The RIAA Says No Dancing To Music On YouTube
from the how-dare-you! dept
We already know that the entertainment industry loves to try to get people to pay for every possible use of their content. Remember the filmmaker who almost couldn't release his documentary because there was a four and a half second clip of The Simpsons playing in the background in one scene? It seems that with the rise of user-generated video, a lot more people are learning about the fun of licensing rights. The RIAA is apparently sending out cease-and-desist letters to YouTube users who dare to put up videos of things such as themselves dancing to music they haven't licensed. It's difficult to see how the RIAA can make a credible claim of "losses" in this case. Clearly, some kids videotaping themselves bopping along to some song aren't going to pay a license fee -- and these sorts of viral videos tend to help build up more interest in artists. So what good does it do to go after these videos?
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I can't prove it but I can say it!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
BS
Some kid records himself dancing to some obscure song, it then get's catapulted to worldwide popularity. How is getting *free* product placement bad?
I don't understand it! In any other industry this is free advertising and product placing. To any other industry this is the best blood thing you can ask for! To the RIAA it's Grand Larceny!
What complete idiotic fools.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
It would depend on how the music is played right? If it is a public radio station they are listening to then they have no case since it is aired in public yeah? If the dancers bought the music they have a license as well you would think. Though they would probably say it is broadcasting, hence they need to license it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
wow
[ link to this | view in thread ]
...I can't wait untill they go out of buisiness LOL
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
...
Which is...
Dumber?
Scarier?
More powerful?
Richer?
More panicky?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
There's only one solution...
Get the kids to dance to PODSAFE MUSIC!
http://www.podsafemusicnetwork.com/
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Fight fire with fire
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Its the RIAA
MPAA = Motion Picture Association of America
RIAA = Recording Industry Assocation of America
The MPAA is NOT the RIAA.. they have the same tactics, but one represents MOVIE studios and has nothing to do with music!!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Fight fire with fire
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Hmm
Perhaps a petition will get them to stop =D I mean there are more people who download the music then people who record it.
Im sure some congressmans children or grandchildren are downloading "Funkytown" right now. Gratz to the US government.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
RiRR or what ever
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
And uploading a video to the net
If the former is a copyright violation due to it containing a copyright song, so is the latter. It doesn't matter how unprofessional the individual looks dancing to the tune.
You don't have to claim losses for a copyright violation. A violation is a violation. (losses can increase damages, but you can win a case on the mere violation of copyright law.)
I'm not a lawyer. And I'm not saying artists should care. But I can see why the RIAA cares. (They're not the artist)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
jeuss..no literally
http://youtube.com/watch?v=3KiAvmzcZbg&search=jesus
thats saved in my favorites a few times...OMG ITS SO FUNNY
digg thesong too
also
http://img92.imageshack.us/img92/3120/ftheriaa0pm.jpg
^i made that (my photoshop skills are mega-not-uber-leet)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
-JB
[ link to this | view in thread ]
RIAA can FLIP themselves
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I don't see what the issue is here?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
It absolutly sickens me to know that people are enjoying themselves.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
All you people shouting "hahaha stupid RIAA" are, I'm sorry to say, only shouting about your ignorance of the law. You may not like paying for music, you may think the prices are outrageous, you may think the RIAA is overzealous and profit-hungry and their lawyers need to take a pill, and largely I'd agree with you, but you can't legally argue with their right to pursue copyright infringers if they want to because the law says they have that right.
THAT is why the attourneys that are parents of these kids aren't going to touch the case - they know that legally they will get crushed because their kids are acting illegally.
Maybe one day everything will be free and you'll be able to rip off anyone's work without facing consequences. Until then though, overzealous as they may be, the RIAA is legally within their rights to hunt you down.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
RIAA
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Boycott purchasing music from RIAA support record companies.
If artisits see the RIAA is loosing them fans and buyers of their product, then the RIAA will cease too exist.
The RIAA is acting as like the politburo of the old soviet days in Russia, only this time it's ordinary people in America !
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
A) Fed a troll.
B) Made a complete ass of yourself.
C) Made those of us who really do care —but like to phrase our concerns in a far more civil way— look just like you: an ass.
Thanks for representing us so poorly. If I were any more cynincal than I am now I'd suspect the both of you of being RIAA goons out to make those against the RIAA look bad.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
There is definitely IMHO scope for change in the law with respect to fair use, so instead of preaching to the choir in places like this, petition your local congressman to introduce common sense into copyright law.
