Why was "videobuff" suspended from You Tube?

[kavo]

Does anyone know why videobuff and his amazing collection of hi-nrg/disco music has been suspended from You Tube? My favorites list is half-gone! He was great... hope he's ok.

[BrunoRepublic]

I would expect that it has to do with YouTube's Copyright infringement policy:

"YouTube respects the rights of copyright holders and publishers and requires all users to confirm they own the copyright or have permission from the copyright holder to upload content. We comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) and other applicable copyright laws and promptly remove content when properly notified. Repeat infringers' videos are removed and their accounts are terminated and permanently blocked from using YouTube."

[STEPHEN L FREEMAN]

Grrr! When I was doing all the research for my Girlie-Girl Top-30 list, on the Main site, I included links to a couple of his videos because I figured he was such an established YouTube member, that I had nothing to worry about.

The day after I posted my list, he got canned! SHEESH!

[BrunoRepublic]

I have always found it puzzling that so many music forums explictly forbid discussion of trading MP3s, bootlegs, P2P networks, etc., but have no problem with links to YouTube videos that are seldom posted by the copyright owner.

[Videoskooter]

Originally Posted by BrunoRepublic

I have always found it puzzling that so many music forums explictly forbid discussion of trading MP3s, bootlegs, P2P networks, etc., but have no problem with links to YouTube videos that are seldom posted by the copyright owner.

Bruno, you have a point but, and this is just my opinion: YouTube is owned by Google, a big, powerful and very rich company, it is their job to check the copyrights. They had a deal with a lot of major companies that was annulated a few weeks ago because the music majors want more royalties paid.

Since then, YT started cleaning up. Videobuff, who I appreciate very much, is probably one of those victims. All Prince vids are deleted by Websheriff. If Prince is not the copyrightholder of the images, they only delete the sound, but I know a lot of people that are being threatened by his lawyers for only using a small fraction of one of his songs.

YT has always been in a twilight zone. Personally, I have the explicit permission of some artists to post the vids here (f.e. the French label Creativesource, Coati Mundi, Cerrone, Evelyne Lenton/Albert Weyman (Belle Epoque)).

MySpace is now doing the same thing. If you upload music without the explicit permission of the artist/copyrightholder, those tracks are deleted and in many cases the account is axed too.

How will all this develop? Only future and big wallets can tell.

[BrunoRepublic]

Originally Posted by Videoskooter

YouTube is owned by Google, a big, powerful and very rich company, it is their job to check the copyrights.

That's an impossible task though. First of all, it would require them to hire staff to screen the thousands of clips that get uploaded every day, which in turn would slow down the immediacy of YouTube. Secondly, those staff would somehow have to know every copyrighted piece of material in existence. This is why YouTube's TOS state that users must not post material for which they do not own the copyright.

We all know that sharing MP3s of copyrighted material is not legal. I think that because the YouTube thing was happening on a major site, for a relatively long time, without any repercussions, that many people assumed this was somehow legal. And if it's the copyright owner posting the clips, it certainly is: witness all the labels which have official YT channels and use it to promote music. And thus YouTube now serves as a nice replacement for the so-called music TV channels which long ago lost interest in showing any actual videos.

But people recording their favourite records and putting them up with a still image or a collage of album covers? How is that any different from sharing MP3s? Really, it's just a (very) lo-fi version of file-sharing.

Oh, and I agree that the Prince thing is ridiculous. But so is Prince. It's quite obvious that he's been living such an insulated existence for so long that he's lost touch with the real world. Maybe not quite to Michael Jackson levels of reality deficiency, but he's on his way there.

[Videoskooter]

Originally Posted by BrunoRepublic

That's an impossible task though.

Didn't I read somewhere that they have/had developed a special program that would screen in realtime the stuff that's being uploaded ?????

Originally Posted by BrunoRepublic

But people recording their favourite records and putting them up with a still image or a collage of album covers? How is that any different from sharing MP3s? Really, it's just a (very) lo-fi version of file-sharing.

Like I said, you have a point. Maybe the difference is in the fact that you can download an MP3 at once and that it's more difficult with a YT-vid (+ soundquality is sometimes very dubious). Maybe you can tell us more on that coz' I'm not an expert in those things.

Originally Posted by BrunoRepublic

Oh, and I agree that the Prince thing is ridiculous.

I'm not joking, I know a girl that had posted a self-taped vid of her young daughter performing with her classmates on "Batdance". She received a message from NPG-records to immediately delete the sound of it or face court action! Even Jill Jones who put up the vid of "Mia Bocca" on her MySpace page, had to remove it at once and she's actually singing the tune and performing it in the vid! The only legal material of Prince is on PRINCE - LOTUSFLOW3R now. Do you know I had to wait for the official permission to place that link here some time ago? BTW, It will be fully operational very soon! (songs and vids)

[BrunoRepublic]

Originally Posted by Videoskooter

Didn't I read somewhere that they have/had developed a special program that would screen in realtime the stuff that's being uploaded ?????

I don't see how that could possibly work. It would require a database of every single copyrighted work in the entire world.

[Videoskooter]

Bruno, I just found the link, maybe I misread it:

YouTube's filters help copyright owners profit from pirated videos | Digital Media - CNET News

And also:

"In August 2008, a U.S. court ruled that copyright holders cannot order the removal of an online file without first determining whether the posting reflected fair use of the material".

Now, what's the "fair use of material"?????

[motobiker]

I think you're all on the wrong track - this has nothing to do with copyright infringement.

Videobuff gave up posting tracks to youtube almost a year ago after a prolonged and very nasty series of homophobic attacks from another user. If you've been watching his channel over the past year or two you won't need me to tell you who this is. The person involved created a number of profiles with which to attack videobuff and to leave some particularly nasty vicious comments on his postings.

I have a feeling (due to some of his messages to me) that he has removed his channel of his own volition - as I say - he stopped posting new tracks over a year ago. the attacks got too nasty and it was clearly no longer worth the hassle.

who remembers the channel videobuffisafag etc etc etc.

Interestingly enough - the person in question has continued throughout to post songs - now has almost 2,000 tracks on his channel and over 3,000 subscribers - shame that not many know him for what he is.

further - VB had a discalimer on his channel and was more than happy to remove any tracks that were requested by the copyright owners to be taken off. Which is more than can be said for a lot of posters on youtube.