This is so idiotic. I'm guessing the music labels expected Google to blink and provide some sort of compensation or revenue share associated with highly viewed videos that feature copyrighted tracks. Free music is free publicity and I'm sure they recognize that. This action just shows that Google won't play ball with the labels even if it means they must develop and implement this muting technology to drive their point home.
The question is, who will suffer first...Youtube or the music labels?
James Williams
· 10 months ago
I can see video services soon sprouting up in countries that don't care about copyright law. Just as they eventually came around and allowed Apple to remove DRM from music tracks, they will realize that fair use only helps them in the long run. Youtube had become a MTV of sorts given that the original is mostly just a reality-tv shell of itself with a nonsensical acronym. As opposed to sampling tracks on youtube to determine if they will buy an album, people will just torrent it.
Frank
· 10 months ago
Copyrights should be respected, just as people's other rights should be respected. We shouldn't really complain that YouTube is trying to do the right thing.
The fact that rights haven't been respected up to now is irrelevant. (Should we go back to not allowing women and blacks the right to vote?)
That being said, I have really enjoyed listening to various artists on YouTube, that I would never have heard otherwise.
I hope that the folks at YouTube can come up with a good solution.
bpa71
· 10 months ago
Does this mean that they will start muting all the acoustic guitar covers and lessons I watch on youtube? That would REALLY suck!!!
geek_girl
· 10 months ago
They could start creating a catalogue of 'free range' artists who will give blanket permission like NIN, Radiohead and Joss Stone. The music industry might want to play hardball but there's a lot of musicians out there who would rather have the publicity. It won't be long becfore they're putting blanket creative commons licences on their products for use on places like YouTube. In the meantime maybe we can listen to the thousands of original recording artists out there who are really good and exceptionaly talented but that 'the industry' won't give the time of day to.
Gavin Ricketts
· 10 months ago
I'd be surprised if they'll stop at muting the track. Why not replace the music with a cross-sounding voice over saying "The track that was upload with this video is in violation of copyright legislation. Please go to iTunes and pay for the track."
Paul
· 10 months ago
Rickrolling will not be affected. Some copyright holders (e.g. Sony) choose to allow users to use their music.
datter
· 10 months ago
Yes, his is annoying but not unexpected and honestly if you're to follow the letter of the law it's perfectly understandable. I don't think it means the end of the sorts of vids your talking about though, what it means is one of two things:
1) People will start returning to self hosting these sorts of videos. Yes there are bandwidth issues related to that, but there are a few good ways around that that I plan to write about in the near future.
2) People will start seeking out (and finding) off shore (ie- outside the US) video hosting services. Wherever you find a need, you'll quickly find someone to fill it and pick up the slack that Youtube and the like are not legally allowed to fill. There are many solutions to a variety of problems in the world, that do not involve the United States, it's companies or it's laws.
Neither of the above get past the moral issue of course, as you really shouldn't be using copyrighted music in your videos in the first place. The two coming solutions I mentioned above do not fix that issue, they merely allow people to continue to ignore it as they've previously been able to do on Youtube.
James
· 10 months ago
I suggest people respond by uploading videos that contain the audio track of John Cage's "4'33" (of silence). Add the original recording to your personal videos, record yourself performing it, be sure to mention that it is being used as the soundtrack, and challenge them to figure out how they can mute this song...
Unfortuantely they are already muting videos of this type as well. I have had that happen to one of mine. Their "dispute process" is a sham. No one I have talked to has ever had the decision reversed. The type of video you are talking about clearly falls under fair use and the courts have even ruled as such. But the only to get your video unmuted is to change the audio to one of their "pre-licensed" tracks or record your self singing the song that never ends or some crap.