Put it this way: if someone broke into your house, took copies of all your digital photos and posted them on their own website, would you be upset? It doesn't matter if they made money out of it, or only posted a few of them, or whatever: the fact is they illegally took your property and put it out there for anyone to see. I'd be pissed and so would you! And all you people saying f**k the RIAA are no different from those burglars.
I wouldn't want you in my house and sure as anything would take a hockey stick to you if I caught you.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
But it's still grey.
What concerns me the most is that the noise to signal ratio in TechDirt comments is getting really bad as of late. There is little or no civil public discourse. This particular article is the worst I've seen in a while.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
re.
Riaa, ask yourself, how many people would have bought that cd/song if it wasn't used in any videos?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
law
n.
1. A rule of conduct or procedure established by custom, agreement, or authority.
Would you accept the outcome if the people changed the laws?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
RIAA Rights
Legally speaking, the RIAA is correct: it's against the law. It's pretty obvious to anyone that this is the fact.
Morally and ethically speaking, they're absolutely frigging wrong. I'm sorry, but just because the law says something is so does not make it right. I am by far not a dissident of legal practices, being a conservative writer for the most part, but this is just ridiculous. Not only are they not facing up to the reality of things today, they are also not facing up to the fact that this presents a hugely bad face for their association.
Let's be real: kids playing music and dancing to it which, by and large, mostly only their friends will see, is not a violation of the law in the *spirit* of the law. If some kid suddenly makes $1 million off a video of him dancing to some music, then fine - ask for a cut. But be reasonable.
By their own account, it would be illegal to play music in your back yard if your neighbors could hear it because you don't have the right to "broadcast" that music into the public domain. That is just outrageously stupid. Everyone knows it is incredibly stupid - even neocons like myself. It bespeaks of an incredibly paranoid mind to take that sort of position.
That it is against the law, I can understand. But that they actually act upon it, or that nobody thinks that it has gone on for far too long to actually set about to change it (with the help of the RIAA to get back into the good graces of the public) is beyond me. And it should be beyond all of you as well - those of you defending this C&D letter campaign.
I'm all for artists making money, and even billions of dollars. But let's not do it by becoming tyrannical with art. This is exactly why everyone hates lawyers.
It's a dumb frigging action, everyone can see that, and those who can't are simply too stupid to have a single coherent thought of their own.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Hmmm....
The point is, there are no reasonable and/or simple licenses for these kinds of performances, especially since they assume you plan to make money with it. Some 13 year old girls dancing around to a Brittany song on Youtube aren't going to make money off of it. Until they can come down with reasonable licensing, I'd say thumb your nose at the RIAA and ask them if they can provide a reasonable/simple license. Chances are, they can't, but that wouldn't stop them trying to litigate you anyway. Hell, they aren't afraid to sue dead people and people with no computers.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lemme get this straight
Would the RIAA go after me if they found out?
Pretty soon they're gonna go after the video camera industry for creating a means of pirating copyrighted material.
Jerks
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
Adrian: I thought the point of the music industry was to make money through entertaining people. I agree that there is an element of stupidity in what the RIAA does, but until people get off their asses to get copyright law changed, they are totally within their rights. South Park? A idea from the common law: what someone creates belongs to them until they assign the rights elsewhere. Music is no different to any other IP. The IP laws are outdated and badly suited to the modern world, agreed. The RIAA overreacts, agreed. It's OK to rip off whatever you want because music should be free, not agreed.
Banagor: I agree that the RIAA is acting stupidly and taking it to far. But the "hooray for piracy" shitheads annoy me just as much as the RIAA does. Both miss the point. And I never said I defended the C&D campaign - I just said that bitching about it is stupid because they're within their legal rights to do so.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
So then...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Plead Innocence?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The real reason the RIAA does what it does
Many governments do this..they want a law no-one would accept, so they start by suggesting a harsh law which everyone rejects, then introduce the original planned bill which seems tame.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
What if bitching about it on forums is a step towards getting people to understand why the law needs to be changed?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Nice
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: So then...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Most of you are missing the point.....again
1) What is the difference between posting an MP3 that I can download illegally and posting a video with me dancing whlel the same MP3 is playing? NOTHING. How hard is it to extract only the audio and now have the MP3 song on my harddrive? If the RIAA doesnt act, how long before someone throw some stupid video on top of the song so they can trade music illegally. Heck the video can be a still image by the argumetns presented here since the content of the video doesnt determine legality.
