Slashdot Mirror
YouTube Identifies Birdsong As Copyrighted Music
New submitter eeplox writes "I make nature videos for my YouTube channel, generally in remote wilderness away from any possible source of music. And I purposely avoid using a soundtrack in my videos because of all the horror stories I hear about Rumblefish filing claims against public domain music. But when uploading my latest video, YouTube informed me that I was using Rumblefish's copyrighted content, and so ads would be placed on my video, with the proceeds going to said company. This baffled me. I disputed their claim with YouTube's system — and Rumblefish refuted my dispute, and asserted that: 'All content owners have reviewed your video and confirmed their claims to some or all of its content: Entity: rumblefish; Content Type: Musical Composition.' So I asked some questions, and it appears that the birds singing in the background of my video are Rumblefish's exclusive intellectual property."
Dear Rumblefish,
I see that you are using my music without proper authorization.
-- God
p.s. I could use ad's, hmmmm... Naa, Smite works just as well...
1. Go to the woods, record birdsong.
2. Make a bunch of videos and post to YouTube
3. Wait for takedown
4. Sue Rumblefish in small claims court for the ad revenue they got from Google.
5. Profit!!!!
I've always said copyright is for the birds... (Well, someone had to say it!)
"Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket." -- Eric Hoffer
YouTube: Blurring the line between the RIAA and Monsanto.
The Wolfpack Project: BitCoin + Crowdfunding = Political Accountability
It depends how you take the quantifiers. :-) In first-order logic, "all As are Bs" is automatically true if there are no As. In the case at hand, there are no content owners, because nobody owns the bird songs (not even the birds). So, all content owners have reviewed the video and confirmed their claims. Likewise, all content owners have seven legs.
Okay, sorry... But someone has to ask this...
Where did the clip of the birdsong come from? Is this something the OP recorded himself? Or did he use an audio clip from some other source?
And if the OP recorded himself, did he make sure the birds were indeed singing a song that is in the public domain?
While birds aren't people and can't own a copyright, a flock of birds is more like a corporation and therefor a person.
Chewbacca's lawyers called, they want his defense back.
Yet bird songs might copy each other's tunes. So his bird song might sound the same as one they recorded. This is because birds have no copyright and reproduce other bird's songs as their own. They then use this to attract a mate and pass the other bird's intellectual property to their kids. Not only do they steal other birds song, but they show that if copying songs is legal, it makes all the birds lazy and not want to come up with new songs. This is why pirates always carried parrots on their ships. The parrot is the most efficient bird at stealing songs back when we didn't have computers and the Internet.
God spoke to me
I have 5 arms
Now THAT'S a bold-faced lie.
William of Ockham had no beard. The most likely explanation is that it was chewed off by squirrels every morning.
False DMCA claims are now called "Rumblefish". EG: "My youtube video just got rumblefished. "