Tad
· 10 months ago
Every cloud has a silver lining: I think this will actually hasten the death of the big music labels. Having music under video is just too much part of the form for users to simply stop doing it. People will change over to using music from their favorite unsigned bands for their YouTube video soundtracks, as well as using music from bands that offer their music freely on the web. Those bands and tunes will get bigger exposure and more fans, listeners and buyers because of it. That very effect - the popularization of new music and large-scale exposure of bands - used to be the service big music labels provided. What hot, new band is going to sign with a big label now when they can "rule the airwaves" of YouTube, without competition from classic and big-label music?
The labels have just created another way new bands can make it big without the labels. There will absolutely be more Numa-numa viral hits out there... the only difference now is, the music labels won't be a part them.
The river isn't kind to those who try to swim against the current. This isn't the day the music died, but it is the day the music labels were admitted to the hospice facility.
manuel
· 10 months ago
This only means that youtube will stop being the center of the video universe online and some other location will grow based on people usage for this kind of things they are controlling. Basically its obvious youtube is on its way to become something of a legit online tv station. I think the sooner people realize that, the sooner they can start posting their crap somewhere else. :)
Steve Darmis
· 10 months ago
I posted several DVD slideshows with music of photos that I took on vacations, my dog, old family photos, etc. Without the music, the slideshows are JUST slideshows. The music is everything. Not allowing the music for such things is terribly petty and sad. I BOUGHT the music I used on itunes, and now they are saying I can't use the song in a sideshow I made? This is really sad. How could any artist say "no" to the music I chose (bought) in a slideshow I made in memory of my dog that died. The song is about a dog crossing over and going to heaven. The name of the song is "Little Doggie". This is a perfect example of how important the music is to a slideshow. Shame on whoever is responsible for not letting me use this song. I hope the music industry comes to their senses and lightens up. Any comments? Agree? Disagree?
Paul
· 10 months ago
Steve, I appreciate the sentiment, but you didn't buy a license to use and redistribute the music, even if its non-commercial. An artist isn't directly saying 'no' to letting you use that in a slideshow - but to anyone using it in principle without their prior permission. Youtube can't distinguish whether the slideshow is about a dead dog or if its a slideshow about boobs. Its impossible to monitor each usage and make an individual decision.
Nicholas Quixote
· 10 months ago
From what I understood reading their blog, it seemed like YouTube was trying to take the lesser evil, simply muting instead of a take down for what is already and offending piece. Somebody has to complain,say the music's theirs, AND that they don't want it used, before YT mutes it. Many music authors or performers won't complain because things like Rickrolls are promotional. They could complain mind you, but they get something out of it, so why bother.
Films that use music for some type of critique are more vulnerable. The real problem, is the DMCA, which favors established folks with deep pockets. A complaint puts all of the burden on the person using any music, many of whom are kids or struggling artists. Complaints can be filed frivolously, at a whim. Satire is a particularly vulnerable area because it is often critical, and there is a grey area as to what should be considered fair use. If you see something uncritical or unflattering of your music, that uses a piece of that music, just complain. The complaint will probably be stifled unless the person wishes to defend themselves. If they are poor, they probably won't. There's a mute on free speech that squashes dissent.
Pawelotti
· 10 months ago
I understand copyright but muting is foolish. The music also gets promoted by being used in videos.They could make something out of it, instead of muting it. If they can automate muting, based on their "library" of copyrighted music, the could also automate a link to a shop where the music can be bought. Then they could measure the effect. Now that's contextual advertising.
atom
· 10 months ago
How short-sighted - if they could add a link next to (or even within) the video that clicked through to iTunes (etc) to buy the track, then they might actually make some sales. I guess it's more engineering for YouTube in the short-term, but surely it makes more sense in the long term?
Lolwut?
· 10 months ago
So, a website relying on showcasing the creativity (or otherwise) of its users decides to drastically cut down the scope for this creativity.
Vimeo, anyone?
Justin Leon
· 10 months ago
Now I really hope there is a mass exodus from the site. If it wasn't unfair bans for idiotic reasons and dealing with idiots, now the music being muted should get people to go to other video sites.