2) Those that argue that playing music loudly so that the neighbors can hear may constitute a breech of the law are also missing the point. Legallythis maybe true, but from a practical standpoint everyone has ignored what appears to be the defining factor in the RIAA's selection of C&D letters - is the content being transferred digitially?
3) I also think everyone is ignoring the impact of these videos with songs on the rest of the RIAA's business. How long before radio stations start to object to paying fees when little Sally can broadcast that same song with no charge to anyone, anywhere at anytime.
4) and finally, what happens when the vidoe collection starts adding meta data recognizing the song, sound quality and other properties and than adds search functionality to segment by music? How does this differ from Kazzaa. Heck how long before someone makes an interface like Kazzaa to search out the video sites only on music and automatically strips the video out during the download?
All of these items lead to the central point that if you project what appear to be minor threats into the broader pictutre the RIAA has too act now before a precedent is set.
As I have said before most of the people on this board want the business models of music and video to stay static while technology advances becuase this will lead to a reduction in the fees they pay. THe music and movie industries have every right to protect and even grow revenues in light of these changes since last i checked these are not non-profit organizations. The smartest thing I have heard is a music ban or writing to congress since this leverages the too most powerful catalysts of change, Economics (supply and demand) and democracy.
Mark
[ link to this | view in thread ]
http://www.magnetbox.com/riaa/
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Hmmm....
The law may be able to be strictly interpretted to make this illegal, but it is ridiculous.
If you want to broadcast music, play music that is copyrighted, etc. then I agree that you should pay fees.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: BS
this song would have probably died pretty hard core had it not been for ytmnd. ya hear me RIAA?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Most of you are missing the point.....again
For an example of an industry that has embraced the web and digital content for years now.. look at porn. Adult content is one of the most pirated forms of entertainment on the net, with legit digital distributers competing against the pirates and doing just fine (Video on demand, monthly billing, etc). The adult industry didnt hesitate one second, and jumped on the web technology as soon as they could, and they are all happier for it.. RIAA, MPAA take notes!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Its the RIAA
it's the exact same companies that belong to both. If you've paid attention to mergers in the last 10 years... all your major music labels are owned by the same organizations that own all the major movie lables.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
greedy
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Its the RIAA
RIAA = Recording Industry Assocation of America
Or you can refer to them both at the same time, and say
MAFIAA = Music And Film Industry Association of America
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
It would be Lucas who was angry, not Speilberg. But I doubt he would be. He probably thinks the Star Wars kid was funny.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Completely wrong analogy. No one stole anything. The record companies SOLD a copy of the music, which individuals have fair use rights on.
Your analogy should really say: "Would you be mad if you SOLD your photographs to someone and they posted a cropped image of one of those photos on the internet." Completely different.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
F'ing moron, there is such a thing as Fair Use. F'ing moron, I think the RIAA should start charging you for any music that eminates to anyone eles's ears that you purchased. If you play a CD in your car, and other's can hear you play it, maybe the RIAA should send you a Cease and Decist order. As, you only purchased the license for your use, not anyone's elses use.
Yep, that's exactly how ridiculous the argument is.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
However, the music companies and the RIAA could file suit to sue you for it's use. If they win, it's how the Jury feels about it. However, the music industry and RIAA could sue you if you purchased a recording and played it loud enough for any other person other than yourself to hear it. And.., again, it all comes down to what the Jury decides for the outcome. That is.., if it gets to a Jury trial.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
You do have the RIGHT to broadcast what is in the background. It's not copyright infringement!!!
- Not necessarily true. Depends on content and circumstances. Most commercial material would not automatically be exempt.
You could even charge people to watch you dancing in the video. Why? Because this is a video about you in real life, a documentary. You are documenting something about your life!
- Not true as regards to recognizable copyright materials appearing in your video. Over simplified, but basically the reason why WKRP has never been released on DVD - music rights for 100's of recogizable songs.
You now own the copyright to the piece of video, unless of course you place it in the public domain, such as YouTube, then the world owns it.
- Placing a video on YouTube does not release it into public domain. Their TOS even states explicitly that the copyright owner retains all rights
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Useless and Pathetic
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Coke and Mentos don't complain...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: RIAA Rights
Thank you for summing up my thoughts on this.
In addition, I wouldlike to direct everyone's attention to the following site, pointing out how ludicrious the effects of laws related to this article's content.
http://www.unhappybirthday.com/
Yes, it is ILLEGAL to sing "Happy Birthday to You" in the presence of others. This holds for any licensed song; You are, by law, forbidden to make a "public performance".
