I tell them to read the AMV Guides on the .org.
Then this other guy comes in, and here's the conversation:
(I'm [Q] for future reference)
I was obviously incredibly pissed, as indicated by my horrible onslaught of cussing that makes no sense.[Q] wrote:You're an asshole and have no fucking clue what happened.Geo_The_#000000_Wizard wrote:Just stay away from a-m-v.org when it comes time to host your video. The administrator (a.k.a. spineless worm) caved to the RIAA without even putting up a fight when they ordered him to pull all the videos with music from Evanescence, Creed, and Seether, and had the audacity to attempt to order his users around, telling them not to boycott, as if he had any such right.
Google Video or YouTube are good alternatives for posting your video up on the web for others to see.
As for video solutions for making the movie, Pinnacle Studio and Avid XPress are good for the PC, and Final Cut Pro is EXCELLENT if you have a Mac. For Linux, I believe VirtualDub is a workable solution, though I admit I've never used it.
The RIAA didn't fucking go anywhere near the .org.
And even if it did, Phade(the owner of the site) said when he opened the site, he WOULD BEND.
Fucking hell man, if you had over a freaking terabyte of illegal shit, you'd bend too.
Here's what happened, asshole.
Some stupid noob emailed the label that happened to own Evanesence, Creed, and Seether. The noob asked if the bands made the music videos on the site.
By US law, when you get a document by that, you HAVE TO DEFEND YOUR COPYRIGHT OR YOU LOSE IT.
Evanesence KNEW about the .org, and has continually allowed certain users to use their songs(and liked them) in AMVs.
But, it's not the band's decision ont he matter. It's the labels.
It was a cease and desist order. Phade tried to work something out, but he decided instead of previewing EVERY SINGLE video ever made to those bands, you just can't link to them.
He wasn't ordering the users around, either.
He was telling them to not boycott, because what happened was out of both of the places' control.
It was a bad idea to boycott the bands because the label didn't send the C&D out of spite, they did it because they HAD TO.
If the label didn't do anything, they would have lost the copyrights for the bands. And if Phade had fought the stupid C&D, the site would've been shut down.
ANd where's the "audacity" here?
HE'S THE FUCKING SITE OWNER.
Even if he were "ordering them around" IT'S PERFECTLY JUSTIFIABLE.
You're a fucking asshole for calling Phade a spineless worm. He is spending over 10k A MONTH to host your AMVs FOR FUCKING FREE.
You need to get off your damn high horse, stop acting like a prick, and LEARN WHAT THE FUCK YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT before giving out false information and your opinion of something which is as worthless as a pile of shit on a hot day on my shoe.
So shut the fuck up, and never post again.
New personc omes in ont he debate.Geo_The_#000000_Wizard wrote:A bit defensive, aren't we?
Sure, just like it's perfectly justifiable for users to migrate to other communities run by those who will either stand up for their users' rights, or offer their users alternatives that are either decentralized, trust-based, or otherwise secure from industry intervention. He may be justified in acting the way he did, but he has no means (nor should he) of either forcing users to stay with his site or actually forcing them to heed what he says and follow along. Hell, I can go up to any random person on the street and say "give me all your money," but with no weapons, blackmail, or other means of coercing them to do so, it's nothing but an empty command.HE'S THE FUCKING SITE OWNER.
Even if he were "ordering them around" IT'S PERFECTLY JUSTIFIABLE.
Considering the number of pledge pages I come across during fifteen minutes of browsing that site, it seems to me like a mass exodus of disgruntled users would be pretty tough on his finances for the site. Fewer active users means fewer pledge-button clicks. Any site that relies that heavily on donations CANNOT afford to piss off its user base. Fortunately for him, anime fans seem to be both easily led and rabidly defensive of anyone they perceive to be doing right by them. So odds are that the community- and leader-minded "Phade" got to them before a dissenting voice planted the thought in their heads that maybe there are better alternatives.
Wrong. He's spending over 10k a month to host YOUR videos for free. I don't use a-m-v.org. I once considered it, but after finding out that he caved, I wouldn't very much want to have my content act as an incentive for people to visit that kind of site. I'll stick with either Google Video, YouTube, or simple torrent trackers. And you know what? Maybe it would be better if he spent less money on the site and kept some of that spare cash for a good legal defense. So he'd be able to host fewer videos. So there'd be limitations on how many on-site downloads he can have. Big deal. At least he'd be able to properly defend his users when the copyright cops come a-knockin'. I'd rather have a smaller site that I know is safe to use than a large, pull-out-all-the-stops site that crumbles at the first sign of legal trouble.You're a fucking asshole for calling Phade a spineless worm. He is spending over 10k A MONTH to host your AMVs FOR FUCKING FREE.
Mabye what happened is a sign of problems with the US copyright system. How exactly does one define "defending" copyright? If the bands didn't mind themselves, they could've gone to court, requested acknowledgement of their ownership of their material, given their OK officially, and let that be that. Maybe that's enough, maybe not. I'm not a lawyer, I don't know if that would suffice. But it's a lot better than his response, which was either lazy, uninformed, or self-serving.By US law, when you get a document by that, you HAVE TO DEFEND YOUR COPYRIGHT OR YOU LOSE IT.
