevitabilty leads to their loss (as is ndefinbitely the case for thge related intellectual property field of trademarks), most law firms feel that failure to enforce copyright --especially when they're put on notice of unlicensed usage -- seriously damages their client's position in future litigation. This law firm appears to take that common position, as well as expressing concern that a failure to exercise due diligence in this regard might provide one or more causes of action for their clients to bring suit against the firm itself.

This isn't a law school classroom, and an oversimplification for the masses isn't tantamount to a lie.
<i>"Tamago no kara wo yabureneba hinatori wa umarezu ni shin de yuku. Warewa ga hina da. Tamago wa sekai da. Sekai no kara wo yaburaneba warera wa umarezu ni shin de yuku. Sekai no kara wo hakai se yo. Sekai wo kakumei suru tame ni!"</i>
User avatar
Joined: 20 Feb 2005
Location: Upstate, NY

Postby SQ » Sat Nov 19, 2005 3:51 pm

Hate to quote it, but it seems I've been ignored.

SQ wrote:Phade,

In the first thread you said if the catalog entry for an affected AMV remained a catalog entry, it was okay, unless the video was on our own webspace.

Does this mean that the record-holders will potentially go through the list and contact the webhosts of the creators, like the example of greenjinji, and give us C&Ds also(assuming they're extremely thorough with their C&Ds)?

And also, has the same action been taken with
And could the action ever be applicable to

Thanks in advance.

Could someone please answer this question?
Pssst. It's not really trademarked.
User avatar
Doesn't have a title
Joined: 08 Nov 2002
Location: Hawaii
Status: Forever Navy

Postby Zarxrax » Sat Nov 19, 2005 4:28 pm

They can, and always have had the ability to browse random sites and serve cease-and-desists (or worse), so yes, there is a definate possibility that they could come after you for serving it on your own site. However, I find that it would be highly unlikely.
User avatar
Joined: 01 Apr 2001
Location: Concord, NC

Postby SQ » Sat Nov 19, 2005 4:31 pm

Pssst. It's not really trademarked.
User avatar
Doesn't have a title
Joined: 08 Nov 2002
Location: Hawaii
Status: Forever Navy

Postby relmdivider » Sat Nov 19, 2005 4:49 pm

this is all so confusing. but if bands don't want their music being used in fanworks, i guess they have the right to stop it. but maybe it has something to do with a lot of AMV's actually using evanesnce (however it's spelt) music.
Joined: 03 Oct 2004
Location: england

Postby GreatLupin » Sat Nov 19, 2005 4:59 pm

I dont know if anyone has read it, but I recently read the copyright law text for a school project and it states that as long as the work in question is an original work, even using existing footage it is legal under copyright law. But that only extends to using the footage and sound from the footage, unfortunately the text does not go into using a different sound for the work, most likely because they had no idea that these types of works exist.

Essentially, under copyright law using the anime is legal as long as it is original, but likely since the song undergoes no creative change it is not allowed.

The funniest part is that it is likely not the band that objected but a high up in the record company, who is really getting the money. sorry i really object to many of the RIAA's practices.
User avatar
Joined: 11 Jul 2003
Location: Beverly Hills, 1983

Re: Some Videos No Longer Available [Follow-up]

Postby Geirr » Sat Nov 19, 2005 6:30 pm

My personal comments and opinions ONLY.

Phade wrote:Since[...] and the band would like to maintain the enforceability of the copyright on their songs, the lawyer had no choice but to take some kind of action.
Another example of 'losing your rights unless you exercise them' happens when, once every few years a store or a strip mal ropes off some or all of its parking lot for a day or two; often posting a sign marked 'Closed for Cleaning' though not a soul is seen actually sweeping. The reason is that in the past other privately owned parking lots (yes they may be called a 'public accommodation') have passed into public domain because the owners DID NOT enforce their property rights. You lose 'em if you don't use 'em, and as Phade said, it's not because the property owner is stingy or evil. They just don't want to lose what they have created, is all.

