RU-vid Poops should be automatically listed as "fair use," because they are not meant to compete with the originals, and are remixes that can be pretty wild.
I don't think RU-vid should remove videos just because of copyright. I think it should give people a link to the official site of the copyright owner so they can get consent from that copyright owner to leave the video up. Who agrees?
I sent RU-vid an email at copyright@youtube.com because I wanted to file a counter-DMCA. When I tried to file a counter-DMCA using the form from my video manager, all that I got was a response that took about 2 days that said "counter-dispute rejected". It has been over a week and still no response from them with the email. This is getting to the point where I'm highly considering calling this whole thing off and walking away from it. There just is not fun in it if I have to fight against a music company which does not even own the song in order to have 2 seconds of it (literally, 2 seconds) in a 30 minute video that has nothing to do with it.
Green Triangle Keep spamming them, send more and more emails. Use other email adresses, use generic words in your emails to dodge any filter they would put there. They'll have to obey the law.
Green Triangle I did the same thing you did and almost got my whole Damn video taken down lolol "RU-vid does not care about fair use at all ever in any kind of way"
Thanks for the help! I'm in the middle of a DMCA battle and when I watched the happy tree friends video for the first time I thought it was odd that they glossed over fair use.
Why did they give youtube to google? I LOVED youtube before. Fuck you google.. I missed the old youtube D: i uploaded a full adventure time episode it lasted about a week and the video was gone...
They made a new Copyright Basics video with Mario and Fafa from Glove and Boots and they now allow remixes and that stuff now on RU-vid. (I know this was made back in 2011 I'm just saying)
Your rebuttal was welcome and sorely needed, I think, for those are unaware of the existence of fair use exceptions in copyright law. I've had some guilt over the years as to the content on my channel, but have since come to the realization that it all counts as fair use. Not only do I drizzle new meaning over everything I mangle, warp and splice, since 2006 I've spent hundreds of dollars on software, equipment and media in order to make my videos, with not a red cent gained from them to date.
Great video. The nature of "Fair Use" is fairly ambiguous and not so black and white with what exactly is allowed and exactly is not. I believe that is the reason RU-vid shied away from trying to explain it in further detail. Better for them not to mention it at all than have someone sue them because they used material inappropriately.
Coincidentally, the very day before this was posted, I sat through the Copyright School. The original Copyright Infringement vid stated several times that remixes and mash-ups of copyrighted content is Copyright Infringement, while this new vid states the opposite. I'm gonna do just a bit more research on this stuff than just watch some guy's vid now.
There's a lawyer in California who runs a website called "counterdmca" who allows you to pay a nominal fee of $1.50 and then use the address of his law firm when filing a counter-notice so you don't reveal your private information. You might want to check that out if this worries you.
I said that for intentional melodramatic effect, mimicking the melodrama of RU-vid's original video. Though they certainly act like they don't want you to know about it, because they make it as hard as possible to claim fair use, and now they give certain copyright owners the right to override any fair use claim, no matter how strong.
I read your blog and if this is for real, i can only say THANK YOU. Copyright false claims are a problem world wide, and the abusive takedown of videos that fits the fair use content is finally going to an end (or at least this stupidity will decrease exponentially).
Noncommercial remixes should in most cases be fair use. If you can get the URLs for the videos which were taken down you can still send DMCA counter-notices to get them restored. If you can't access the account, you may have to use RU-vid's contact form to find out the URLs of the deleted videos then email a counter-notice instead of submitting one through the webform.
I think so. The case for fair use in the case of reviews using small clips to show what you're talking about is very strong, so in that case commercial use would probably still be fair use. Actual TV news networks do that sort of thing all the time and they're certainly commercial.
@floydstinkyboy Thanks for your comment. I don't mean to say that you should take this process lightly. You are making a legal claim, and there is always the potential you could end up in court over it. That being said, as far as any tech policy group out there is aware, no regular RU-vid user has ever been sued after sending a counter-notice. If you have a genuine fair use claim, typically they don't bother. So don't take it lightly, but don't be too scared of a lawsuit to use it either.