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Most of you are missing the point.....again
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Kill the MPAA and RIAA
[ link to this | view in thread ]
You've got to be kidding
[ link to this | view in thread ]
simple solution
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Freedom
As far as doing something about the RIAA, the best thing is to not buy their product and to make sure everyone knows why. But, if you feel inclined to steel music or use it in your video that's your choice. You may get a C&D letter, but who cares. By the time you get it your video will probably be mirrored in thousands of places if it's good. If they sue you, do you think any court would do anything more than tell you to stop using their song in your video?
Personally, I think the RIAA and the industry they represent sucks. But, if your an entertainer and choose to be part of that industry or a consumer and want to continue to fund them, that's your choice. I don't buy any of their products and probably won't even if they do change their practices...just personal choice.
Piracy? If people want to make their statement that way, that's their choice. Sometimes just talking about laws and nagging politicians doesn't work and other measures need to be taken. I'm pretty sure we didn't gain our freedom as a nation by writing letters.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
stupid as stupid is
you are the people keeping them alive you f,ing yourselves you are giving them the money to abuse you think about it
the money they use to go after you and others is the money you give them from buying music movies going to movies going to concerts buying ipods tv's all the advertisements that generate funds for them we the people are feeding them to stay alive.. wake up because you are being stupid its like feeding the hungry grizzy bears who keep biting you in the ass but you keep feeding them and complain about it to everyone else ,lol
so stop crying about the mpaa and the riaa if you not going to do anything about it and the only way to do this is to have a MASS NO BUYING ,RENTING GOING , TO MOVIES, CONCERTS, NO BUYING MUSIC, TV'S STEREOS,
CAN YOU PEOPLE DO THAT FOR 2 YEARS IF YOU DID THE WHOLE INDUSTRY WOULD DIE ACTORS AND MUSICIANS WOULD RALLY AND PUT A END TO THE RIAA AND MPAA THEMSELVES AFTER THEY SEE THE PEOPLE ARE TIRED OF THERE SHIT, THEY WOULD THEN BEGIN TO SEE THAT IT IS US THE PEOPLE THAT KEEP THEM ALIVE AND RICH IN MONEY ITS US THAT MAKE THE MPAA AND THE RIAA WE ARE FEEDING THEM TO ABUSE US,SO WTFU AND STOP COMPLAINING ABOUT IT AND DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT AND THAT TAKES ALL AMERICANS TO DO IT CAN YOU DO THAT FOR 2 YEARS ASK YOURSELVES IF YOU DID THEY WILL SEE THAT ITS US THAT HAVE THE POWER ,WE HAVE MORE POWER THEN YOU CAN BELIEVE IF WE ALL STOOD AS ONE AND THATS THE POWER OF THE PEOPLE ..
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Stupid
I don't buy DVDs anymore because the copy-protection scheme drives my legally purchased DVD players nuts - I have to watch some DVDs using my PS2. Hey Disney, guess what, I won't be buying Season 4 of Scrubs since Season 3 will not play in my legal DVD players. What do you think of your copy-protection scheme now? If anything, you are pushing me to get a pirated copy in the future. Idiots.
It's clear that the lawyers are running the show at the RIAA and MPAA. At some point someone at the RIAA and MPAA will have to realize that annoying your paying customers is not a wise business decision. Surely, someone with half a brain will realize this, right?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
RIAA
[ link to this | view in thread ]
YOU ARE RIGHT
we might as well bend over and let them f us somemore..cause we are paying for them to do so .. so its time for everyone to wake up...
postitutes with strapon=mpaa = riaa = the john--->we the people
[ link to this | view in thread ]
FUCK RIAA
http://www.captaincopyright.com/
HILARIOUSLY USELESS.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Where do they come up with this stuff?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Not a challange, just a question
Now this dance is not a paid performance... there's no admission or cover fee. I'm not getting paid for this and no one is paying to see it (except gas money to get there). so....
If I don't license the song to which I'm dancing, would the RIAA come after me? Should they? More importantly, I purchased that song legally (yes, believe it or not, it's a legal MP3).
Seriously... the video is about me dancing, not the song that's playing. And it's my song. Shouldn't I be able to dance to it? Shouldn't I be able to let my friends see it? Shouldn't I be able to record that so other friends can see it?
