Rumblefish, Youtube and abusive copyright claims.

[guartz]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nPBlfeuZuWg

So here is a guy who uploads a video of himself picking flowers that would normally get like what, 15 views, depending on how many friends he has. Pretty typical upload on shitube. What's the big deal?

Turns out youtube detected a copyright musical content in his video. Yea, the birds chirping in the background. He gets a notice that a company called Rumblefish owns the musical content, so youtube decided to put ads in the video and gives all revenue to Rumblefish.

Here are some links that talk about this in length:
http://www.google.com/support/forum/...372461a6&hl=en

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/200...06106704.shtml


tl;dr Basically the best scam on youtube to date.

edit: This is a pretty illegal scam that's going on, in my opinion. See put yourself in that guy's shoes, you dispute the false copyright, it gets auto denied and your only recourse is to try to contact somebody at the company directly to get them to drop their claim, spending I don't know how many hours if not days doing it..or file a lawsuit. Would you do it? Personally, I would not. I don't think I'm alone. How many people just say fuck it and don't fight back? Leaving Youtube and who ever made the claim to profit. Sure, these videos get what, 100 views at most, but I bet there are shit ton of them.

[SephYuyX]

So, a mistake is made, then corrected, and no one is the wiser or is hurt.
Awesome story bro.

[Yugl]

Salads were meant to be naked. WHY ARE YOU DRESSING THEM?!

^ Italicized was the best part of those comments.

[guartz]

So, a mistake is made, then corrected, and no one is the wiser or is hurt.
Awesome story bro.

It was not corrected, sir. He lost the dispute claim.

[Correction]

This doesn't belong in the politics/religion subforum.

[MistaC87]

This doesn't belong in the politics/religion subforum.

This could generate a political discussion, and unfortunately that's what internet censorship has turned into. It's becoming a big political debate.

(Censored because I'm a new user)

So here is a guy who uploads a video of himself picking flowers that would normally get like what, 15 views, depending on how many friends he has. Pretty typical upload on shitube. What's the big deal?

Turns out youtube detected a copyright musical content in his video. Yea, the birds chirping in the background. He gets a notice that a company called Rumblefish owns the musical content, so youtube decided to put ads in the video and gives all revenue to Rumblefish.

Here are some links that talk about this in length:
(Censored because I'm a new user)

(Censored because I'm a new user)


tl;dr Basically the best scam on youtube to date.

edit: This is a pretty illegal scam that's going on, in my opinion. See put yourself in that guy's shoes, you dispute the false copyright, it gets auto denied and your only recourse is to try to contact somebody at the company directly to get them to drop their claim, spending I don't know how many hours if not days doing it..or file a lawsuit. Would you do it? Personally, I would not. I don't think I'm alone. How many people just say fuck it and don't fight back? Leaving Youtube and who ever made the claim to profit. Sure, these videos get what, 100 views at most, but I bet there are shit ton of them.

I have investigated the video myself, and either the person is a god at mastering sound....oh come on who are we kidding? You just can't "steal" a sound of a bird. Birds are birds. End of story. Some sound alike, and some are their own unique thing. I'm an audiophile and a sound designer (I work with music A LOT) and this was a real bird in the background audio.

This reminds me of [a certain company] taking down a video of someone's kid dancing to a song playing in the background.

Frankly, this seems like more of a mistake, which is hard for me to explain, but I honestly think they just have lazy morons viewing user counterclaims. But either way, the outcome is very negative no matter what. To me, it basically seems like someone saying "THIS IS MINE MINE MINE" when it isn't even their's to begin with.

I have also been victim of illegitimate claims on several accounts and they piss me off. In 2007 on one certain account, I remember a film company doing a contest for film, and I have also been working on video editing for years, so I decided to take a stab at it, and I submitted it. Instead of getting any recognition, a person at Lionsgate told YouTube to get rid of my video for it violated the DMCA. After they removed it, it shut down my account completely (I made a music remix for a TV show and a TV show mashup clip which were both removed by a company).

