Join Early Retirement Today
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 03-03-2015, 04:01 PM   #21
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
robnplunder's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 2,160
Wow, another vote for this being absurd.

If an artist wants to make money off of a song, his time is better spent going after commercial users who is willing and have money to spend.

Pura Vida
robnplunder is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 03-03-2015, 06:04 PM   #22
Full time employment: Posting here.
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: St. Charles
Posts: 679
This reminds me of the days when our son was in elementary school. The annual fundraiser was a play written by, and acted by, the parents. It was always a take off of something, with a lot of music from recent, and not so recent, movies and TV shows. We always kidded about being sued for copyright violations. Never happened, but this does make you wonder.
Most memorable event: one year it was a take off on Wizard of Oz. One night we had a special guest. Mickey Carroll, one of the original Munchkin's!! He was in his seventy's, but still very engaging. I hope the little note and autograph is still on the wall, backstage, for all to remember.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Early Retirement Forum mobile app

If your not living on the edge, you're taking up too much space.
Never slow down, never grow old!
CardsFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2015, 07:35 PM   #23
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 18,874
Originally Posted by Mr._Graybeard View Post
Ahhh - thanks, very interesting. Reader's Digest version (ooops, trademark infringement?), if I followed it - if the youtube robot scanner detects a violation, it informs the copyright holder, and it is up to the copyright holder to either ask them to take it down, or they can track it to see how much positive exposure they are getting from it, or share in ad revenue from youtube.

I suppose if they get no response from the copyright holder, they take it down to protect themselves.

I need to look at this more - is it obvious to the viewer that the copyright holder has approved the video? If so, then I won;t feel any guilt watching these, or worry so much that they will be taken down in the future.

Originally Posted by robnplunder View Post
Wow, another vote for this being absurd.

I don't think you are following this. The copyright violation is an automatic detection system. No one is doing anything absurd (though the results might seem absurd), youtube really needs to default to the conservative side of kicking out marginal things to protect themselves. What else can they do?

Originally Posted by Chuckanut View Post
As I understand it, the software detected his podcast in the station's broadcast and in effect cloaked the podcast with the station's copyright causing the podcast to be flagged as a violation of the station's copyright, even though the podcast itself existed independently of the broadcast. It was purely an automated response, proving again that computers do what we tell them to do not what we want them to do.
I'm still not sure I'm following this. Are you saying that once the station posted their broadcast (with the podcast excerpt in it), that the youtube system saw the podcast as the property of the station, and then the original podcast got flagged?

Seems a bit out there, from what I know. I've heard that youtube has created 'fingerprints' of copyrighted material, and use that to flag stuff.That is what that 'Shazam' app was all about - they were actually using that to test the 'finfgerprint' idea. But are they creating fingerprints for every news broadcast out there - possibly, just seems outside what they are looking for to me.


ERD50 is offline   Reply With Quote

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Street Crime haha Other topics 8 02-26-2010 11:28 AM
American crime fiction vicente solano Other topics 21 05-24-2009 02:27 PM
Crime laffs peterbilt Other topics 0 06-04-2008 12:50 PM
Parents Turning Their Kids In for Crime tangomonster Other topics 22 02-22-2008 10:19 PM
Cyber crime & Phishing WARNING $$$ acg FIRE and Money 16 11-12-2005 08:22 AM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:39 AM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.