Maybe the pirate bay can make a video sharing site knowing their stance on copyright.
Paul
· 10 months ago
@Lolwut I would say that using somebody else's music isn't an example of creativity. Now opening up garageband and making your own, copyright free soundtrack would be a better example
Maria Popova
· 10 months ago
Absurdity all around. Reminds me of that stupid case of the brilliant, critically-acclaimed animated film that got banned because it uses 80-year-old copyrighted music.
When will copyright holders, especially those in the creative sphere, realize that inclusion in content is a word-of-mouth powerhouse on their side, not an offense? Ridiculous.
Tim
· 10 months ago
"I don’t understand why any copyright holder could prefer removing his/her audio track to simply slapping some ads and trying to monetize the fact that someone, somewhere, likes their song."
Artists and labels want control of their music. They don't want to be associated with user created content that may not be in line with their own views or public image. Public image goes a long way in the music industry. Just because it can be good publicity, doesn't mean it all would be. Think about how it really could be used and you should get where they are coming from, unless you really feel that entitled.
chris
· 10 months ago
I'll enjoy it while I still can.
"...push the pool stick in your new crib, same hand that you hoop with, swing around like you stupid..."
All of these videos work for me with sound... You guys are crazy.
joanned
· 10 months ago
another great opportunity for indie artists who are signed to labels who smartly wont give in. thanx major labels!!
Poingly
· 10 months ago
People's copyrights SHOULD be respected, as a result YouTube's muting is completely disrespectful to copyright law.
The purpose of copyright law is NOT to protect your work; that is a corollary. The purpose of copyright law is to foster creative works. Just because record companies can afford better lawyers is irrelevant.
The laws haven't been ignored; they've been interpreted differently.
Why doesn't YouTube work with the copyright holders to create a system where the video poster pays a small fee when the system sees that the video being uploaded contains copyrighted material. YouTube and the copyright holder could share this fee and make some money OR the video poster would have to agree to some type of advertisement being placed on their video, again with the revenue being shared by both YouTube and the copyright holder.
Clem
· 10 months ago
Question: if someone plays a popular song on his piano and posts the video on YouTube, is it also considered a copyright infringement?
IKSOVIET
· 10 months ago
not only they mute video for copyright issues. Try finding Billy Crystal in Letterman show and you will see they cut out the part he says about the earthquake in Obama's party the 20th...
Joe Spencer
· 10 months ago
YouTube travels to the past to revive silent movies
Stepha
· 10 months ago
i am a dancer. Does this mean that i can't post videos wiht background music anymore?? Ok, first of all, we shouldn't have to pay for music in the first place. People shoudl make music for the love of it and not for the money. You tube was the one place that made snese because i could listen to music all i wanted. And now they took that away too? What do i do if i need advice from youtubers on dancing? write in teh description box: sorry there is no beat, youtube decided to mute all my videos, but have fun watching my ballet shoes move in silence for 2 minutes.
If youtube doesnt fix this problem soon, people are going to stop using it. When myspace got corrup like that, everyoen left. I don't knwo a single person who uses it anymore. Youtube is going to be the same thing. Plus, when you do "audioswap", the songs are CRAP...sorry but it's true
Alex
· 10 months ago
When I actually have BOUGHT the song, YouTube muted it. I'm sick of the record labels. The only artist that I can really understand is about Prince and why all of his songs are muted. Go on, look it up, every single one of "When Doves Cry" are muted. I sometimes make Sims 2 videos (One on my channel that has been of course, MUTED.) and I can't share them if they're going to be copyrighted. And the audioswap library is a piece of crap with all this stupid pop -_-
Ana
· 10 months ago
Alex: You bought the song or the rights to use that song in that video?
"And the audioswap library is a piece of crap with all this stupid pop -_-"
You get what you payed for :-)
Martijn Westerink
· 10 months ago
Nooo I have hundreds of clips from all my favourite live concerts since like 2005 on there! They have value to me, don't touch that!