Evanesence KNEW about the .org, and has continually allowed certain users to use their songs(and liked them) in AMVs.
But, it's not the band's decision ont he matter. It's the labels.
It was a cease and desist order. Phade tried to work something out, but he decided instead of previewing EVERY SINGLE video ever made to those bands, you just can't link to them.
So think for a minute about the users. You're an enterprising AMVer, and you make a video from a Creed song. Suddenly the host pulls it. Assume you lost the original file in a hard drive crash. Assume you deleted it, figuring "the org" would be keeping it safe. You're SOL now, with nobody able to view your hard work and no way to post it anywhere else. What the hell are you supposed to do now? And are you still such a big fan of the site?
Frankly, Q, you can defend Phade's community all you want but he clearly cares more for either himself or his pocketbook than for his users and their creative endeavours, and I will continue avoiding any site with which he's involved, and advising others to do the same. He's shown where his loyalties lie, and can't be trusted.
Torrent trackers or public FTPs, on the other hand, can.
Oh, and just a parting thought: most of those videos are not Phade's. His users created them, he only provides a common repository for storing them. Without his site, the videos would still exist. Possibly requiring more time to find, but a search for "anime music videos" on Google turns up plenty of results that are not "the org."
Without a-m-v.org, the creators would still have their videos.
Without the videos, a-m-v.org would be an empty shell of a site. All that would remain are the pledge-begging pages.
Dave the lost wrote:What if they never uploaded it to a-m-v.org in the first place, they would have still lost it when their hard drive got destroyed, or if a-m-v.org for shut down.
And do you really think google would spend large amounts of money defending the right of people to put copyright infringing items up on their site?
If the RIAA goes to google and says "You have these videos, 1, 2, 3, 4, that include our music and we did not give them permission to have them, we thus request that you take them down"
So tell me, you think google's going to fight back, or do you think google's going to take down the videos?
Hint, their TOS clearly state that they don't allow it and they have simple, easy to fill out forms for reporting copyright infringement, never mind the whole they have to.
And since you agree that it's perfectly justifiable, why are you arguing about it? His site, his rules.
And since they're not forced to stay there, yet they still do, clearly he doesn't seem to be pissing off his player base.
And a question, why aren't you up in arms protesting gaiaonline's refusal to protect copyright infringers?
Unlike a-m-v.org where lawyers had to be brought in to stop him, they'll delete your work if you use copyrighted stuff without the owner's consent straight away, no need for the owner of the copyright to even know it's happening.
And yet you're still here, and no complaining about it either...
So, you've got a site that spends less money, but has more legal defense...ok, he skimped a bit on servers, you may experience frequent outages, but you get that.
It's a pity that all your legal defense can do is pick holes in their argument, and stall.
They come to you with a list of infringing items they want removed. They hold, or represent the copyright holders.
The site has four choices.
1. Do what they say
2. Spend lots of money on a legal fight to stall, then do what they say
3. Refuse to do what they say, and get taken to court where you're free to be shut down, and possibly fined/imprisoned (quite unlikely the last, those are mainly for commercial distributors, and uncommon)
4. Refuse to do what they say, spend lots of money on a legal defense, which stalls your site being shut down.
For hopefully obvious reasons many sites choose the first option.
Maybe you disagree with copyright law, fine, that's hardly anything to do with a-m-v.org.
And, just like any other law, while it's in action, it is enforceable, and still counts.
Just because you think the murder laws should be changed to allow some things, doesn't mean that you should be allowed to act like they're changed before they are, or hide someone/help them commit the crime, and expect no repercussions.
I'll update you as the thread progresses, but.. What are your thoughts on this?Geo_The_#000000_Wizard wrote:What I meant to get across was that they could have uploaded it to an alternative host that wouldn't take it down, so when the original file was lost, there would still be a copy. This goes back to the point about there being alternatives to a-m-v.org. Assuming the file is lost in a crash either way, it's better to have it uploaded to a host that will keep it around instead of caving to industry pressure and taking it down.Dave the lost wrote:What if they never uploaded it to a-m-v.org in the first place, they would have still lost it when their hard drive got destroyed, or if a-m-v.org for shut down.
Google would A. have the time and resources to verify whether or not the work actually infringed on copyright and B. if they thought there was enough of a demand for the service, go to court and fight for their users. Remember that Google is huge, and in America, money seems to be what dictates right vs. wrong these days. One doesn't just walk up to Google and start barking orders.And do you really think google would spend large amounts of money defending the right of people to put copyright infringing items up on their site?
