One rule for them?

Technical Ben · Oct 22, 2012, 11:28:11

I find it infuriating if Youtube or other companies take down your work for "copyright infringement". Oh, I understand they have to, and don't want to infringe copyright, but it's so hard to remove everything from a video or recording.

But fair enough. It's a protection, right? If we ever needed to remove some of our own copyrighted material, Youtube, Itunes, Google etc, would help us. Wouldn't they?
Seems like they won't http://torrentfreak.com/artist-cant-get-pirated-music-off-itunes-google-and-microsoft-stores-121016/

Unless your a big company, you get little to no help, while others make money off your work. I know there are some photographers here who would agree it can be impossible to get the big guys to listen. Sad really.

cavillas · Oct 22, 2012, 12:31:43

Aren't those companies now pirating this persons original copyrighted material?

pctech · Oct 22, 2012, 14:33:05

It's got bugger all to do with morals and all down to how many lawyers you can afford.

The law is there to serve the rich and corporate interests, the average working person just gets done over by it.

zappaDPJ · Oct 22, 2012, 17:43:41

It's actually more to do with the DMCA safe harbor rules which limit service provider liability i.e. it's really not their problem, they are not liable. A large service provider is unlikely to take any action unless a take down request is via a DMCA and the article fails to say whether or not a DMCA was involved. If it was they would have acted upon it or at least that's been the case in my experience.

Technical Ben · Oct 22, 2012, 18:39:44

Ah, but that's the problem Zappa. If they are following DMCA, why did they not reply to the artists request? They have now technically lost the safe harbor. But I guess 1 guy can't sue them for nothing in comparison to Apple or Warner etc.

PS, he did file a DMCA, so sorry if you did not notice.

Quote"These companies are willing to shove 1,000 attorneys down your throat if you share music, but won't even respond to a legal order about actual music theft and piracy," Jordan concludes.

zappaDPJ · Oct 22, 2012, 21:45:56

I'm fairly sure the artist in question didn't file a DMCA but instead sent out a cease and desist letter although ironically he did I believe have a DMCA served on him. I'm also reasonably sure it was a letter and not cease-and-desist order which would have carried far more weight as it generally needs to be obtained from a judge.

I do agree with the general sentiment of the piece but from what I've seen (this story went viral very quickly) there may be some inaccuracies compared to the original blog story. I could be wrong though, it has been known

pctech · Oct 22, 2012, 22:29:01

Doesn't DMCA only apply to the States though, as in the person who has been infringed has to be a US corporate or citizen.

zappaDPJ · Oct 23, 2012, 00:45:30

No. The act was originally passed in the US Senete but adopted by the EU soon after.

Technical Ben · Oct 23, 2012, 09:47:09

Quote from: zappaDPJ on Oct 22, 2012, 21:45:56
I'm fairly sure the artist in question didn't file a DMCA but instead sent out a cease and desist letter although ironically he did I believe have a DMCA served on him. I'm also reasonably sure it was a letter and not cease-and-desist order which would have carried far more weight as it generally needs to be obtained from a judge.

I do agree with the general sentiment of the piece but from what I've seen (this story went viral very quickly) there may be some inaccuracies compared to the original blog story. I could be wrong though, it has been known

Fair enough. I wonder how many DMCA's actually get iTunes to remove songs then? (Or google etc etc)

zappaDPJ · Oct 23, 2012, 10:30:57

Quote from: Technical Ben on Oct 23, 2012, 09:47:09
Fair enough. I wonder how many DMCA's actually get iTunes to remove songs then? (Or google etc etc)

Are you sitting comfortably because it's a bit of a shocker. I believe Google for example claim to receive somewhere in the region of one million take down requests per month. How many of those are via a DMCA I don't know but they do claim to responded to all copyright removal requests that meet with DMCA standards. I've also read that they claim to honour around 97% of those requests, the remaining 3% being bogus e.g. anticompetitive.

Technical Ben · Oct 23, 2012, 17:58:38

True, but do they do so for individuals? I know Sony can get anyone's video taken down. Think you'd manage to get a Sony video taken down?

zappaDPJ · Oct 23, 2012, 20:41:32

Quote from: Technical Ben on Oct 23, 2012, 17:58:38
True, but do they do so for individuals? I know Sony can get anyone's video taken down. Think you'd manage to get a Sony video taken down?

In my admittedly limited experience, I think you might. DMCA notices seem to carry quite a lot of weight. I've seen a situation where a very large corporation blatantly stole some graphics from one of my clients and placed them on their website. A DMCA notice had it removed within hours. I should say there was little doubt regarding ownership, the material that they stole was still parked on my client's server space. They just linked to it from their site. That may well have been a factor in the quick take down

Technical Ben · Oct 23, 2012, 21:30:34

Sounds reasonable then. Still does not help the "use it now, ask later" attitude of some companies.