BP
· 10 months ago
Re: Steve Darmis "I BOUGHT the music I used on itunes, and now they are saying I can’t use the song in a sideshow I made?"
No you *licensed* the music for limited personal use from iTunes, and that limited license never included universal sync rights.
It's not even sync rights, warner has pulled all their music from youtube, because they don't think they're getting compensated fairly. Clearly they're getting more money from myspace, lala and imeem and want to get an similar deal from youtube.
Anonymous
· 10 months ago
This is the most disturbing implication of YouTube's video muting: Censoring funerals.
from Facebook date [removed] subject Notification of Alleged Copyright Violation mailed-by facebookmail.com
Hello,
We have removed your video entitled "[removed]" uploaded at [removed]. We did this because we learned that your video might include copyrighted material owned by a third party, such as a video clip or background audio.
If you are the copyright owner, or have permission from the rights holder to upload and distribute this material on Facebook, you may file a counter notice of alleged infringement by following the link below.
Please note that if you re-upload this video without filing a counter notice, or if you upload another video that infringes on the rights of a third party, our system will again remove the content. This could cause your access to the Facebook Video application to be disabled, or your Facebook account to be disabled.
To file a counter notice: File a Counter Notification
For any other questions, view our Help page.
The Facebook Team
l8ryoutube
· 10 months ago
I just deleted my youtube account.
Problem solved.
I suggest about another 40+ million more of you do so as well. Enough of the games, music is part of our lives. You can't control everything. When will these fuktards learn that?
Their business model is WAY outdated, get with the times or die off dinosaur recording industry..
Tomboys
· 10 months ago
I don't think it's the copyright holders.. I think it's the record labels who own the masters. Why do they have to be such killjoys?
NN
· 10 months ago
The marginal utility of a little more money is pretty low when you're used to receiving far too much of the stuff for only a little work. That means the carrot of monetising music in new ways isn't very appealing to the old-time music industry.
OTOH the fear of losing control you've grown accustomed to having is a powerful motivator in the absence of a positive goal to work towards. It's the source of most anxiety whether you're a music exec or some other kind of primate.
Carrots don't always beat sticks - it depends on the perceived size of each. The music industry believes they have everything to lose and diminishing returns to gain. And they're basically right, because their position is a bubble built on technological scarcity that no longer exists. Cornered animals don't generally behave well, and this will get more interesting before it's resolved. Sit back and enjoy the show.
NN
· 10 months ago
The marginal utility of a little more money is pretty low when you're used to receiving far too much of the stuff for only a little work. That means the carrot of monetising music in new ways isn't very appealing to the old-time music industry.
OTOH the fear of losing control you've grown accustomed to having is a powerful motivator in the absence of a positive goal to work towards. It's the source of most anxiety whether you're a music exec or some other kind of primate.
Carrots don't always beat sticks - it depends on the perceived size of each. The music industry believes they have everything to lose and diminishing returns to gain. And they're basically right, because their position is a bubble built on technological scarcity that no longer exists. Cornered animals don't generally behave well, and this will get more interesting before it's resolved. Sit back and enjoy the show.
Rhys
· 10 months ago
This is completely idiotic. I can't believe they're tightening down on this, it's stupid. My friend's video has just been muted for putting it in his Call of Duty montage, and he only put it up today!
Muting Youtube videos is so petty. Why would someone download half a song which includes gun shots and background noise, the song is just there for effect! And respectively, the music is being advertised so what's the point of muting it.
I hope youtube see drop rates of users, maybe they'll realize that this copyright nuisance is pathetic and idiotic.
Rhys
· 10 months ago
This is completely idiotic. I can't believe they're tightening down on this, it's stupid. My friend's video has just been muted for putting it in his Call of Duty montage, and he only put it up today!