I did get my account back up thanks to the folks at Google, but I no longer post to that account out of fear that I will lose it again, and I never had a chance to participate in the contest...but that matters not to me anymore.

I knew this would be come a more widespread problem, and I'm glad this thing involving Rumblefish is out there now, because it pisses me off when the person being claimed is doing absolutely nothing to violate any copyright. In my case, it was all over spoiled milk for me because I didn't have permission the first two times I received strikes on my YouTube account. But the 3rd time, WOW, that just blew smoke out my ears. It feels so terrible to work your butt off on something, and for it to go NO WHERE. Pretty much why I stopped editing altogether back in the day.

I dislike these companies that censor artistic talent, public domain videos, and stuff like this. And to think that stuff like this is happening now because of the fiasco of the whole fear of pirated music and movies from years ago which spawned the terrible Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Now look at how terribly this whole thing is backfiring (and yet they want to introduce crap like SOPA).

Like I said in the title, this is proof of some unethical business practices for sure. I sent an e-mail to the company asking them to re-review the content in a peaceful manner, and for them to correct their decision. Granted, I don't think that will do anything, but hey, can't say I didn't try.

If they do nothing, it will generate a lot of negative PR for them for sure, because more and more of things like this will continue to happen. And in case none of you noticed, there is a lot of activism going on lately for stuff like this...and I won't be surprised if I see a story about Rumblefish being DDoS'd coming up on my Twitter anytime soon, nor will I have any sympathy for them.

[kuronosan]

Nevermind the fact that YouTube is already under fire from its users for allowing Replygirls accounts to stay and for pushing paid content to the front page instead of user-created free content.

[pohibaba]

From what I heard, Rumblefish didn't put in a copyright claim at all. Youtube's copyright detection software just sucks really bad and flagged this video on accident. This also happens occasionally with car and motorcycle background noise as well.

[Headspace]

Can't film nature.

It's copyright protected

[Acturus]

Can't film nature.

It's copyright protected

Occupy Mother Nature

[Silenka]

See, if everyone used adblock this wouldn't be a problem

[hey]

See, if everyone used adblock this wouldn't be a problem

Right, since youtube wouldn't exist.

[Silenka]

Oh no, how would people live without Youtube poop and He-man mashups?

[miokomioko]

Occupy Mother Nature

I love camping. :D

[BaneTheBrawler]

Oh no, how would people live without Youtube poop and He-man mashups?

HEY!

HEYEYEYEYEY



You leave He-Man out of this!

[hey]

Oh no, how would people live without Youtube poop and He-man mashups?

Except there'd also be no google, or pretty much the majority of the internet. If no site could generate revenue with ads, the internet would basically be wikipedia, amazon, non free porn sites, and other tiny sites that people can afford to pay for out of pocket. Ad block is great and all, but if every single person used it, the internet would suck.

[MaachaQ]

Argh, my internet is being flakey... Hope the post works this time.

Sorry to bump this thread, but it was the closest that seemed relevant

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2...-by-lionsgate/
The story is rather long, but it's basically about a 3 year old video which has been used in US Copyright office hearings as an example of exemptions in the DMCA for fair use. That video recently had a claim made against it by Lionsgate, that claim was overturned, and they made another claim which is currently being appealed.

[Qalbert]

Related:

tl;dr, dude made a minecraft parody of gangnam style, it keeps getting taken down/blocked

[Quicklet]

There's also this from about a month ago:

http://www.reddit.com/r/Games/commen..._users_videos/

Unfortunately I don't see this getting better in the short-term, because that would probably require revisions to the DMCA, and having proactive change on these issues in Congress is going to be next to impossible, even though reaction to SOPA was very successful. Long-term, big content is fighting a losing battle, but I don't know how long it's going to be until we reach a tipping point on this issue. Same thing with patents and net neutrality.