As to the argument that someone could rip the song from the vid and record it... so? How is that my responsibility? How could I be liable for some action that someone else might take?
oh, and I do want to put my 2cents in on a previous comment:
The RIAA should act now to protect their interests... but not as they have been. They should be changing their business model to meet new competition. Not suing the hand that feeds them.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The RIAA appears to be a massive scam.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: James and John
The third factor assesses the quantity or percentage of the original copyrighted work that has been imported into the new work. In general, the less that is used in relation to the whole, e.g., a few sentences of a text for a book review, the more likely that the sample will be considered fair use. Yet see Sony Corp. v. Universal City Studios for a case in which substantial copying — entire programs for private viewing — was upheld as fair use.
"The fourth factor measures the effect that the allegedly infringing use has had on the copyright owner's ability to exploit his original work. The court not only investigates whether the defendant's specific use of the work has significantly harmed the copyright owner's market, but also whether such uses in general, if widespread, would harm the potential market of the original."
Depending on a COURT OF LAW this video could constitute fair use, and I argue that it should, as 1) It adds to the origional peice of work; 2) Quality of the origional is significantly reduced and as such would not be a viable source for copying; and 3) This does not harm the origional product in it's market, conversly, it may help it in the origional's market
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: banding together
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Seriously, you're confusing illegal downloading with a video that has _purchased_ music in the background; its fair-use. You, in your post, described what was illegal and wasn't without any explanation, but the truth is, their divine right to sue the working class in itself is unconstitutional. It is more likely to be that it represents the outcome consequence of a failing business model that needs to change.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
hard to believe
if it is ture, it is insane.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Freedom
And it won't be regained that way either.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: RIAA
What do ya say?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: RIAA
What do ya say?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
DO IT MORE!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
whistling
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: FUCK RIAA
GRRRRRRR
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Remember Numa Numa?
I can't believe the RIAA is so anal that they have to crack down on the usage of unliscenced songs playing in the background of viral videos. It's not like these are pre-release tracks, or high quality streams, it's not even like these are complete songs. Hell i bet I could find longer, better quality clips of most of those songs on the artists website. You really have to wonder, not how much business suffers from these kinds of videos, but how much money has been saved and how much profit was the result. And the RIAA want to stop this all, why? It seems to go against every logical sense in my body, but that's the RIAA for you.
Stop supporting these money-hungry bastards, stop giving them any kind of fuel to continue this kind of ludicris action. Stop buying their CDs, stop buying their merch and make sure to turn off your MTV or MuchMusic.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: ...
Scarier? Neither
More Powerful? RIAA (whole industry v. 1 politician?)
Richer? RIAA (again whole industry)
More Panicky? RIAA (i dont need to justify this one)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: FUCK RIAA
[ link to this | view in thread ]
When will they quit b@t^$i%*
[ link to this | view in thread ]
isnt incidentil copyright infringment alowed in am
[ link to this | view in thread ]
We are your worst nightmare
I will say again that you are no longer needed, the internet has taken your place and everything is cheaper then what you charge, if not free. The bands can promote their music online then make up by playing concerts and selling merchandise.
You suits will never get the picture. You made the same arguement with the invention of radio and tape players, and this time its for real. As long as the average user can get his or her content, you will no longer have any say. Your threats and intimidation are not the way to do business, and you have no interest in your artists, you exist only to sue the same people that you have been ripping off for years. Even your artists dont condone what you do, maybe its time you throw in the towel and give up.
In conclusion: We will continue to steal your product and there is nothing you can do about it. For every person you sue, 1000 more will take its place. The newsgroups and peer to peer networks are still very active, and we enjoy our free content since you are unable to sensefully negotiate with the public.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
la la la la la
permission required to whistle/hum your favorite songs
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Incredulity
[ link to this | view in thread ]
STupid
Personally, the videos are good advertisement. Look at the Numa Numa song....how many people actually knew/heard it before that video? Not me...and that ended up being free publicity for them.
Personally, I suggest all non-American residences to make videos and put them on YouTube, cause it'll piss off the RIAA, and they can't do anything about it :)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Paying the license
I hope someone understood my opinion...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ugh..
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Wedding
IT IS SO STUPID THATS NOT FUNNY !!!!!!!!!!!!!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
JEWS belong in Auschwitz
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Don't Enforce It
[ link to this | view in thread ]
What a crock!
Just last year I was at the PNE in Vancouver and there was some guy in a Tweety costume and some lady wanted to take a picture of her child hugging Tweety and some fuckhead comes over and tells her that she was not allowed to take a picture.
