YouTube's Unspoken Linking Policy For Copyright Infringers

Hackajar writes "Valleywag has an interesting post detailing YouTube's new way to deal with copyrighted music videos, removing embed tags and linking it to the official content on site. What's significant here is the lack of video removal by YouTube staff. From the post, "Uploads of music videos from the band by non-official sources now carry a link reading "Contains content from [insert studio here]"". They use a Modest Mouse music video from a third party to illustrate the new change."

Comments

Re:Don't forget...

[Anonymous Coward]

The official videos are usually better quality, anyway. But it's a good guide to tell you whether the thing is worth downloading via bittorrent in the first place.

Re:YouTube's unspoken policy for fair users

[LandDolphin]

"If you can not record a video of your 1 year old son dancing to a well-known song, your ability to participate in the society and extended family is seriously curtailed"

Society changes...

We did not always have YouTube, and Society will adapt if we remove the ability to record a video of your 1 year old son dancing to a well-known song.

We participated in society and with our extended family extended family before YouTube, and many of us still do without YouTube right now.

Re:YouTube's unspoken policy for fair users

[iamacat]

Yeah, in Saudi Arabia you can not even watch movies or listen to music and the society adapted. But, do we want to live in an oppressed society where medium-income individuals can not contribute to popular culture?

Re:YouTube's unspoken policy for fair users

[owlnation]

What if you can do it provided you license that well-known song for the purpose for which you intend to use it?

While this is indeed the RIAA's mercenary position, that doesn't make it fair or reasonable. The OP is correct. It should be fair use to use a piece of music in the example quoted, provided there's no intent to make money from it.

Those bastards in the RIAA want to have their cake and eat it too. They practice payola to promote songs so that they get heard, and then once they get heard they charge radio stations for playing them.

While they are slowly dying as a result of failing to adapt, there's still much to be done to make the record labels die faster. Take wikipedia for example -- it feels like every second page has a sentence or paragraph that promotes some band, or song. You know the "The Blahblah, wrote a song about the French Revolution, it's on the XYZ album" Yep... That's spam. Wikipedia is absolutely full of it. Even most music articles (that actually have sources) quote sources that are media articles derived from RIAA press releases, or direct to the band's own marketing devices such as their MySpace or Website. That's how the Record Labels make more money. That sort of crap needs to be stopped.

Re:Don't forget...

[Ethan Allison]

Rei's video

Re:YouTube's unspoken policy for fair users

[LordNimon]

If you can not record a video of your 1 year old son dancing to a well-known song, your ability to participate in the society and extended family is seriously curtailed.

-1 flamebait

You can record a video of your son dancing to a well-known song. What you cannot do is post that video to an international web site where millions of people can download it. And why would you want to do that anyway? I only want to share my home videos with family members. So I post them to my personal web site and email a URL.