ExtortionLetterInfo Forums
Retired Forums => Legal Controversies Forum => Topic started by: Libertas on October 13, 2016, 05:47:32 PM
-
I have a question that I have had a hard time getting an answer to and thought I would try here.
It's in the same realm, albeit with music and video.
Youtube has a system in place to manage copyrighted music and video. If you're not aware, the system identifies copyrighted works, and if it has a deal in place with the publisher/copyright holder, then it will respond by either blocking the video, muting it, or monetizing it with ads. It's up to the publisher to choose which option with most choosing to collect royalties off of advertising.
So here is my question, is the user still on the hook for copyright infringement under this system? For example, if I made a video that used a unlicensed song but was allowed to upload it to google because the publisher agreed to collect royalties. In this scenario, the youtube video would be the only place the video would be viewed from. I could understand that it wouldn't be a blanket authorization, but something seems awfully sketchy about the legal parameters.
-
short answer is probably, as the infringement still exists..
-
You will not be able to profit from your video. If the artist and YouTube do not have an agreement, the video will not be viewable. This is from my personal experience with the website.
-
I have a question that I have had a hard time getting an answer to and thought I would try here.
It's in the same realm, albeit with music and video.
Youtube has a system in place to manage copyrighted music and video. If you're not aware, the system identifies copyrighted works, and if it has a deal in place with the publisher/copyright holder, then it will respond by either blocking the video, muting it, or monetizing it with ads. It's up to the publisher to choose which option with most choosing to collect royalties off of advertising.
So here is my question, is the user still on the hook for copyright infringement under this system? For example, if I made a video that used a unlicensed song but was allowed to upload it to google because the publisher agreed to collect royalties. In this scenario, the youtube video would be the only place the video would be viewed from. I could understand that it wouldn't be a blanket authorization, but something seems awfully sketchy about the legal parameters.
Most artists nowadays choose the "place ads on your video" approach.
They see it as a win / win. The Artist makes money, you get to use music in the video.
Unlike these image extortion schemes, YouTube typically flags your video as soon as it goes up and give you options. (eg: remove it, dispute it, etc)
It becomes up to you what you want to do at that point.
Again: Unlike these image extortion schemes you get a chance - in most cases..
With that being said, do you remember the "dancing baby" lawsuit a while back?
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/09/14/440363919/dancing-baby-wins-copyright-case (http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/09/14/440363919/dancing-baby-wins-copyright-case)
Anything is possible...