Slashdot Mirror
Record Label Infringes Own Copyright, Site Pulled
AnonCow sends in a peculiar story from TorrentFreak, which describes the plight of a free-download music site that has been summarily evicted from the Internet for violating its own copyright. The problem seems to revolve around the host's insistence that proof of copyright be snail-mailed to them. Kind of difficult when your copyright takes the form of a Creative Commons license that cannot be verified unless its site is up. "The website of an Internet-based record label which offers completely free music downloads has been taken down by its host for copyright infringement, even though it only offers its own music. Quote Unquote Records calls itself 'The First Ever Donation Based Record Label,' but is currently homeless after its host pulled the plug."
...the copyright system works and is perfectly sane.
I mean, the market for hosting is so huge they shouldn't have a problem finding a company that actual understands CC and won't pull their site right away. I hope they do.
Obligatory blog plug: http://www.caseybanner.ca/
I gotta get off. All hope is lost, sanity has fled us. Run for the hills everyone. It can't get stupider then this. Or can it?
Si vis pacem, para bellum! For evil to succeed good men need only do nothing!
It's right here
Help stamp out iliturcy.
Copyright holders by definition cannot violate their own copyrights. They have the (copy)right to do with their own material as they see fit.
Their host chose to pull the plug on this website because they thought it was a risk, and because of their own lame policies. It's not like anyone actually sued for copyright infringement. The host, not the band, is who loses here. They can just go find another host who is more worthy of their service.
I wouldn't be all that surprised to hear that this is just the host's way of kicking off a heavy bandwidth user.
Most websites will have copyrighted material on them. Most of the copyrighted material will not be registered. If they have this policy, and they require proof that most people won't have, it's a bit pointless arguing with them, and a lot easier to find a new host with more sensible policies.
And I think I've found the perfect guy for them.
Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
...publicity stunt.
Win a signed Stephen Carpenter ESP Guitar from the Deftones: http://def-tag.com/?r=0008781
So, the hosts asks for a copy of the registration records with the Copyright Office. That's stupid but it's not an impossible request. Record label dude can't give records because the copyright isn't registered. Fair enough. What I don't get is why record label dude doesn't simply register the music and say the registration is being processed? That makes a lot more sense than blathering about Creative Commons, and it's actually helpful if there ever are real legal problems.
When even pink contract spammers can find a way online, are you telling me they can't find an ISP that doesn't have their head up their ass? File a breach of contract lawsuit if you got good reason to and if not just move on.
The problem is one of perception. There is a perception that spammers (and other internet denizens of a dodgy nature) are primarily a Russian and Chinese problem (a lie, but there we are), and that the US, with its 'clean' internet must crack down on the currently hot, if in reality extremely unimportant, issue of copyright enforcement (not that it isn't important, but no way is it as important as is being ranted in the halls of power).
Its an assumption that all the big problems on the internet are 'somebody elses problem', so they focus on silly things like music copyright, often mindlessly following 'the rules' so that only the big labels get a say.
Its classic disassociation, and it can't last. I'm not being all 'ooh look at me, I'm a liberal', I'm being realistic.
The old economic and copyright models are collapsing. Not into anarchy, that's far too pessimistic an assessment. No, they're falling in the face of different models. In the case of Internet and copyright the people who run things (businesses, not regulatory bodies) aren't quite as up with the trends as they need to be.
A learning experience is one of those things that say, 'You know that thing you just did? Don't do that.' - D. Adams
No, he's saying sue/file a police report on the salesman and find another, instead of bitching about having no car
What?
... literally, because the rest of the world has the Berne Convention. What are these "copyright registration forms" of which you speak?
the story does remind me of something eBay tried years ago -- they took down auctions of people selling their own software or software for linux because the auctioneers didn't have licenses from Microsoft.
however, this story sounds a bit fishy. I believe that the ISP pulled his site because it's highly likely they're retards and see any online music as pirated, but I'm suspicious of his having lost his own copies of the files. Did the other musicians in any of the bands not have copies? Didn't any of them burn onto CDs to give to their friends, or to play in their cars?
I think this is creative marketing. When the site goes back up, he'll get loads more hits to his site, and make a bunch of pity sales and more people have now heard of him and his bands. Epic Win.
The reason girls and Windows users don't understand UNIX is because all the documentation is in Man files.
According to the article, the web hosting outfit "proactively" took it upon itself - with no complaints - to take down the site.
IANAL, but.... (take the rest with a grain of salt)
Since it did not follow DMCA provisions, I would presume that it left behind the DMCA safe-harbor provisions, and is open to a lawsuit...
It sounds like some suits from the RIAA worked over the weekend to study the nuances of the RoR and narc'd the company to its own host.
There is a feature on Evite.com, which lets you associate your own icon with your "account". Obviously, using copyrighted images is prohibited.
Well, the geniuses at Evite have deleted my logo, which I created in Paintbrush back in 1993 (before switching to Unix for good), because — they thought — it can't possibly be my own creation...
Well, ass-covering, ignorant dimwits working for a corporation... Spit-spit-spit...
Years later, the same image is forcibly deleted by Wikipedia — where it was only used on my own user-page.
The idiocy spreads...
Maybe, there is some artistic merit to that poorly-drawn cat on a castle wall? Should I try selling it or something?
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
The website was pretty well made, and they had Bomb The Music Industry! signed. Silly name aside, they are a really marvelous blend of punk, twee, and brass, something I could normally never appreciate
They gave away stencils and cds at shows for free, so that fans could make their own t-shirts. They've got a brilliant DIY ethic going on, and they became something of an underground hit without even properly releasing a CD.
So I don't know who tagged this "andnothingofvaluewaslost", but you don't know what you're talking about.
It's very easy to complain about how the RIAA does things, but you need to think up solutions, as well as identifying problems, or you're just being annoying. Quote Unquote make the perfectly valid point that some artists aren't interested in wealth, and can get by on donations alone. Obviously it suits some bands better than others, but it's _a_ solution, not the only solution
It seems that the ISP ix is itself propagating copyright infringement. The landing page they put up for 'Quote Unquote' includes advert links to copyright infringing sites. Perhaps someone should find out if ix is a sub-hoster and then send a DMCA takedown notice to their host. As it turns out they own their own DNS server, so it seems unlikely.
here's a partial transcript from Live Chat with an IX Webhost Rep (be warned. there's a lot of incoherent rambling because the customer service rep is from Ukraine, and i think there was a slight communications barrier):