What a fucking crock!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I know something that would solve all of the RIAA's money problems. Why not try releasing something with some kind of actual quality and talent? Instead of over-hyped, diluted, derivative garbage. Half of the time, the only reason people even want to buy those albums is because they bombard us with the songs everywhere we go, and mix the song with sex appeal, fashion, status symbols, and flashy music videos when the song itself is horrible. I wouldn't be surprised if they used subliminal messages. It's sad that me, who hasn't turned on a radio in six years, and rarely watches TV, somehow already knows all of the lyrics to the latest pop song even before it comes out. Because I've heard it in every single commercial break, every 7 minutes, and then when the show comes back on, the song is playing in the background.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I haven't bought a CD in years
[ link to this | view in thread ]
When major RIAA executives die, I should troll their funerals.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
RIAA FUCK
[ link to this | view in thread ]
FUCKING BUNCH OF FUCKING TWATS
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Need to reformat my brain
So what do I do now ? Where can I get a license for it ? Whom do I pay for public performances ?
Other times it just plays in my head but I guess it still counts, doesn't it ? ...I just don't want to screw some poor chap at RIAA.
Please, somebody help me...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Screw the RIAA
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: We are your worst nightmare
Death to music industry suckers exploiting artists and customers
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: We are your worst nightmare
"You may stop this individual,but you can't stop us all... after all, we're all alike."
OK, so it wasn't about this exactly, but that final sentiment still rings true.
Ma�k
[ link to this | view in thread ]
BOYCOTT!!!!!!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
In Canada But...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
When Will They Stop?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
You are Idiots
Once you get over the fact that you are stealing, and justifying it with ignorance, I think you will agree that while it sometimes seems outrageous, you are benefiting from the RIAA's actions.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
You are Idiots
Once you get over the fact that you are stealing, and justifying it with ignorance, I think you will agree that while it sometimes seems outrageous, you are benefiting from the RIAA's actions.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Copyright
"these sorts of viral videos tend to help build up more interest in artists" which is 100% true.. I would only think it to be "illegal" when you can "Download" the video or song.. youtube doesn't have this option.. the only way is to get a program that allows that access.. and if someone is doing that.. then.. that is illegal..
Basically, yes, this is advertisment for music... if the artist is credited.. such as, at the beginning or end of any video reads, such and such artist and song...
When someone dances to that song and doesn't really give credit to the artist.. atleast stating who really made the song.. I can see it to be illegal then...
Really though.. it's more as an advertisment for that song.. or even video if a video was edited..
As long as anyone gives credit to the artist.. tells of the movie title if you use a movie with an artist.. then I think nothing can really be done in that case...
The way the RIAA is acting is very "Absurd"..
[ link to this | view in thread ]
So it seems to me (35 percent legit music, 60 percent file-traded, 5 percent actual-shared) that we, the mass, can do nothing but fiddle our thumbs and wait for this historical scandal to play out. We all lack the money and cooperation to effectively do anything about this. Except continue to do what we already do.
The pro-RIAA argument that states file trading is pure piracy holds a bit of water. Yes, by downloading free music I am stealing. I would rather not pay for it. I would prefer to keep acquiring music in this fashion.
However, it is only because, at present times, there really doesn't exist a conveniant and balanced medium for getting music on your PC, other than iTunes and perhaps a few others. 99 cents for a song, by itself, is not much. Multiply that by the number of songs you [would like to] listen to, and that price becomes exorbant. The point here is that licensed music is still too high-priced for consumers, and that much of the profit does not return to the original artist anyways (esp. the big names). CD's are beginning to be obsolete, and I'm sure in ten years (or maybe less) they will be. Consumers want conveniant and cheap, and they love free. Is there anyone here who is honestly going to blame the consumer for who (s)he is? From reading some the posts, I guess there are such people, i.e. poster You Are All Idiots. Yes if it weren't for the RIAA, we probably wouldnt have those CD's we have. We'd have something better. And less expensive. And more than likely of better quality. You Are All Idiots, the next time you feel like berating needlessly you should shut off your computer and head for Washington D.C. Let's see how smart you really are.
Until some revolutionary format comes out, until the economy becomes A LOT healthier, we'll still have to deal with the RIAA and its strong-arm tactics. But I can guarantee that the death of the RIAA is approaching. Just like all oppressive regimes, they all eventually cave in on themselves. This is just a waiting game.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Personal Liberty
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Down with the RIAA
[ link to this | view in thread ]
sorry
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Most of you are missing the point.....again
[ link to this | view in thread ]
RIAA reaction: CRAP, people are DANCING to MUSIC! CRAP!! We've got to get the copyright laws changed! PARODY WILL BE NO MORE... muahhahahaha...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I have a question
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
RIAA can go shove it
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: I don't see what the issue is here?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
wammie!
well part of it ,
so far i have...
http://famouscanadianwomen.com/home%20page/links.htm
(famous people in the history of the counrty)
+
(Performers,politicians,medical enineers)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: I have a question
[ link to this | view in thread ]
copyright infringement
Clearly, a couple seconds of audio in the background isn't attempting either of those things. So, what case does the RIAA have in actuality? No profit is being stolen and no plagarism is taking place, so no copyright has been infringed, right? Or am I just crazy?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
What's next?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Why Buy?
