Tag: fair use

Improving YouTube’s Content ID could help creators of all stripes

Why not make Content ID more accessible and transparent?

Much has been written about YouTube’s Content ID program, a fingerprinting technology that allows rights holders to find and claim their music or movies when uploaded to YouTube.  The technology was introduced in 2008 in the wake of Viacom’s lawsuit against YouTube and since then has helped (some) creators mitigate the problem of piracy on the popular UGC (user-generated content) site.

Those who have access to the Content ID system can uploaded reference files and use a dashboard to choose how matches should be handled.  They can be limited based on audio, video, and length.  Matching content then can be blocked, removed, or monetized based on territorial rights.

Read More

BOGUS fair use claims hurt creators already victimized by piracy

YouTube users claim Fair Use as a defense for uploading full copies of pirated movies

There was a lot of talk about fair use and takedown abuse at last week’s the U.S. Copyright Office’s Section 512 roundtables in San Francisco.  Many of those who spoke, bemoaned how poor, innocent uploaders were victimized, time after time, by malicious DMCA takedowns.

It’s a tried and true talking point, convenient, but disingenuous all the same.  Some of us, myself included, tried to make the point that creators, whose work is routinely (and massively stolen),  are often (doubly) victimized by malicious fair use claims.  

I thought I’d share an example of this that occurred just this week on YouTube.  On Tuesday a full-copy of the Swedish indie film “Kyss Mig” (all 147 minutes of it) was uploaded to YouTube by a user aptly named “Free Movies.”  As an added flourish, the user-name included the notation, “free movies bitches.”

Read More

YouTube’s DMCA decision and the campaign to morph victims into villains

YouTube will pay copyright court costs for a few users–not because it’s right–but to protect Google’s bottom line

According to a story in today’s NY Times, the folks at YouTube are ready to pony up cash to support some of its users “fair use” claims in court.

“YouTube said on Thursday that it would pick up the legal costs of a handful of video creators that the company thinks are the targets of unfair takedown demands. It said the creators it chose legally use third-party content under “fair use” provisions carved out for commentary, criticism, news and parody.”

You’ve probably read a lot about “fair use” lately.  It’s the Electronic Frontier Foundation’s mantra and if the folks there had their way, pretty much everything and anything would be considered “fair use.”  Fair use an important legal doctrine and when applied properly (criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research) is not an infringement of copyright.  However, these days, too often is used as a disingenuous defense for copyright theft.

The tech-funded campaign to turn villains into victims

When a court recently ruled that a snippet of a Prince song was indeed “fair use” in the notorious Dancing Baby case it gave a boost to efforts to use fair use as a cudgel against rights holders who legitimately assert their rights using the DMCA takedown process.

Note that the actual video at the center of this case was reposted after the uploader sent a counter-notice. The only reason the case ended up in court was because the uploader, Stephanie Lenz, filed suit and the only reason she did so was because she was bankrolled by the EFF.  The EFF saw it as an opportunity to advance its Google-funded agenda.

Read More

Copyright au courant for Monday, September 21st.

Our pirate pal Kim Dotcom is back in the news as a hearing for his extradition to the United States to face charges of copyright infringement, racketeering, and money laundering was held Monday in New Zealand:

Big car, big chair, big black outfit means a grand entrance at court for America’s target. –NZ Herald

Read More

Dancing around DMCA Takedowns on YouTube

Court’s language on “fair use” won’t change fight against online piracy

Indie filmmakers and musicians who find their work uploaded to YouTube without permission are probably pretty familiar with sending DMCA notices to Google.  I know I am.  I also know that the 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeal’s decision in the EFF’s infamous  “Dancing Baby” lawsuit will have ZERO impact on how I approach sending those notices moving forward.

Read More

Instagram rip-offs by Richard Prince show why we need a small claims copyright court now

Ripping off artists in the name of ART is not OK

How long are we going to continue to let small artists get screwed by those with deep pockets?  Talk to any small creator–filmmakers, musicians, photographers, artists, authors–and ask whether they’ve had their work stolen (and monetized) by others and most will likely say “yes.”  Then ask them what they did about it.  The answer will likely be, “nothing.”

Right now a con-artist named Richard Prince is busy raking in the dough by selling Instagram photographs taken by others.   Oh yeah, he adds some drivel and emojis to the bottom of each photo before he blows it up a 65 x 48 print.  Yes art is often derivative, and yes these photographs are altered–but, in essence, at its core, the art remains a photograph taken (and owned) by someone else.

Prince, and the Gagosian Gallery where his work was shown, apparently have no qualms about blatantly appropriating and cashing by selling the work of other artists without their permission.  As a Paddy Johnson noted so succinctly in a piece he wrote for Artnet News, “Richard Prince sucks.”

So, while there’s no doubt Prince is a phony, piggy-backing off the work of Instagram artists; the question is–returning to my original query–Can the photographers whose pictures were stolen do anything to stop Prince’s outrageous fraud?  Well, not really. You see, quite simply,  Mr. Prince is loaded and the people he steals from are not.

Read More
Loading