Viral Video Of 9-Year-Old Girl Football Star... Taken Down Because Of Music
from the now-back-with-awful-music dept
If you follow the "hot viral video of the week" you probably have seen or heard about Sam Gordon, the 9-year-old girl who is pretty damn good at football, (the American kind for all you foreigners), as shown in an impressive highlight reel her father put together:Just one problem. The original video had all sorts of famous songs in it:
Without the music in that video — Jane’s Addiction covering The Doors’ “LA Woman” and The Germs’ “Lexicon Devil” (as part of a medley) and the Beastie Boys’ “Soul Fire” (also in a sense a cover) — this video wouldn’t be nearly as effective, and thus not as viral. Her father Brent Gordon, who originally uploaded the video, chose these songs because they are exactly what this video needs. As any Hollywood director knows, pairing the right music with any video makes it way more effective.Sure enough, soon after people started pointing that out -- and even though the video had something like 2 million views lined up already, it went down due to a copyright claim. It looks like ContentID showed up late, because the "takedown" mentions a bunch of possible copyright holders, without saying who made the final call:
Normally, the Beastie Boys, Jane’s Addiction, The Germs, and The Doors could choose to get paid when a video with their music goes viral like this. But that does not appear to be the case here, at this point anyway.
We’re pleased to see that the video is online, because that Sam Gordon is a sight to behold, with amazing moves and no small amount of moxie, which is the main reason people liked the video so much. But it’s a shame that the music is now so bad that we couldn’t even make it through one viewing without muting it. With the other soundtrack, I ended up watching it five times in a row.Of course, depending on your general position in this debate, you can make one of two arguments here. The copyright hardliners will say that this proves the importance of good music and that Gordon should have paid up in the first place. Those who find problems with today's copyright system will note that it's not like your average person is going to even be able to license, let alone want to pay for, songs to stick on a video like this (especially without knowing that it's about to go crazy viral). The music industry could make this easier with a simple database / store option ("want this song for your non-commercial video? $1 -- click here to buy the license") but they don't seem to want to do that. So, instead, we get this situation where no one wins. The video has crappy music. The good music providers don't get paid. How is that a good solution?
And thus it was proven for the umpteenth time that A) The right music makes all the difference in a video, and B) Copyright, while necessary, tends to rain on parades, especially when multiple rights-holders get involved.
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
Filed Under: contentid, copyright, sam gordon, viral videos
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
One small correction
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: One small correction
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: One small correction
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: One small correction
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: One small correction
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: One small correction
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: One small correction
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: One small correction
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: One small correction
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: One small correction
Luckily, I don't give a crap about either game :)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: One small correction
Even attempting to do so can get you ejected from a rugby match for being too rough. A yellow card in rugby is a normal football play. A rugby red card will result in football play being halted to check for injuries, but then play resumes.
So no, American football isn't nancy boy rugby, rugby is nancy boy American football where people are too afraid of hurting each other to get properly into the game.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Would a license have prevented the takedown?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"How is that a good solution?"
Now, it IS a good situation for society because more or less prevents talentless hacks (or uselessly talented sports players) from too much leveraging off the work of others. It's not difficult to make a video of your own dull or stupid actions and yet have it be "hit" primarily because of someone else's work.
And "someone else's work" is the basis of copyright: to more or less suppress unearned grifting, to try and make it so that the rewards properly go to those who put in the time and money.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "How is that a good solution?"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: "How is that a good solution?"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "How is that a good solution?"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: "How is that a good solution?"
Either as an awesome file locker or a fantastic video platform.
If he can make millions from that why can't the **AA make money by using a similar format? Oh yeah because they'd make more money if the internet never existed so they'll pretend it doesn't.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: "How is that a good solution?"
Come on, man, you can't be this dense. I highly doubt the total profits from Megaupload would come anywhere close to the amount of money spent to create the content it distributed illegally.
In case that isn't clear enough: there's only "millions" in the content-give-away game if you're not also footing the bill to create the content being given away.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: "How is that a good solution?"
People like you are why there is now a guilty until proven innocent system in place
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: "How is that a good solution?"
Fixed that for you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: "How is that a good solution?"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: "How is that a good solution?"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: "How is that a good solution?"
Did you watch the video - no sad plight here. She's friggin' awesome!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: "How is that a good solution?"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: "How is that a good solution?"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: "How is that a good solution?"
It's like they're creating their own destiny or something.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: "How is that a good solution?"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: "How is that a good solution?"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "How is that a good solution?"
