Copyright and web deletions - a cautionary tale

[Dave]

Hi everyone,

There is a very interesting report in the current edition of "BBC Click", about and by a blogger who had his entire blog and 5 years of Youtube videos (900!) deleted by Google/Youtube, for what most people would consider to be minor copyright infringements.

There is a strong message in it for all of us who upload a lot of content to blogs and the web in general, including in theory forums like this one too: beware of the heavy hand of the record company, YouTube and Google. But it's not only them, sites like Proboards could, if they wished to, adopt a similar approach (though at present, fortunately, they don't seem to).

But anyway, I'll just post the link www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00sl52d/Click_22_05_2010/ and for anyone who cannot view it, I've made two videos of the report (12 minutes, 50MB):

BBC Click report - web deletions (divX for download)

BBC Click report - web deletions (.wmv for playing or download)

This is of course a concern of us here at HWI, and of all fan sites who just want to support an artist. It also explains why we try to maintain what we think is a reasonable approach to copyright - something we think record companies can live with - but even so, we have had copyright notices from Youtube about four of our videos. Fortunately, the two record companies involved have both taken a sensible approach to this so far and have allowed them all to remain, with Worldwide availability; our channel remains "in good standing". Ads may, however, appear beside or over the videos, which is fine, but the overall situation remains a concern.

I highly recommend watching this 12 minute video from BBC Click. It could affect anyone who uploads stuff to the web.

Cheers, Dave

[maya]

Hi, all.

May 28, 2010 17:53:15 GMT Dave said:

Hi everyone,
I highly recommend watching this 12 minute video from BBC Click. It could affect anyone who uploads stuff to the web.

Thanks Dave for the information and the preparations for non UK residents.
I've tried to watch "BBC click" directory but I had a message below and couldn't see any of it.

"Currently BBC iPlayer TV programmes are available to play in the UK only, ..."

So your video was helpful for me but I am hoping that BBC would not complain me watching it outside of UK. I recommend foreigners to watch the ones provided by Dave.

Best wishes.
Maya

[martindn]

Hi Dave,

Interesting and scary. The vid didn't say exactly what the objection was, but there are many vids on YT that include copyright material, so I have sympathy with anyone that gets picked on.

The trouble with copyright law is that it is often poorly defined, which means that those with the deepest pockets will usually prevail. And the fear is that this could be used to curtail free speech.

I always consider that what it means is you don't upload anything that is a copy of a commercial product, either video or audio. But if you make the recording yourself, I understand that you own the copyright, even if it is an artist performing something that is otherwise a commercial product.

I actually think that amateur videos of a performance help to promote the artist. The sound and picture quality is not usually up to commercial standards anyway. My own motivation in uploading my own vids of Hayley's performances is that they will help to spread the word about my favourite singer, and win her new fans. Those new fans will then buy her records, so that they can hear her properly.

So yes, we have to be careful not to upload stuff that infringes copyright. But it seems to me that this is not subject to any sort of proper and just arbitration, and that even a totally unjustified complaint will be acted on. That, for me, is not acceptable.

Martin D

[Richard]

Apr 22, 2011 14:49:04 GMT Simba said:

If possible can someone please upload Amalia por amor into youtube XD I really can't wait to listen to that song fully....

Sorry Simba, but we do not allow links to YouTube or other videos where the soundtrack is a commercially available recording. This is for copyright reasons.

Richard

[Simba]

Oh wait, How come I find other studio recorded versions of Hayley's songs in Youtube o.O...I'm sorry for being stupid, but I can't understand what you mean by that, are you saying it's not allowed to upload tracks of albums in youtube, or that it's not allowed to post such links here? XD

[Richard]

Hello Simba,

We have no control over YouTube, but we don't allow such links on the forum.

Richard

[Simba]

Oh okay got it, thanks

[nicola]

Just to clarify, it's actually illegal to upload copyrighted material on Youtube, but it's a difficult law to enforce, which is why so many slip through the net. There technically shouldn't be ANY of Hayley's songs on Youtube unless posted by Decca, her management or herself (or whoever owns the publishing rights, actually - normally the record company).