I don't think the Fair Use Protection weapon works anymore. Example i uploaded a video game gameplay on RU-vid, that includes music(the music is not added in by me, its included in the game). I get copyright strikes on my video of course and i try to tell em that gameplay fall under fair use protection, but they still deny it. Do you have any tips?
What gets me is, we get punished for simply wanting to talk about a certain clip from a show thats uploaded that we gain nothing from. It kills the purpose of even having comments on videos. Sometimes I think its just out of spite.
Here's the problem I have. Fair Use can only be legally determined by a court of law. If you contest a take down notice under the DMCA don't you open yourself up to a lawsuit if the copyright holder disagrees with your claim? And even if you think you're likely to win you still have to through the time and expense of taking it to court.
Noncommercial music videos usually do not compete with the original, since there is no market for licensing music for amateur non-commercial use on user generated video sites, and it does not generally substitute for buying the song. That's basically what that means--if it can substitute for an established market for the copyrighted material.
In the original Copyright School video, they talk very fast about so-called fair use, and the text about fair use came so fast that I found it hard to read. I had to set the video on pause to be able to read it. They don’t talk so fast elsewhere in the video.
I filed a notice, but I don't think it was a counter- one, it was the one where you tick boxes and most of them are fake and you get left with the last few boxes, and I ticked the bottom one, since I have 2 strikes, I'm too scared to file any more stuff.
Depends on how much you post. Posting a reedited version of an entire movie probably wouldn't be considered fair use, but just short snippets with deleted scenes edited in and some material around them for context could be.
@swwardle I also have a problem with people who say "fair use can only be decided by a court." Something can be fair use even if it is never adjudicated to be so. If you are doing something in other contexts that you believe is legal, it doesn't make it illegal just because no court has actually declared it legal. Copyright enforcement these days has been largely privatized anyway. So there is no reason you cannot assert fair use out of court in the context of a private enforcement system.
Subtitling is a big gray area. There are people who argue that things like posting subtitled anime shows that aren't sold in the US is fair use, and others who say it is not. Some subtitle sites have been shut down for copyright infringement. It really depends on the circumstances and there's no clear answer to that.
@Sismiques If you are confident that the copyright claimant does not in fact own the copyright on the work in question, you can always file a Content ID dispute or DMCA counter-notice.
@swwardle True, to a point. However there are cases that are much clearer fair uses than others. Additionally, litigation is expensive and complex, period. That's why copyright disputes on RU-vid almost never result in lawsuits at all. Since the risk of being sued over a RU-vid video is minimal, as long as you have a decent argument for your video being fair use, there is not that much risk in asserting fair use and filing a counter-notice.
This is really informative. I wish they made it easier for people to contact the owners of something that is copyrighted, so no one would have to lose their account or get a strike for sharing something here. People on this site aren't trying to steal anything from money hungry companies, just to share the content, esp. songs, movies etc. that aren't even shown on television anymore on RU-vid. Oh well :/
If you're just playing the whole song and making a sort of virtual mixtape, that's a big gray area. Tons of people do it, and there probably is an argument to be made that it's fair use because your unique compilation and recontextualization adds new meaning to it, but since it consists of whole copyrighted songs, it's probably more likely simply infringing. Hard to say really.
Covers are a big gray area. There's actually a special statutory license that professional musicians have to get when they do a cover, but that doesn't actually include all the rights necessary for a public performance on RU-vid. In the case of most amateur cover artists, I think it would be reasonable to claim fair use, as I don't think Congress intended the statutory cover license to apply to teenagers playing guitar in their bedrooms, etc.
Okay thank you. I really tried to contact the owner of the movie first, but haven't had any luck with that. I figured I try to learn about Fair Use then since I have no desire to profit from this, just create a simple tribute video.
Generally that's probably not fair use to post a straight unedited game trailer. Common sense says the game company would be happy to have advertisements for their game spread far and wide, but the ownership mentality these companies have says any distribution they don't control is a threat, so they have to shut it down.
@tavarusito It may or may not be. My opinion is that the addition of video, particularly when the video is highly synced to the audio like in an AMV, adds new meaning and message to the song, qualifying as transformative even if the song itself isn't changed. That may or may not hold up in court, but it's my view.