Phade wrote:If you would like to preserve or expand the rights that you as a normal citizen have under the law, please write and petition the persons that make the laws (here in the United States, this means Congress). There are powerful and well-funded groups on both sides of the copyright/fair use issues. Please support the groups that you agree with as well as make your views know directly as an individual to lawmakers.
Perfectly writtten, Phade.

We as enjoyers of audio and video and multimedia works, have let others redefine the vocabulary of what we do, and because they have chosen negatively-sounding words that we can be made to look bad to others and made to feel unsure of ourselves. The trick which has been pulled on us was equating 'unathorized' with 'illegal,' or 'criminal,' and so far most of the public has bought into that line of thinking, for now.

One group that has fared much better are gun owners and reloading hobbyists. Example: the press, eager to add hype and sensational-sounding words to a story, will write that "[So-and-so] was found in possession of an unregistered gun." Boy, that sounds criminal and dangerous, right? - but what remains unsaid is that not all states REQUIRE registration of all guns. Although the following example differs from copyright law, a grandpa can give his hunting rifle to his grandkid, and neither the 'original creators' nor any arm of government has a RIGHT to be informed of this, or to limit or the number of trades the piece can undergo before it becomes unusable.

The harder-core gun-nuts are VERY sensitive, defensive and vocal** about their rights to anonymous ownership, unmonitored use, "unregistered" (and yet non-criminal) trades which leave no paper trails, and protecting "unlicensed" possession to be understood as NON-criminal in many cases. They've done a decent job over the past 200 years despite losing ground here and there over time. Every once and a while some ground is gained back though, and as Phade said, this effort best happens AT THE BALLOT BOX.

(**That's why much the rest of the people may view them as extremists.)

Recalling that copyright law is STILL different from firearms laws and governance, a closer parallel to the point of 'remixing' and 'unathorized duplication' remaining NON-CRIMINAL are the reloader hobbyists, who would not BEGIN to think that they need permission of the 'original content creators' when they separate a bullet from a casing, add propellants from a different manufacturer, or re-mount other bullets or even some of their own home-rolled (okay, hand swaged) projectiles, and trade them among friends and acquaintances. A reloading machine can produce several hundred UNAUTHORIZED DUPLICATES of 'original content,' or hybrids.
("Have you tried the Remington/IMR-4198/185gr FMJ REMIX of Peter Paul Mauser's 1898 classic 8mm 'Best of' collection? There's also a guy who makes BOOTLEG .32-40's from original 32 Special brass and SELLS THEM ONLINE.") Just about ANYBODY can make and trade ammunition.

The reloaders would be FIRM about their following 'rights'
- The machines and materials are not registered
- You can make and distribute numerous copies
- You can take apart commercial products and assemble them into different things, and even mix in your own creations
- No one has a RIGHT to be notified about what you do
- You don't need LICENSES or PERMISSIONS

Maybe we can build back to THAT kind of cultural understanding. You can still find 1960'e era paperback books that say "This book is sold on the condition that it shall not be lent..." but in the 70's or 80's th courts tossed that out as bee-ess.
User avatar
Joined: 21 Apr 2001

While I agree with you Nestor. . .

Postby littlebobcat » Sat Nov 19, 2005 7:04 pm

I love it when AMV creators use music that isn't overused. It's refreshing to hear new music or see new anime. However, I will also view a video if it has one of my favorite "popular/mainstream" songs or anime. Why? Well, as my radio DJ friend told me once, "People are willing to listen to the same song over and over because of what it does to their hearts. It has touched a chord within them somewhere and they love going back to the memories or feelings that song stirred up in them the first time they heard it." I understand that new songs and new anime are a beautiful thing. I didn't know anything about Frou Frou or Rahxephon before that "Euphoria" AMV everyone raves about now. But now that AMV is considered "mainstream" by some people's definition, just because members liked it enough to rank it high in the favorite AMVs list. What a beautiful country we live in that lets us choose what we watch or listen to and "dis" if we feel so inclined! The only demand I make for AMVs is quality work. Whether the creator chooses mainstream or unique materials doesn't mean as much to me as whether they really did their best to put out an AMV that others can appreciate (and want to rewatch more than once). :D
Joined: 11 Oct 2004
Location: Windy & Cold Corner of the World

Postby Brad » Sat Nov 19, 2005 7:11 pm

Hey guys.

