My First Youtube copyright block

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: Grambler

Slow down or speed up your video samples by a small percentage, say 4-5% speed change... it will usually break the computerized content trackers and the only way they asshats will catch you is via user complaints that would have to be checked by an actual human copyright checker.

Or you could use video clips no longer than 30 seconds (this I understand is covered as fair use, from marketing professionals I have worked with).

a reply to: Grambler

My video subsatntially changed the messaging of the clip I used (I was criticizing it) and I only used around 7 minutes of a 40 minute or so show.

Your words, not mine. So what does substantially (corrected the spelling) changing the messaging mean?

You also have stated you used 7 minutes of a specific 8 minute segment of the programme. Not sure that would be classed as fair use.

originally posted by: uncommitted
a reply to: Grambler

My video subsatntially changed the messaging of the clip I used (I was criticizing it) and I only used around 7 minutes of a 40 minute or so show.

Your words, not mine. So what does substantially (corrected the spelling) changing the messaging mean?

You also have stated you used 7 minutes of a specific 8 minute segment of the programme. Not sure that would be classed as fair use.

Oh nothing to say on you being wrong and criticism being fair use?

If I called out someone’s intelligence and was wrong then would probably acknowledge it

Substantially change the message means the material must be transformative

A criticism of the material is specifically listed as being transformative

As far as using 7 minutes of an 8 minute clip, it was 7 minutes of a one hour show

If I criticize a book and show one whole chapter of the book that doesn’t mean it was 100 percent of the source material included

Now there certainly is a question as to how much of my own material must be included in a criticism to be enough to be considered fair use

This was about 85% my material

Is that enough, I don’t know it’s hard to find guidelines

But as I said from the get to, criticism is fair use, and your claim that obviously it wasn’t is absolutely wrong

a reply to: Grambler

mornin' G....I see it as this...if you are asking for, getting, receiving "likes" or stars, views...then you are getting them on borrowed content that's all.

Look at it like politicians using some rocker-song without asking the group if they could...and maybe said group doesn't support them...yet may very well have allowed it....if they were just asked.

Some are fine...

FYI: There is generally no YouTube hit squad watching every single thing....but someone, somewhere...saw it and physically requested it be removed

Good luck going forward! Best, M.S.

a reply to: mysterioustranger

It’s not for stars and flags

I could make a thread without a video and still get stars and flags of that is my concern

And both honestly and legally this is way different than using a song without permission

I made the videos because I feel the media is damaging the country, and I am criticizing them

That is allowed under fair use and far different than using a song in the background or something

Thank you for the blessings going forward though, I honestly appreciate it

I know it's not for stars etc....but YouTube and a few others....can be used to create views, viewers and "likes"....that can create interest and $$$ for the channel.

Therefore...you potentially could be gaining for viewership or profit w content inside your original work....that you didn't have permission to use.

It's a simple, yet fine line between creation of something of yours containing someone else's c.righted material...and being creative by using, modifying and or editing...someone's material.

Fair use is fine when it's not for $$ or clicks...but to put it up for all? One takes the risk of it possibly violating international copyright law.

When in doubt, ask permission or at least credit the hell out of it, put a disclaimer on it.

Good luck on your media endeavors...any clarification on any of this, contact me. Feel free.

Video copyright owner
Musical
Literary
Trademark owner

a reply to: Grambler

Your words -

I took about 7 minutes of an 8 minute clip of the opening of "Morning Joe"

So you stole 7 minutes of an 8 minute clip. Stop trying to dance around the subject.

If you stole a whole chapter of a book without the authors or publishers permission, and if there wasn't permission granted at the beginning of the book that such a substantial element could be used, then no, it wouldn't be classed as fair use.

You often do this, try and establish your opinion as fact than complain when others say otherwise. This is irrelevant anyway, maybe you should chalk it down as a lesson learnt and even blaming the democrats won't make it better.

a reply to: uncommitted

Sorry I put very little stick into the opinion of people that are proven wrong and refuse to admit it

You acted like any reuse of material was not allowed, then when proven wrong change your argument without admitting you are wrong

Instead you smugly attack my intellect

Nice try though

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: uncommitted

Sorry I put very little stick into the opinion of people that are proven wrong and refuse to admit it

You acted like any reuse of material was not allowed, then when proven wrong change your argument without admitting you are wrong

Instead you smugly attack my intellect

Nice try though

Not really, you are doing what you always do, twisting things.

You acted like any reuse of material was not allowed, then when proven wrong change your argument without admitting you are wrong

No, I said that if youtube don't allow clips from copyright restricted TV shows to be shown on its site then you stealing one was never going to end in your favour. The conversation then moved on swiftly (by you) to what you consider should be fair use - in your opinion - and I responded based on it.

Sorry I put very little stick into the opinion of people that are proven wrong and refuse to admit it

don't we all, just surprised I bother responding to them.