Muting Youtube videos is so petty. Why would someone download half a song which includes gun shots and background noise, the song is just there for effect! And respectively, the music is being advertised so what's the point of muting it.
I hope youtube see drop rates of users, maybe they'll realize that this copyright nuisance is pathetic and idiotic.
Anas
· 10 months ago
Hello guys i found this site that made my youtube video very famous lol
think of it as move by the media corporations to reclaim control of content. and it doesn't end there. have you tried downloading a youtube video lately?
buddi budinski
· 9 months ago
think of it as move by the media corporations to reclaim control of content. and it doesn't end there. have you tried downloading a youtube video lately?
Your Name*
· 8 months ago
It is idiotic for real, I just posted two vids of me talking, no copyright infringement there unless they think I stole someone else's voice or something and i used a piece of music from garage band at the beginning is this copyright infringement?
I am about to ban youtube i tell you.
Your Name*
· 8 months ago
It is idiotic for real, I just posted two vids of me talking, no copyright infringement there unless they think I stole someone else's voice or something and i used a piece of music from garage band at the beginning is this copyright infringement?
I am about to ban youtube i tell you.
Patrick
· 6 months ago
I love these comments about using music.
There's a song by Midnight Oil titled "Short Memory". It's true about this stuff too.
Artists have always riffed on the work of other artists. Classical music is a great example, as is rock music.
It IS creative to use another's work in a different way even if that is purely as background to something you've made. It's rather insulting to argue that someone has to write their own music to be creative - that would cut out Elvis to start with.
This is merely an example of over-reach. The companies don't want to NOT make money from what you do and so stop you from creating things from which YOU don't make money. The fact they'd get no money anyway is irrelevant. They can stop you and so they are - not because of loss of income, not because of concerns about the rights of the original artists, but because they can.
It's a shallow and transparent game they're playing, but they can do it and so they do. They're trying to work out how to make more money. They're not interested in fair use and they're not interested in broadening an audience to their product UNLESS they can see the dollar sign.
Any argument about protecting the authors rights are purely spurious.
Roque
· 5 months ago
If any, this is just another proof on how the outdated copyright system is totally obsolete.
As a funny side effect, I've seen music videos muted even from the artist's official channel.
Johnny
· 3 months ago
I have a question to all with rights knowledge :
I found an easy way to go around the automatic removal of the audio, so you can put it up there if you modify a small thing.
But then my question is : Can you expect anything worst then just being cancelled by YouTube ? Could the rights owner sue you ? Some people communicate small professional activities through little videos they put on YouTube and send to their clients that include their email or website adress. Could they risk a lawsuit ?
djteel
· 2 months ago
wouldn't this also end people uploading videos that display thenm playing 45rpms and albums??? songs are copyrighted.i've found alot of music i'd been searching for on youtube via people 'playing' the records in a video.,if youtube goes to the extent of eliminating those types of videos,i'll totally stop using youtube.
djteel
· 2 months ago
does this mean that the videos that people upload of themselves playing 45rpms and albums ,will also be eleiminated since those songs(records) being 'played' in the videos are copyrighted?if so,youtube can kiss my ass and i won't be visiting their site again.i've found alot of music i haven't been able to find via of those kinds of uploads.
All Comments
The question is, who will suffer first...Youtube or the music labels?
The fact that rights haven't been respected up to now is irrelevant. (Should we go back to not allowing women and blacks the right to vote?)
That being said, I have really enjoyed listening to various artists on YouTube, that I would never have heard otherwise.
I hope that the folks at YouTube can come up with a good solution.
In the meantime maybe we can listen to the thousands of original recording artists out there who are really good and exceptionaly talented but that 'the industry' won't give the time of day to.
1) People will start returning to self hosting these sorts of videos. Yes there are bandwidth issues related to that, but there are a few good ways around that that I plan to write about in the near future.
