Taking the Anti-Piracy Argument Back From the Music Industry

[electrizer]

YouTube's content verification program to pull down illegally shared music.

Can one do that as a non-affiliated individual? I'd be interested. When I was posting Swans' "To Be Kind" teaser last Weekend Chatty I saw the entire album being posted on YT. When I wanted to flag it, the only options I had were "Pornography, "Racist content", "Spreading hatred" blah blah blah. The only option referring to reporting illegal content enabled me to do it only if I was the owner of the copyrights.

[Paul Marangoni]

The only option referring to reporting illegal content enabled me to do it only if I was the owner of the copyrights.

Exactly. It's very easy to post something and violate someone's copyright (and do it anonymously), but it's VERY difficult to get it removed. And when you do get it removed, there will be a notice with your name indicating that you had it removed. Take a look at the video you posted at the beginning of this topic.

Nothing wrong with that, right? Google is righteous.

[Paul Marangoni]

How is he out of line! Dude. What. LOL?

He is out of line because he is insinuating that Frank Gambale ONLY posts about online piracy/theft/copying. He referenced ONE post from Frank, and suggested that too many artists only focus on that subject instead of more noble topics. This particular topic is about anti-piracy, yet he felt it was all too much, so he decided to post a video by some Mike Johnston clone who is proselytizing about yet another self promotion cleverly disguised as a campaign to raise money to feed the hungry.

That's out of line and out of left field in my eyes.

[Paul Marangoni]

Or is that we as artists should be more concerned about that than fucking Monsanto, the oil in the Gulf of Mexico, NSA, Guantanamo, etc, etc, etc?

By that logic, no one should dare post anything online that doesn't help the planet or humanity.

[Rene]

This article titled: "How One Generation Was Single-Handedly Able To Kill The Music Industry", drew my attention. It was shared byJohn DeChristopher on my FB page. The analysis brings more arguments to the table than just piracy. John shared this article due to the correlation between the record business and the shrinking, ever-downsizing, drum industry/musical instrument business.....

http://elitedaily.com/music/how-one-gen ... ry/593411/

Music (the mass) is like fast food: no real quality ingredients, cooked in a few seconds, no flavour, consumed in minutes.

[Paul Marangoni]

http://blog.davismcgrath.com/2014/04/24 ... gle-books/

[electrizer]

Or is that we as artists should be more concerned about that than fucking Monsanto, the oil in the Gulf of Mexico, NSA, Guantanamo, etc, etc, etc?

By that logic, no one should dare post anything online that doesn't help the planet or humanity.

There's enough evil to go around for every aspiring activist. Some campaign against cancer, some against corporate tax evasion, and some raise copyright infringement awareness. I wouldn't have a life if I wanted to change the world for everyone (not that I'm trying my absolute best to). I prefer to "start from my own backyard".

It's the same boat for all of us, fellas.

[Rene]

http://blog.davismcgrath.com/2014/04/24/google-prevails-in-fair-use-case-over-google-books/

Cool: a clairvoyant judge that saved or gave a boost to the book industry in the US.

[Morgenthaler]

The only option referring to reporting illegal content enabled me to do it only if I was the owner of the copyrights.

Exactly. It's very easy to post something and violate someone's copyright (and do it anonymously), but it's VERY difficult to get it removed. And when you do get it removed, there will be a notice with your name indicating that you had it removed. Take a look at the video you posted at the beginning of this topic.

Nothing wrong with that, right? Google is righteous.

@electrizer - no, you partner up with YouTube (this is free) and get a ghost account from which you can pull down any material that violates
your copyrights or the copyrights of those you work for.

@Paul Marangoni: I wouldn't say it's VERY difficult. I'd say it's VERY easy. I check in once a day. Anything shared illegally I'll have removed within
5 to 10 minutes. That's not "VERY difficult" in my book. I love that people can post basically anything in the first place. I don't mind having to take down
a lot of stuff. Often I interact with the posters too - trying to make them understand why posting material that cost thousands of dollars to create just can't
be shared for free, without causing the artist some kind of grief.

I genuinely think that the advantages of the internet and particularly the www far outweigh the disadvantages - also for artists.

[Paul Marangoni]

The Internet could disappear tomorrow, and I couldn't care less (and I make a good living off of developing for the Internet).

First of all, the Internet (and most technology for that matter) wouldn't even be what it is today if it weren't for pornography (but I digress).

Secondly, having to login everyday to police the world's activities on YouTube as they relate to you is beyond ridiculous. Once something has been posted online, chances are very good that many people have already either viewed it, or even downloaded it. Having it taken down one day doesn't prevent it from being uploaded again hours later. You're suggesting that artists do this themselves, or hire someone to do it. Who has that kind of free time?

A better approach is to let users know that uploading something that they did not create, or that they have no permission to upload will result in charges being brought against them. And then they need to be fined. Heavily.