RIAA sucks
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: jeuss..no literally
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: jeuss..no literally
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: I don't see what the issue is here?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Remember Numa Numa?
I believe there's some kind of compromise to all this and being an unreasonable stickler (on either side) isn't going to do any good.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Rise up against the Homegrown Music Terrorists, be
Back in my day, a long time ago, I used to download songs illegally, mainly to listen to new music. How is the RIAA really supposed to think that people will just blindly buy an album because the song on MTV is kind of catchy. It doesn't work like that, sad to say. If I liked the album, I'd order it or buy it, to support the artists. I, myself, am a musician, and an advocate for the "art over business" argument that scars the face of music today.
Music started as entertainment in the early days of recorded history. Granted, an artist composes or records a great work, they should be able to charge money for the patrons who listen to it. They should not, however, go around threatening everyone with frivolous lawsuits designed to put more money into the pocket of the executives. They're gonna sue for $750 per song because that's how much they're "losing"? That amount is way too high, and it's just a way to punish a few people for what a lot of people are doing. Truth is, people need to be punished for breaking the law, but today's hunt for music pirates has turned this period in history into a Digital Witch Hunt.
Luckily, there are services out there that have the DRM tags, which allow me to do the music testing like I did, but legally this time. Maybe the RIAA should grow half a brain, and stop with the terrorist tactics against innocent people. They're no better than the terrorists against this country, only this time, they've been homegrown, right under our noses, with a falsified sense of law.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
We're Not Gonna Take It!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
SOME Musicians LIKE us!
In fact, the frontman, Jason, said this in a LIVE interview: As long as my music is out there and people are listening, I don't care how it is done.
The RIAA is going crazy over this, taking it out of context. I mean, for example if a person who plays guitar or piano (or in one case drums) finds tabs/sheet music whatever and learns a song, then posts a video of themselves playing this song...what does that mean? Can the RIAA c&d them or sue them for it? It is not the purchased or illegal download, it is not the actual musical artist, and it is not a studio released version, it is simply a person playing music.
How far is this going to go?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Delete music interruptions on my computer!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Copyright infringments, NOT!
I made some Videos using music in the background and made the mistake of uploading them to You Tube. I gave the artist full credit for the music content in the Video. You Tube cancelled My account.
Like You said in this article, wouldn't the artists think a little free advertisement for their music be a good thing? I guess not.
It's not like People are using artists Music to make Money, they are expressing themselves through the music.
It's sad that our society ihas become this greedy.
I know if I was an artist I would be flattered someone though enugh of My music to use it in an expressive manner.
I've even had some artists e-mail, thanking Me for using their music!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: BS
I always put the artist and name of the song in all My Videos.
When People see the Video they know where the music came from and who the artist is.
I guess I could pay them a royalty, then turn around and charge them for advertising the Song on My Viedo. I'd say this would sort of cancel the other out.
It's just so sad that the Music industry stoops to such levels, no wonder P2P sites are so popular...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
http://www.riaa.com/default.asp for more info.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: RIAA & The Law
As to your suggestion that people here may not know the letter of the law - they certainly know the difference between right and wrong, good business practices and bad business practices, and a corporate lackey, when they read one.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Riaa
[ link to this | view in thread ]
RIAA
When I'm at a park overhearing other people's music should I pay a fee? Or, can I sue because I don't like that particular song and I'm being forced to hear it?
A comparison of pre-internet music revenue and current music revenue would be interesting. They've never had such good exposure to a world market.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
CAMEL
YOU OWE ME ONE CAMEL YES PLZ
[ link to this | view in thread ]
LITTLE MONKEY HATS
[ link to this | view in thread ]
MY SON YES
EXCUSE
ONE CAMEL FORE TAKE PLZ
C2C BIG HAIRY YES
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Blueberry pie
[ link to this | view in thread ]
/
[ link to this | view in thread ]
death to RIAA
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: jeuss..no literally
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: I don't see what the issue is here?
