DSE 3 #1 March 23, 2009 http://www.nytimes.com/glogin?URI=http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/23/business/media/23warner.html&OQ=_rQ3D1Q268dpc&OP=1aeb280dQ2FbjHKbxikQ3CQ24iihQ2BbQ2B@@lb@rbQ2BrbKqQ3CeYHQ3CQ3Cb_HxeWbQ2BrjWQ24YHQ24Q23Q51h_Q3E You may need to register to read; it's free. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
idrankwhat 0 #2 March 23, 2009 I'll admit I haven't dug into this topic as deeply as I should, but does anyone have any idea how freely downloadable content is treated on sites like YouTube? Some bands, nine inch nails for example, make some of their music available for free. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
beowulf 1 #3 March 23, 2009 Freely downloadable does not necessarily mean copyright free. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
idrankwhat 0 #4 March 23, 2009 QuoteFreely downloadable does not necessarily mean copyright free. I expected there to be some issues with "for hire" usage and the like. But I thought there might be some more leeway for things like personal YouTube mixes. I really don't see how the record companies are going to deal with this in the years to come. I mean, how do they deal with a mash up of a mash up etc.? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpeedPhreak 0 #5 March 23, 2009 Facebook is also now taking down videos that get identified as having "copyrighted material owned by a third party". Hello, We have removed your video uploaded at 10:49am March 18th, 2009. We did this because it appears to contain copyrighted material owned by a third party, such as a video clip or background audio. If you believe this material was removed by mistake, 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, we may remove the content. This could cause your access to the Facebook Video application, or your Facebook account itself, to be disabled. SkydiveAllegan.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnskydiver688 0 #6 March 23, 2009 If it hasn't already, here comes the explosion of personal domains and personal content sites, where you get to circumvent Facebook, YouTube, etc.Sky Canyon Wingsuiters Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bdazel 0 #7 March 24, 2009 QuoteQuoteFreely downloadable does not necessarily mean copyright free. I expected there to be some issues with "for hire" usage and the like. But I thought there might be some more leeway for things like personal YouTube mixes. I really don't see how the record companies are going to deal with this in the years to come. I mean, how do they deal with a mash up of a mash up etc.? They'll get screwed. They'll fight a good battle, but they can't beat the technology. The smart ones will adapt and find new ways to gather revenue. The not-so smart ones will fold and go away. I find no fault with You Tube at all. They're only covering their own ass. Willful, contributory infringement is a bitch. Record companies will go after the deepest pockets possible - and Google has some pretty deep pockets. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChangoLanzao 0 #8 March 24, 2009 QuoteFreely downloadable does not necessarily mean copyright free. I don't think it's as much a matter of copyright as it is a matter of licensing. There should be no problem, for example, in using copyrighted music as long as you license to use/mix it permits you to distribute it via YouTube. There's a lot of good Creative Commons stuff out there that can be used this way. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