Youtube are good at removing videos as soon as they informed though. Youtube needs only to be made aware of offending videos. x

[mihizawi]

Hi, Simba,

It shouldn't be allowed to post a commercially available audio track on Youtube without the permission of the copyright holder, in most cases, the record company. Indeed, it is illegal, and Youtube will delete the video if the copyright holder asks to do so. You can find many videos on youtube uploaded without the permission of the companies, either because some of them are more permisive or because they haven't discovered it yet. The fact that the record company leaves a video doesn't mean it stops being illegal and if the company decides so, it can be deleted at any time. The only way to make it legal is to get an explicit permission from them.

And from this side, HWI has a policy of not allowing any links to videos that contain commercially available audio unless they come from official sources or clearly with its permission... So, obviously, HWI cannot encourage posting any of those videos, and even if someone followed your request, it wouldn't be allowed to post the link here.

Michal

[Simba]

I'm really sorry then, I was told that as Youtube compresses all audio files in a way that it's not stereo anymore, and high quality is lost, and hence why Youtube is not banned, and that it was legal to put up audio tracks I didn't know this. Thanks for the explanation I guess I just have to wait for my copy XD

[Roger-G]

Apr 22, 2011 14:56:54 GMT Richard said:

Sorry Simba, but we do not allow links to YouTube or other videos where the soundtrack is a commercially available recording. This is for copyright reasons.

That's entirely correct and as it should be.

However you seem to have no problem with directly hosting entire copies of copyrighted magazine articles.

Is there a legal difference?

[martindn]

Hi Simba,

I should point out that you CAN put audio tracks onto YouTube - provided you recorded then youself or have the copyright holders permission to do so. WE cannot know whether the people who posted those commercially available recordings have the copyright holders permission or not. However, in the case of commercial CD tracks that the copyright holder sells, it seems very unlikely that such permission would be granted. But YouTube does take accusatiuons of piracy from the copyright holders seriously, as they must under the law.
You have to state anyway, when uploading stuff, that you are not violating copyright. If you choose to lie, that is up to you.
However, where our members make their own recordings of Hayley's concert performances, the person making the recording then owns the copyright of that recording. So can post it on YouTube. Although it is a coutesy to ask the performers first. Although there are other copyright issues, for example whether the song itself is copyright (most are) - it can get very messy.

Martin D

[Simba]

Oh that's a lot of complications, thanks for informing

[mihizawi]

Indeed, there may be a legal difference, Roger-G, although it's a very unclear discussion (and we are drifting VERY offtopic, but I reply here and will let the moderators find the appropriate thread to move these posts)

There's an exception on the copyright law called fair use. It does allow the reproduction of partial or total copyrighted material in some cases, including a critical discussion. The fair use is a very vague idea, but one of the criteria used to calibrate it is how the use affects its commercial value (even potential).

Taking in consideration this, I see two main difference between posting a magazine article here and posting a video on youtube:
- The amount of people that it reaches.. Obviously, the amount of people that will watch a song posted on Youtube makes the amount of our visitors who read an article here very insignificant.
- Also, the geographical availability of the copyrighted product: an album, or even one song, have nowadays a commercial value internationally, not only because it may be released in many countries, but also because it is very easy to download music from any part of the world, so one could argeu that posting it on youtube decreases the number of people who may have potentially bought it. Most of the articles that are published here, are from local or national magazines that the HWI members from other countries are very unlikely to buy. Indeed, it has been proved that the fact that an article is published triggers that some of the members buiy it even if it is an import, so one could argeu that in this context, the use even increases the commercial value of the article.

Michal

[Roger-G]

Apr 22, 2011 16:44:31 GMT mihizawi said:

Indeed, it has been proved that the fact that an article is published triggers that some of the members buiy it even if it is an import, so one could argeu that in this context, the use even increases the commercial value of the article.
Michal

That would apply equally to a CD posted on Youtube that is currently only available in New Zealand