Instead you smugly attack my intellect

Show some, then I'll see if I want to respond, smugly or otherwise.

mysterioustranger (dude, you are missing an 's' in your profile unless you are a mysterious tranger) gave you some very good basic background on copyright protection but yet again you just keep digging the hole, refusing to admit that just because you have an opinion doesn't make it right - I really wouldn't find it laughable if you didn't post so many threads accusing others of doing exactly the same thing.

a reply to: uncommitted

Mysterious stranger said it could possible violate, and he is right

The laws are very vague

However your initial claim that things like criticism were not fair use was flat out wrong

You chose to make smug insults, and yet we’re totally wrong

Notice how you United all of the links I posted saying criticism was fair use

Then you switched your argument to the length of the clip I used being the reason, completely ignoring your previous wrong argument

That’s fine, I am used to people like you insulting me, only to be proven wrong and then ignoring it while changing your argument

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: uncommitted

Mysterious stranger said it could possible violate, and he is right

The laws are very vague

However your initial claim that things like criticism were not fair use was flat out wrong

You chose to make smug insults, and yet we’re totally wrong

Notice how you United all of the links I posted saying criticism was fair use

Then you switched your argument to the length of the clip I used being the reason, completely ignoring your previous wrong argument

That’s fine, I am used to people like you insulting me, only to be proven wrong and then ignoring it while changing your argument

However your initial claim that things like criticism were not fair use was flat out wrong

No I didn't, you said you had substantially changed the message, which implies you made changes to the actual footage. The fact that you posted a stolen 7 minutes of an 8 minute section though implies it's still doctored to miss out a point.

Yet again, you just keep hammering home your message that you must be right because..... well, because you must be right. I can understand you being used to people picking you up when you post threads that try and make your opinion fact because you do it so often. it's very tiresome though.

a reply to: uncommitted

I know it’s tough to admit you are wrong

I posted sites showing the material is allowed to be used if it is transformative

In other words, if the message has been transformed or changed

I pist d links showing criticism is just that

You were wrong

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: uncommitted

I know it’s tough to admit you are wrong

I posted sites showing the material is allowed to be used if it is transformative

In other words, if the message has been transformed or changed

I pist d links showing criticism is just that

You were wrong

It really is rather sad and pathetic. Tell it to youtube, perhaps they will agree, but for me, you are just a sad little person. The world isn't all about you, when you realise that then you will probably become a better person. Maybe not, but you can but hope.

a reply to: uncommitted

Yes someone else punting our you smugly made arguments insulting others intelligence proves they think the world is all about them

I do not think the word is all about me

I pointed out that you were wrong in you assessment that criticizing material is not allowed

You were wrong

I admitted earlier in this thread I was wrong about owning what o type in ats

I also admit I don’t know what the exact threshold is on how much material can be used when using criticism

It’s jot hard to admit when your wrong

But not you. Just double down and keep insulting and hope we move on

Don’t worry you will be ok

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: uncommitted

Yes someone else punting our you smugly made arguments insulting others intelligence proves they think the world is all about them

I do not think the word is all about me

I pointed out that you were wrong in you assessment that criticizing material is not allowed

You were wrong

I admitted earlier in this thread I was wrong about owning what o type in ats

I also admit I don’t know what the exact threshold is on how much material can be used when using criticism

It’s jot hard to admit when your wrong

But not you. Just double down and keep insulting and hope we move on

Don’t worry you will be ok

Oh dear, you really don't have a skin for this whole media thing do you? Tell you what, I'll stay away from your future threads as they will all be (as usual) you twisting what other people say to match your world opinion and expecting other people to believe you. Some will, as they will hold the same bias, some won't and you will do as you are doing here to try and defend yourself.

The world is full of stupid people, I'd like to make sure I hold conversations with at least one less of them.


ETA, although I'm not here for stars, isn't it strange my responses get them and yours don't? You might want to sharpen up your media skills.

a reply to: uncommitted

Classic

Get proven wrong, make insults, brag some like minded people gave you stars

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: uncommitted

Classic

Get proven wrong, make insults, brag some like minded people gave you stars

Brag some like minded people? Does that even make sense? You mean I'm bragging about getting stars? Far from it, I mean't the fact no one appeared to be supporting your responses, I couldn't really care, it just means people disagreed with you.

Oh dear, oh dear.

Just please face it, you made a post where you wanted people to support you when you committed copyright theft. You didn't get what you wanted and now are acting like a child. It happens, lots of other people do it. Best thing to do, learn from it. Other companies material is not for you to use as your own without permission, it's not a hard concept, if you come out with something interesting at some point in your life and other people try and steal it then you will possibly feel you are protected. Or should be.

a reply to: uncommitted

I am not sure if my video falls under fair use or not

I do know that criticism does fall under that, and your original argument, that you made so confidently that you insulated my intelligence while making it was wrong

You know it is wrong, as I cited three cites showing it

So you changed your argument and went in insulting

Now you make the classic “I got more stars!” comment

I don’t care how many stars you got

You were wrong

a reply to: uncommitted

Just so we can see what your original point was


I said
“People have the right to use publicly available material to criticize."


You say

If it's been placed in the public domain without any restrictions or caveats placed against it, that's correct. If not, then it isn't - that's tough, but it's a fact. Just having an opinion doesn't make you right, having an opinion without having the facts risks you looking like an idiot.

Then I posted the articles showing you were wrong, criticism is fair use

You couldn’t respond to those, so you changed your argument

All of your insults and claims of me being and idiot and it just being my opinion, and you were wrong

Then you further insult me when I prove you wrong, and say because you got stars you must be right

Just admit you were wrong and move on

originally posted by: uncommitted

Far from it, I mean't the fact no one appeared to be supporting your responses, I couldn't really care, it just means people disagreed with you.

Or it means most of us who do see Gramblers arguments have moved on from the thread?

I drop back in and find such disingenuousness from you, uncommitted.

Since stars equal won argument is your appeal I do think stars and percentages sometimes tell the story.