If they determine that the videos are actually infringing on copyright, then they'll do whatever's in their policy. "Phade" saw the scary men, freaked, and pulled whatever they wanted pulled. Google has the financial and legal backing to say "You are GOING to give us time to double-check the content, like it or not." Remember also that Google is a media company. They can have lobbyists like any other industry, and they can have those lobbyists push Congress to revise copyright law if it benefits Google. Historically copyright revision has always benefitted the copyright holder and not the customer or end-user, but Google's in a position to change that, if they deem it beneficial to them to do so.If the RIAA goes to google and says "You have these videos, 1, 2, 3, 4, that include our music and we did not give them permission to have them, we thus request that you take them down"
So tell me, you think google's going to fight back, or do you think google's going to take down the videos?
Hint, their TOS clearly state that they don't allow it and they have simple, easy to fill out forms for reporting copyright infringement, never mind the whole they have to.
It's justifiable to the extent that it's justifiable for me to make whatever rules I want in my house. However, if people don't like it, there is NOTHING I can do to stop them from LEAVING AND NEVER COMING BACK. Which is honestly what I hope a lot of his users do.And since you agree that it's perfectly justifiable, why are you arguing about it? His site, his rules.
Wait. Let this happen a couple more times. Let his users express concern over the stifling of their creativity, and let that concern be met by his "LA LA LA I CAN NOT HEAR YOU LALALALAAAAAA" responses, coupled with insults and threats to those who talk about boycotting (hint, "Phade," there are a LOT more than "all 5 of us" who are boycotting these bands. 5 million is more in the ballpark, and you can find a lot of them at Slashdot). Their patience will only run so far. Everyone has limits. And it'll start slow, but pick up speed plenty quickly. One user gets pissed off and leaves, a couple others react. Maybe they openly shun him, maybe they talk about why he shouldn't have left. But for every one who speaks ill of him, a few others who don't say anything about it are thinking that maybe he was right. So next time, a few users leave. And the same effect is felt, but wider. And more users leave. Those who stay might be less inclined to click those "Pledge" buttons. Why donate to a site that doesn't promise to keep your content around? Pretty much like paying for nothing. People make donations because they want to see some positive result of it. If donating is only going to lead to more videos being pulled as a result of corporate intervention, then why bother donating at all? Next time, it could be theirs that gets yanked.And since they're not forced to stay there, yet they still do, clearly he doesn't seem to be pissing off his player base.
I have been in the past. Plenty of arguments were made, and won by me, in the anime forums about downloading anime and other such issues. I pissed a lot of people off, and I never claimed to be a contender in any popularity contests, but I shot down challenges to my points well enough.And a question, why aren't you up in arms protesting gaiaonline's refusal to protect copyright infringers?
I assume you're talking about the art forums. Simple answer: I don't visit those. C&T is the forum I visit here more than any other.Unlike a-m-v.org where lawyers had to be brought in to stop him, they'll delete your work if you use copyrighted stuff without the owner's consent straight away, no need for the owner of the copyright to even know it's happening.
Because Gaia isn't my primary forum of choice. Gaia's the forum I browse when my first choice is either down or having a slow news day.And yet you're still here, and no complaining about it either...
It IS possible to win these cases against the copyright holders. It's just that nobody ever actually tries. Get a judge to rule that AMVs fall under Fair Use, and that stuffs a big ol' cork in Creed's mouth pretty quick.So, you've got a site that spends less money, but has more legal defense...ok, he skimped a bit on servers, you may experience frequent outages, but you get that.
It's a pity that all your legal defense can do is pick holes in their argument, and stall.
They come to you with a list of infringing items they want removed. They hold, or represent the copyright holders.
The site has four choices.
1. Do what they say
2. Spend lots of money on a legal fight to stall, then do what they say
3. Refuse to do what they say, and get taken to court where you're free to be shut down, and possibly fined/imprisoned (quite unlikely the last, those are mainly for commercial distributors, and uncommon)
4. Refuse to do what they say, spend lots of money on a legal defense, which stalls your site being shut down.
It has a lot to do with a-m-v.org. Copyright law was the reason those videos were pulled in the first place. The video creators were using the music as a fan work, never tried to make money off of it, and never tried to claim ownership or authorship of the songs themselves. All they did was set them to video. Most had copyright notices in the videos themselves stating "This song is the property of ($BAND) and its associates blah blah blah fine print info that's usual for these disclaimers." A little reform of copyright law granting Fair Use rights for people to do works like this, and this would never be a problem again. Of course, going on historical evidence, "Phade" is still every bit as likely to pull the videos "because it's the right thing to do" even if they have the legal right to keep them around. Talk to any anime fan about bootlegging, fansubs, or downloading licensed anime. The response you'll get is WAY beyond "You shouldn't do it for reasons of legal repercussions." Legality is all they actually have to worry about, but there's a mindset among anime fans (which the majority of the users of "the org" are) that if it's illegal and in any way, shape, or form keeps money away from copyright holders or ESPECIALLY the animators (mind you, even refusal to buy OR pirate falls under this category, and so does buying legal used copies), it must be morally reprehensible to a degree not even capital punishment or abortion could dream to touch.Maybe you disagree with copyright law, fine, that's hardly anything to do with a-m-v.org.
"Phade" needs to either reassess his priorities or watch his user base slowly fade into oblivion. And if the former doesn't happen, I'm going to do everything in my power to help the latter along.