2) People will start seeking out (and finding) off shore (ie- outside the US) video hosting services. Wherever you find a need, you'll quickly find someone to fill it and pick up the slack that Youtube and the like are not legally allowed to fill. There are many solutions to a variety of problems in the world, that do not involve the United States, it's companies or it's laws.
Neither of the above get past the moral issue of course, as you really shouldn't be using copyrighted music in your videos in the first place. The two coming solutions I mentioned above do not fix that issue, they merely allow people to continue to ignore it as they've previously been able to do on Youtube.
See source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUJagb7hL0E
The labels have just created another way new bands can make it big without the labels. There will absolutely be more Numa-numa viral hits out there... the only difference now is, the music labels won't be a part them.
The river isn't kind to those who try to swim against the current. This isn't the day the music died, but it is the day the music labels were admitted to the hospice facility.
This is really sad. How could any artist say "no" to the music I chose (bought) in a slideshow I made in memory of my dog that died. The song is about a dog crossing over and going to heaven. The name of the song is "Little Doggie". This is a perfect example of how important the music is to a slideshow. Shame on whoever is responsible for not letting me use this song. I hope the music industry comes to their senses and lightens up. Any comments? Agree? Disagree?
Films that use music for some type of critique are more vulnerable. The real problem, is the DMCA, which favors established folks with deep pockets. A complaint puts all of the burden on the person using any music, many of whom are kids or struggling artists. Complaints can be filed frivolously, at a whim. Satire is a particularly vulnerable area because it is often critical, and there is a grey area as to what should be considered fair use. If you see something uncritical or unflattering of your music, that uses a piece of that music, just complain. The complaint will probably be stifled unless the person wishes to defend themselves. If they are poor, they probably won't. There's a mute on free speech that squashes dissent.
Vimeo, anyone?
Maybe the pirate bay can make a video sharing site knowing their stance on copyright.
When will copyright holders, especially those in the creative sphere, realize that inclusion in content is a word-of-mouth powerhouse on their side, not an offense? Ridiculous.
Artists and labels want control of their music. They don't want to be associated with user created content that may not be in line with their own views or public image. Public image goes a long way in the music industry. Just because it can be good publicity, doesn't mean it all would be. Think about how it really could be used and you should get where they are coming from, unless you really feel that entitled.
"...push the pool stick in your new crib, same hand that you hoop with, swing around like you stupid..."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5gWD4g63RNI
The purpose of copyright law is NOT to protect your work; that is a corollary. The purpose of copyright law is to foster creative works. Just because record companies can afford better lawyers is irrelevant.
The laws haven't been ignored; they've been interpreted differently.
http://www.urlesque.com/2009/01/15/youtube-chip...
If youtube doesnt fix this problem soon, people are going to stop using it. When myspace got corrup like that, everyoen left. I don't knwo a single person who uses it anymore. Youtube is going to be the same thing. Plus, when you do "audioswap", the songs are CRAP...sorry but it's true
"And the audioswap library is a piece of crap with all this stupid pop -_-"
You get what you payed for :-)
"I BOUGHT the music I used on itunes, and now they are saying I can’t use the song in a sideshow I made?"
No you *licensed* the music for limited personal use from iTunes, and that limited license never included universal sync rights.
It's not even sync rights, warner has pulled all their music from youtube, because they don't think they're getting compensated fairly. Clearly they're getting more money from myspace, lala and imeem and want to get an similar deal from youtube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iBCqDvNpO2k
from Facebook
date [removed]
subject Notification of Alleged Copyright Violation
mailed-by facebookmail.com
Hello,
We have removed your video entitled "[removed]" uploaded at [removed]. We did this because we learned that your video might include copyrighted material owned by a third party, such as a video clip or background audio.
If you are the copyright owner, or have permission from the rights holder to upload and distribute this material on Facebook, you may file a counter notice of alleged infringement by following the link below.