@108makoto1 I talk about that on my site. Basically if you are using a small amount of the original and make your own original remix (like a music video or fan trailer), that alters transforms the original into something new and counts as fair use. The key thing is whether you are merely copying the original or making something new.
@Islandgamers I can't give specific advice, but the tricky thing with music is if you are adding a new message or meaning to it, or just using it as filler. Normally the latter would require a synchronization license, while the former is more more likely to be fair use.
I had a video of Marge Simpson crumping to 1000 miles by Vanessa Carlton. It was taken down because I used a clip from The Simpsons that lasted about 5 seconds, but I replayed it over and over until the video lasted around 30 seconds. I hardly think it's worthy of being taken down but if someone could explain I'll happily listen.
Disclaimers have no legal effect whatsoever, and they're not going to dissuade anyone from taking your video down either because it's all done by bots at this point. No human ever sees these claims until the dispute stage, and even then someone at the copyright enforcement companies they farm this stuff out to just clicks through and denies every dispute. Only once you file a DMCA counter-notice can you actually beat them.
I don’t know if my use is transformative. I made a video entitled, “How to pronounce metal band names.” The purpose of the video is to compile quotations of people properly pronouncing band names so that others may and learn from them. The video consists entirely of clips of other videos (mostly interviews). The duration is 515 seconds, using 40 clips, so the average clip length is less than 13 seconds. Is this fair use?
So one of my best videos that ""I"" made that got thousands and thousands of views was just removed today due to a theme song to an old cartoon show. They then put me in copyright school. Ill be 100% honest. Im pissed....
Acknowledging just means you've seen the claim, so you can do that if you want or just ignore it. If you want to dispute videos that are blocked anywhere you can. Personally I usually leave ones alone that aren't actually blocked.
Well there's no set limit to it, but generally short clips could fall under fair use, especially if used for some kind of commentary or just filmed incidentally in the background. If that gets blocked you can always dispute the copyright claim.
Hello, I got copyrighted for in-game music on a gaming video. IMO, that isn't my fault. The music is in the actual game, playing in the background. WTF?! There's nothing i can do about that.
Funny thing, I had a video up for 3 years and it got deleted a few days ago just because I had ann Hikaru Utada song. Another video had copyrighted music but got muted then UN-muted. RU-vid staff obviously doesn't know what they're doing.
i was wondering because if you think about it they dont compete with the origanal and have new meaning. guess it is kinda iffy, i might make a new channel to take my chances
@PCHavoc I've seen that disclaimer a lot, but it's not actually a very good one because it says nothing about why YOUR SPECIFIC VIDEO is fair use. It's just a general summary of fair use. Disclaimers in general don't really do anything, since they won't prevent your video from being taken down. But if you want to do a disclaimer, I'd recommend something like, "this video is fair use because it is non-commercial, transformative in nature, and does not compete with the original work."
It really depends. That's kind of a grey area with no clear answer. Also even if it is fair use RU-vid still may not let you monetize it, since they have a stricter standard for monetization and and may not accept fair use as an answer for that. You can always try though and see if they allow it or not.
They knew what they signed up for when they started. They may say otherwise, but I'm sure they knew it'd be big. They should've prepared, or at least started out with ads so we don't disdain them like we do today.
Everyone has the right to share his content. RU-vid has the right to take down your video because youtube owns its site. But If they say Goverment will put you in jail and that shit. THey can't! We have the right to share everything we don't give a fuck about copyrights. We have every right to share each other content. Like pirate bay does so many years.
@tavarusito Yes I agree AMVs do promote the show/game/song, which is why it's stupid for media companies to block them. And fair use applies to old movies just as much as new ones.
Sounds like it would be fair use to me, though I can't say for certain. Have you actually filed a counter-notice? Once that goes through the strike should be removed. Sounds like you haven't done the counter-notice yet if you still have strikes.
I got a perfect score on the quick without even watching the Copyright School video. Today I went back and watched the first few seconds of the video and found it incredibly insulting. I understand copyright more than the average user, and I believe that RU-vid is not handling fair use issues correctly. I have already filed my counternotification against the National Football Leage, the copyright holder who assulted me with a notification.