This website that you are posting on? Someone else's work.
Your whole stupid shtick? Someone else's work.
The phrase you use for your moniker? Someone else's work.
You, sir, are the talentless hack.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: "How is that a good solution?"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: "How is that a good solution?"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "How is that a good solution?"
That would get rid of the collection agencies.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "How is that a good solution?"
Carry on, Sancho, carry on.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "How is that a good solution?"
so�lu�tion/səˈlo͞oSHən/
Noun:
1. A means of solving a problem or dealing with a difficult situation: "there are no easy solutions to financial and marital problems".
Only you would go out of your way to nitpick about someone else's use of a word and then get the definition wrong.
"It's not difficult to make a video of your own dull or stupid actions and yet have it be "hit" primarily because of someone else's work."
The musicians are talentless hacks? That's a little cold, bra. I like the Germs.
"so that the rewards properly go to those who put in the time and money."
Offer an example of how, thanks to this takedown, that is happening.
Not gonna lie - I was hoping to see some kind of substantive argument from the pro-copyright side on this one. Maybe there isn't one. I honestly agreed with the takedown until I read your post.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not just an obnoxious snot-monster, but also a dirty, freeloading pirate hypocrite.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
blocked in canada due to copyright
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: blocked in canada due to copyright
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
That's how they play the commercial use angle.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Cue AC jackass now playing "Jane's Addiction - Been Caught Stealing".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Valid Point
With that said, I'm not sure how it should be set other than an arbitrary $.99 (seems like a decent number). The problem with the industry is that it seems to believe that the internet is like TV or Movies and that it's entitled to some insane license for music put on non-commercial video.
I should add that this music license should not be imposed on videos posted that just happen to have music playing in the background.
I'm guessing that the reason these licensing deals have always been fees, rather than a percentage of net revenue, is that all the players in the field have similar accounting practices that always show zero profits.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Valid Point
Non-commercial uses like this video are a perfect example of something that I feel should probably be limited to attribution. People that like the song will probably go look for it, and everyone benefits.
Licenses should be limited to commercial aspects, such as advertising campaigns, trailers, etc... The lines can get blurry, but I think it should be easy for the courts to create a dividing line.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Fuck their shit up.I am just so sick of reading these Stories of Copyright Assholes picking on little people for no reason at all.
I have absolutely no sympathy at all for MAFIAA and would love to see some really really bad things happen to them.
Hope someone makes me a happy person some day.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Show everyone you know how to use torrents, encourage them to use it and if they buy a cd or dvd download it immediately and start playing it, that should shock them into torrenting very quickly.
If you see people you know buying cd's or dvd's just gently laugh and encourage them to change and not spend there money on outdated plastic disc's
All anyone has to do is get three people to stop buying and very soon there will be no MPAA to attack the average joe for sharing good videos because there is music in the background.
Every time I read a story like this I do my bit to make sharing more available to everyone I know. Seriously I alone have probably cost the industry at least 40 people that used to buy dvd's and cd's and that is the direct encouragement I am sure they have told friend's who have told friends who have told friends(it feels good getting back at the monopolists). I look at it as my way of boycotting and doing my part to force them to come into the future, which they are fighting with everything they have got.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Seriously, why do non-commercial videos get treated as if they were major commercial endeavors backed by deep pockets? Whatever happened to fair use?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Youtube is most definitely a major commercial endeavor backed by deep pockets.
I suspect that if the father had just spread the video via email and p2p, it wouldn't have been yanked.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Music licensing
Anyway, almost two years later, while perusing Youtube for Boss Hoss videos, I CAME ACROSS MY OWN VIDEO, WITH THE ORIGINAL TWO SONGS ON IT!!! The information on the video said there was a standard Youtube license applied. While I am happier-n-chit over seeing the video out there, what interests me is how did that happen, and who put it out there? I never uploaded the video!
Non-commercial use of a song for home-made videos, regardless of whether they're put out there on the web or used for home viewing (as in weddings, funerals,or immortalizing a child's accomplishments), shouldn't be subject to greedy monetizing. Greedy monetizing efforts should be contained within the context of commercialization, period. My two cents.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=JqydG0BtX68
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Don't the takedown notices have to specify the infringing portion? They can't possibly be claiming infringement on the entire video because of the soundtrack can they?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
There's no reasoning with such people.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
meh
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: meh
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: meh
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This isn't football
[ link to this | view in chronology ]