Please note that if you re-upload this video without filing a counter notice, or if you upload another video that infringes on the rights of a third party, our system will again remove the content. This could cause your access to the Facebook Video application to be disabled, or your Facebook account to be disabled.
To file a counter notice:
File a Counter Notification
For any other questions, view our Help page.
The Facebook Team
Problem solved.
I suggest about another 40+ million more of you do so as well. Enough of the games, music is part of our lives. You can't control everything. When will these fuktards learn that?
Their business model is WAY outdated, get with the times or die off dinosaur recording industry..
OTOH the fear of losing control you've grown accustomed to having is a powerful motivator in the absence of a positive goal to work towards. It's the source of most anxiety whether you're a music exec or some other kind of primate.
Carrots don't always beat sticks - it depends on the perceived size of each. The music industry believes they have everything to lose and diminishing returns to gain. And they're basically right, because their position is a bubble built on technological scarcity that no longer exists. Cornered animals don't generally behave well, and this will get more interesting before it's resolved. Sit back and enjoy the show.
OTOH the fear of losing control you've grown accustomed to having is a powerful motivator in the absence of a positive goal to work towards. It's the source of most anxiety whether you're a music exec or some other kind of primate.
Carrots don't always beat sticks - it depends on the perceived size of each. The music industry believes they have everything to lose and diminishing returns to gain. And they're basically right, because their position is a bubble built on technological scarcity that no longer exists. Cornered animals don't generally behave well, and this will get more interesting before it's resolved. Sit back and enjoy the show.
Muting Youtube videos is so petty. Why would someone download half a song which includes gun shots and background noise, the song is just there for effect! And respectively, the music is being advertised so what's the point of muting it.
I hope youtube see drop rates of users, maybe they'll realize that this copyright nuisance is pathetic and idiotic.
Muting Youtube videos is so petty. Why would someone download half a song which includes gun shots and background noise, the song is just there for effect! And respectively, the music is being advertised so what's the point of muting it.
I hope youtube see drop rates of users, maybe they'll realize that this copyright nuisance is pathetic and idiotic.
my youtube video is:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Otp8kvv2o7U
155 Full Ratings - Views: 28,454
This is the site that made my youtube videos famous:
http://www.viewtube.ws/
I hope this helps as it did help me so much :)
Anas
my youtube video is:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Otp8kvv2o7U
155 Full Ratings - Views: 28,454
This is the site that made my youtube videos famous:
http://www.viewtube.ws/
I hope this helps as it did help me so much :)
Anas
and it doesn't end there. have you tried downloading a youtube video lately?
and it doesn't end there. have you tried downloading a youtube video lately?
I am about to ban youtube i tell you.
I am about to ban youtube i tell you.
There's a song by Midnight Oil titled "Short Memory". It's true about this stuff too.
Artists have always riffed on the work of other artists. Classical music is a great example, as is rock music.
It IS creative to use another's work in a different way even if that is purely as background to something you've made. It's rather insulting to argue that someone has to write their own music to be creative - that would cut out Elvis to start with.
This is merely an example of over-reach. The companies don't want to NOT make money from what you do and so stop you from creating things from which YOU don't make money. The fact they'd get no money anyway is irrelevant. They can stop you and so they are - not because of loss of income, not because of concerns about the rights of the original artists, but because they can.
It's a shallow and transparent game they're playing, but they can do it and so they do. They're trying to work out how to make more money. They're not interested in fair use and they're not interested in broadening an audience to their product UNLESS they can see the dollar sign.
Any argument about protecting the authors rights are purely spurious.
As a funny side effect, I've seen music videos muted even from the artist's official channel.
I found an easy way to go around the automatic removal of the audio, so you can put it up there if you modify a small thing.
But then my question is : Can you expect anything worst then just being cancelled by YouTube ? Could the rights owner sue you ? Some people communicate small professional activities through little videos they put on YouTube and send to their clients that include their email or website adress. Could they risk a lawsuit ?