I think the RIAA has overstepped its bounds as far as Fair Use goes, but, every corporation has it's interests to protect, especially in this Digital Millenium when pirating music is easier than ever.
You can make the RIAA out to be evil, but that's because you are not part of the recording industry. If you were losing millions of dollars daily because of easily copied and shared music, you would tend to get a little paranoid and go over-board.
As far as YouTube goes, this would also be a concern as videos are easily downloaded and audio streams ripped out. Though why anyone would want to rip a poor audio quality stream is beyond me, but that's what the concern is.
Do I agree with the RIAA, for the most part they have some legit beefs. Do they go too far? Possibly. I'm sorry, I know this won't be a popular post. And no, I don't work for the RIAA.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Has the RIAA overstepped it's bounds in certain areas? Yes. Would you be happy if there were no recording artists because no one paid for music?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: RIAA Rights
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Among the artists that currently support the RIAA:
Metallica, Peter Gabriel, Celine Dionne, Shekira, U2 and several others.
Oddly enough, Metallica used to be a proponent of music sharing, until the same music sharing made them big enough to make money off of the music.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Stupid
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Adolf Hitler
If normal citizens have no say, if it's only the government and business reps that have say. Given that you are a worthless citizen yourself then you have NO SAY at telling us we have no say. STFU !!!
Fuck you Mr. Adolf Hitler, you have no say at telling me I have no say. You can go fuck yourself and bend over the RIAA and the government. You seem to enjoy getting screwed, I certainly have no say about that. Enjoy getting screwed you worthless motherfucker.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
mckkfkgfut6yhjcj
[ link to this | view in thread ]
copyleft
At the end the musicians have created the monster with their need to collect money.
When the internet was not here, there was not any other option. Now the musicians should free theirselve from the tirany.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
backward music
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ha-ha
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Rise up against the Homegrown Music Terrorists, be
[ link to this | view in thread ]
YouTube Robot allows you to search for videos using keywords or browse video by category, author, channel, language, tags, etc. When you find something noteworthy, you can preview the video right in YouTube Robot and then download it onto the hard disk drive. The speed, at which you will be downloading, is very high: up to 5 times faster than other software when you download a single file and up to 4 times faster when you download multiple files at a time.
Manual download is not the only option with YouTube Robot. You may as well schedule the download and conversion tasks to be executed automatically, even when you are not around. Downloading is followed by conversion to the format of your choice and uploading videos to a mobile device (if needed). For example, you can plug in iPod, select the video, go to bed, and when you wake up next morning, your iPod will be ready to play new YouTube videos.
Product page: ww w.youtuberobot.com
Direct download link: ww w.youtuberobot.com/download/utuberobot.exe
web-site: ww w.youtuberobot.com
E-mail: support@youtuberobot.com
[ link to this | view in thread ]
duffy
[ link to this | view in thread ]
THIS IS STUPID!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
THIS JUST GOES TOO FAR! FIRE THEM!
Boycott the RIAA. If you want them to lose, don't buy music they distribute, plain & simple. Support independent artists instead.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: You are Idiots
Hey dumbass! You've been brainwashed! When you pay for a song online, your paying the RECORD LABEL, NOT THE ARTIST.
Get your facts straight You are Idiots, we dance to music----people use music like this in the REAL world! So get out of your prehistoric dreamland & do some research on both sides. What's next? Are you going to sue us for singing our favorite song in the shower. People like you make me sick to my stomach. Fuck you! Fuck yourself! Fuck your family! And fuck your computer-illiterate mind. Rot in hell you retarded fascist!
People like you are just bad for business! Take it from an expert!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
TAKE THIS RIAA!
-----—--—--/´¯'|)
————---|—-|
————---|—-|
————---|—-|
� ��——--/´¯/'--'/´¯`•_
———-/'/--/—-/—--/¨¯
——--('(———- ¯~/'--')
———————-'—--/
———-''————_-•´
———————--(
————-———--
F*** YOU RIAA
[ link to this | view in thread ]
RIAA
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: star wars kid
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Royalty free music
website, you may search and get most useful audio files for any commercial project or personal use. Our studio uses it always for most projects we do.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: You are Idiots
This poster's comments are pretty old now but just to clarify - the issue isn't someone dancing alone to their music on a video - the issue is youtube, a for profit company making money off of the content uploaded by their users. The video becomes an asset of youtube and is monetized - so the song becomes part of the income generated by youtube (profits). So the music creators are asking to be compensated by youtube.
It isn't about the content of the video, it's how the video becomes an asset of a billion dollar distribution company.
[ link to this | view in thread ]