Question : I created a stop motion video for the Red Hot Chili Peppers song : "I feel love". I made it as a tribute for the band as I appreciate them very much. The video is not for sale and I am not makeing money out of it. Is it considered fair use ?
It's hard to say. A professional artist would need to get at least two types of licenses for a cover, but that system is pretty much impossible for amateurs to use. I personally think there's a good argument that amateur covers are fair use.
Sorry if this has been asked before-! You seem to be knowledgeable when it comes to grey areas... What about using a copyrighted song and making your own music video out of your own art...? Not just a slideshow kind of thing, but an actual music video with a story. (It's one of my hobbies, my featured video is an example~)
In my case I really don't mind to have the video taken down... I'm just annoyed by the 6 months punishment, and losing some of the features in my channel, even after taking the video down myself... Here's my story... My First Copyright Strike on RU-vid
@GameVidMakerTUSA I personally believe AMVs are fair use, even if they don't change the song and the use the entire thing, because they are adding a new meaning on top of the song. That may or may not hold up in court, but that's what I think.
Thanks for the video :) I didn't know all that And btw .. if you have some 50 videos with fair use of copyright material and they were all taken down.. I highly doubt you'd feel like filing 50 counter notices.
PS, I got my first notice when I put up two songs that were altered in Audacity to sound male, and neither were the full songs, which were taken down within the hour I put them up. No remixing, just altering, and YT took them down. Was that just or was I just? The artist seems to have a home or two on YT.
You would think false claimants should be punished, wouldn't you? Sadly, that's not how RU-vid works. They never punish false claimants, and the worst like UMG they actively reward for it.
Hi, I spent 10 hours editing a peppa pig video I downloaded from EOneFamily, and there's custom footage and sounds at least every 4 seconds. Is this fair use or not? I submitted two counter-notification to EOne who gave me 2 strikes (I uploaded it twice). Can I do anything?
@tavarusito Yes. Fair use is something that depends on how you use the material, not whether it's new or old or whatever. So if for example you made a music video using footage from Avatar, even though it's a new movie, because that's a transformative use it's still fair use--every bit as much as if you made a music video of say, Gone With the Wind. How old it is doesn't matter.
Incidentally captured background music is usually fair use, but at the same time it's usually not really worth disputing a claim unless it's being blocked or depriving you of ad revenue.
What if you are posting a game trailer just because you like it? Does it not fall under fair use because you did nothing to it? Or does it fall under the "news" category of fair use since you are simply posting it, and it does not interfere in any way with the original content?
@Sismiques It it showing up as "awaiting response" or "confirmed"? If the former, your video is actually probably live, even if the view copyright info page says it's blocked. Try logging out of your account and seeing if you can view the video. If it's showing up as "all content owners have confirmed their claim to your video," you are sadly out of luck, as there is currently no further way to dispute it.
If they get taken down, it's my opinion at least that amateur cover recordings qualify as fair use, though I could be wrong about that. I wouldn't worry about it if they're just matched though and not actually blocked.
@NewMusicRealm Possibly if the case for fair use is already very strong (such as direct parodies). In many cases though, making money off something undermines your case for fair use. And as far as I know, RU-vid does not accept fair use as proper authorization to use copyrighted material for purposes of monetization. They require you to have written authorization for everything you use.
@ArkBlitz I would if I could. Unfortunately, RU-vid does not let me use their built in CC license tag on any of my videos, probably as a result of a 3-year old copyright strike I still can't get removed because I deleted the video ages ago, and so RU-vid won't respond to counter-notices on it. I'm assuming CC licenses are like the "unlisted" video option and aren't available to anyone who has ever gotten a copyright strike.
If it was creative commons at the time you made the video, than you should be good. That counts as a license as long as you stick to the parameters of the CC license.
@Anamatonamaton I'm afraid I can't give an evaluation of specific videos because that would be legal advice, but you can use the material on my website to determine if you think it is fair use or not, and if so, you are free to file a dispute.