Move on.

Ask Brad an After Effects Question! - Forum - Site
User avatar
Joined: 20 Dec 2000
Location: Chicago, IL

Postby DeinReich » Sat Nov 19, 2005 9:51 pm

If the band's don't like it, it's their loss. They no longer get free promotion from us.
User avatar
Joined: 27 Mar 2005
Location: College

Postby devilmaykickass » Sat Nov 19, 2005 9:55 pm

AtomX wrote:Hey guys.

Move on.


Practice what you preach. LoL internet.
User avatar
Joined: 12 May 2003

Postby SuperFusion » Sat Nov 19, 2005 10:22 pm

devilmaykickass wrote:
AtomX wrote:Hey guys.

Move on.


Practice what you preach. LoL internet.

Joined: 11 Dec 2003
Location: Miami, FL

Postby scottyhotty » Sun Nov 20, 2005 12:26 am

SOAD2k8 wrote:If the band's don't like it, it's their loss. They no longer get free promotion from us.

Promotion? All you gotta do is watch MTV. Nuff said. It doesn't matter if they get "free promotion" from us. What matter is the "promotion" isn't authorized. I shall now quote some lines from one of the Red vs. Blue episodes:

Man 1: Does anyone have the new Creed CD?
Man 2: I have it.
Man 1: Give it to me. Right now!!!
Man 2: Give it to you?
Man 1: You're not giving it to me fast enough! Give it to me faster!!!
Man 2: Wait, that's illegal!
Man 1: No it isn't. I don't want it to be illegal, there for it isn't.

Most of you sound like this idiot. You bitch and whine about not being able to create vids using other people's music. You keep on forgetting that they own the damn rights! Who are WE to tell them they are wrong?

What if I were to steal your car keys and take your car out for a joy ride? I'll tell everyone that I'm using your car. It benefits you right? It's free "Promotion" for you to make you more popular since you got a nice car. There's nothing wrong with that right? Free Promotion baby! If you don't want the free promotion, your loss. I'm just helping you get more popular.

Or hell, I'll go to Tower Records and steal a CD. Then I go out and play it outside on my portable stereo. I'm "Promoting the CD" and helping Tower Records sell more by showing people on the street that good music is sold there. Then I get arrested and ask why. Hmmmmmmmm.

Let me tell you all a little secret. I have friends who haven't purchased a CD in over 7 years. They use Filesharing progs like Kazaa to get their MP3s... or they come to sites like this to D/L the music vid, and then copy the song off of the video to make their own MP3.

So while the MP3 isn't hosted on this site, the song still is there in it's entirety. All you need is a prog that can rip the song from the vid, and you got yourself an artist's music free of charge. (note: Those progs aren't that hard to find)

Just accept the fact that this site is basically illegal, but Phade has done a nice job keeping it alive. The more people keep thinking that this site "only helps to promote the artist more", the more they do it. And the more they do it, the more likely a larger record label will step up and ask that this site be shut down. Case in point - Napster.

Enjoy this place. Cherish it. But don't be stupid to think that breaking a law to help promote someone is ok. The law is final and absolute.
Joined: 20 Nov 2005

Postby Shinigami_Obelisk002 » Sun Nov 20, 2005 12:52 am

It's sad that if any one of us became a lawyer that we could just reap off heaping amounts of money by loaning out our services to the lawyers of famous singers so that they can get paid like the lawyers of those bands and we would also get a little kick-back...

Joined: 22 Jun 2004


Return to Site Announcements

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest