Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Universal Uses DMCA To Get Bad Lip Reading Parody Taken Down

Posted by timothy on from the gang-fight-gang-fight dept.

Joren writes "Bad Lip Reading is an independent producer known for anonymously parodying music and political videos by redubbing them with his humorous attempts at lip-reading, such as Everybody Poops (Black Eyed Peas) and Gang Fight (Rebecca Black). According to an interview in Rolling Stone, he creates entirely new music from scratch consisting of his bad lip readings, and then sets them to the original video, often altering the video for humorous effect and always posting a link to the original off which it is based. Although his efforts have won the respect of parody targets Michael Bublé and Michelle Bachman, not everyone has been pleased. Two days ago, Universal Music Group succeeded in getting his parody Dirty Spaceman taken down from YouTube, and despite BLR's efforts to appeal, in his words, 'UMG essentially said "We don't care if you think it's fair use, we want it down."' And YouTube killed it. So does this meet the definition of parody as a form of fair use? And if so, what recourse if any is available for artists who are caught in this situation?"

15 of 298 comments (clear)

  1. It's only fair use if you go to court... by Darkon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...and argue that it is, which a private individual rarely has the resources to do.

    Got to love the legal system.

    1. Re:It's only fair use if you go to court... by purpledinoz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Everyone has to face that the fact that in the US, legal rights are only available to those who can afford to hire a good lawyer.

    2. Re:It's only fair use if you go to court... by todrules · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Welcome to the United Corporations of America.

    3. Re:It's only fair use if you go to court... by Rockoon · · Score: 3, Insightful

      ... then Google is 100% off the hook, so they have no reason not to put the video back up.

      ..and by no reason you mean that Google doesnt have a large revenue stream associated with advertising RIAA music on a large percentage of its youtube video collection, and Google also isnt in the process of making a deal with the RIAA for direct music purchasing through Google...

      Sure, as long as you ignore the money reasons, Google has no reason not to put the video back up.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    4. Re:It's only fair use if you go to court... by mitgib · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Uh except that you could go to court yourself. And if you are accused of a crime you get a free lawyer if you can't afford one.

      Which has no bearing on this topic

      --
      Being a spelling & grammar Nazi is a sign you do not poses the intelligence to contribute to the conversation
    5. Re:It's only fair use if you go to court... by Joce640k · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Sure ... so long as you remake the video as well as the audio, eg. Mad Al Yankovitch.

      As it is he's using somebody else's video for profit (direct or indirect)

      --
      No sig today...
    6. Re:It's only fair use if you go to court... by bondsbw · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The need for lawyers who have studied for years or decades indicates that our legal system is too complex. There are so many laws, there exist laws that even the best lawyers are unaware of. There is a huge amount of case law that many times, but not always, provides direction in cases that are ambiguous in the law. We have laws from 2011 that override some part of laws from 2003 that override some part of laws from 1987 that override some part of laws from 1972, etc. to the beginning of time. I don't know the solution to all of this, but I think there has to be one.

      And the free lawyer is rarely as good as the paid lawyer. Otherwise, they would be working for higher pay in the private sector.

      --
      All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
    7. Re:It's only fair use if you go to court... by Qzukk · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And if you are accused of a crime

      Violating copyright isn't a criminal case in most cases. And you don't get a free lawyer for civil court cases.

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
    8. Re:It's only fair use if you go to court... by king+neckbeard · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Except the RIAA will gladly cut off its nose to spite it's face.

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    9. Re:It's only fair use if you go to court... by morari · · Score: 3, Insightful

      He had an invasion (not illegal), wiped out all his legal crops leaving only the crops he knew to be patent protected, and then used the patent protected crops to almost exclusively plant his next year's crops. He knew he was breaking patent law.

      He was breaking the law? So fucking what? I seriously hope you don't actually believe that seeds should be protected as trade secrets, let alone controlled to the extent that Monsanto does. If anything, you just helped to illustrate exactly why no one trusts Monsanto. They want to control something as simple as food and create a Soylent Green-esque future of poverty-stricken riots and rations.

      --
      "He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing." --Paul Atreides, Dune
  2. Bought congress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    These are the kinds of laws we get when we let companies (via their lobbyists) write their own legislation.

  3. Streisand the hell out of it! by Progman3K · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This must not stand!
    Repost the video!

    --
    I don't know the meaning of the word 'don't' - J
  4. Counter notice? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Can't he just file a counter-notice? I though in that case Youtube would be obligated to put it back up and instead force UMG to sue if they don't agree?

  5. Re:Kickstarter that badboy. by icebraining · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Google has no right to decide whether it's a parody or not. That's up to the courts. If they receive a DMCA complaint, they have to take it down. If they didn't, Youtube wouldn't exist by now.

    --
    Dilbert RSS feed
  6. Another of the 1% by Phoenix666 · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Add this to the list of problems with the 1% that need to be corrected. The entire issue of intellectual property needs to be overhauled in the Constitution 2.0.

    --
    Do what you can, with what you have, where you are.