Go Back  DVD Talk Forum > General Discussions > Other Talk
Reload this Page >

Viacom Pulled My Video

Other Talk "Otterville"

Viacom Pulled My Video

Old 05-29-08, 09:04 PM
  #26  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: New York City
Posts: 5,229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Tracer Bullet
I understand your points and agree with you, as far as it goes. Now I get to disagree.

The first point is that the public domain as a practical matter no longer exists. Congress has effectively neutered it by continuing to grant copyright extension after copyright extension.

[clip]

If the copyright holder wants to release it, I think that's great. However, after a certain length of time, I believe it is in our best interest as a society to tell creators that they can't keep things locked away forever. I'm sure you're aware of the documentary film problem, for example. This is mostly footage of arguably no commercial value that cannot be used except by paying an exorbinant licensing fee. As a result, many documentaries get abandoned. This is plainly not the purpose of copyright. Put more bluntly, you should not be eligible for a no-fixed-duration revenue stream as a creator. George Lucas should not still be making money off Star Wars.

If 14 years with one extension was good enough for the Founding Fathers, I think it should be good enough for us.
Well, blame Disney for that. Seriously. But noooooo, you all keep buying those tin boxes of Disney Classics DVDs!
Old 05-29-08, 10:10 PM
  #27  
DVD Talk Godfather
 
DVD Polizei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 53,604
Received 132 Likes on 96 Posts
Recap for those in a dizzy:

1) What "Dr." can mean
2) Van Morrison got Nazi
3) Copyright Law <s>101</s> 99
4) Viacom rapes little girls
5) YouTube posting rights
6) Those rare and cherished videos missed on YouTube
7) I'm getting a blow job

ok, the lstone ism y additionoooooohhhh goooooodddddd.
Old 05-29-08, 11:29 PM
  #28  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Mrs. Danger's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: With Nick Danger
Posts: 18,277
Likes: 0
Received 97 Likes on 59 Posts
Originally Posted by drmoze

Ask Mrs. D. She's an artist and understands the importance of protecting the rights to one's creations. You're just some kid who wants a bunch of free stuff on his computer. Sorry, you are wrong and your opinions on IP rights scream of naivete. (I can't make the accent thingie there, so just imagine I did.)

I'm pretty sure she was referring to suing for any actions taken based on that application of logic!
Damn straight!

The fellow who tried to take a digital picture of one of my paintings learned about "tangible" property, too. If you want to look at the art, you can buy it. That's why I made it. It's not like it's critically important data, or cancer medication. It's just ENTERTAINMENT. If I don't want to release copies of something, that's just too bad for you.

If Viacom doesn't release every little piece of video you would like to see, well, go look at something else.

I don't suppose it ever occurred to any of you whiners to ask permission before posting? Sometimes you get it.
Old 05-30-08, 06:38 AM
  #29  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 25,058
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Mrs. Danger
Damn straight!

The fellow who tried to take a digital picture of one of my paintings learned about "tangible" property, too. If you want to look at the art, you can buy it. That's why I made it. It's not like it's critically important data, or cancer medication. It's just ENTERTAINMENT. If I don't want to release copies of something, that's just too bad for you.

If Viacom doesn't release every little piece of video you would like to see, well, go look at something else.

I don't suppose it ever occurred to any of you whiners to ask permission before posting? Sometimes you get it.
People (like me) who support reasonable copyright have no problem with this. Would you support limiting copyright to 14-year terms, renewable once?
Old 05-30-08, 09:39 AM
  #30  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Mrs. Danger's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: With Nick Danger
Posts: 18,277
Likes: 0
Received 97 Likes on 59 Posts
I would prefer copyrights to last the lifetime of an individual copyright holder.

The problem with that, is applying the rule to a corporation.

An individual creator (video, art, whatever) only has their own work to live on. A corporation can solicit work from many people. I DO favor a shorter copyright term for corporations.

A shorter copyright term for myself? Well.... if I can't come up with something new to sell in 28 years, I should probably find another line of work. I'm not happy with the idea, but I could live with it.

Which raises the idea of second party copyrights. After something becomes "public domain", whoever owns the original object (painting, reel of film, whatever) can release their own copies of it under a NEW copyright.

So, expiring copyrights still don't mean that everything eventually becomes public domain. It just means that Disney doesn't get to sit on everything forever.
Old 05-30-08, 09:53 AM
  #31  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 25,058
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Mrs. Danger
I would prefer copyrights to last the lifetime of an individual copyright holder.

The problem with that, is applying the rule to a corporation.

An individual creator (video, art, whatever) only has their own work to live on. A corporation can solicit work from many people. I DO favor a shorter copyright term for corporations.
The problem with this, however, is that copyright is primarily designed to promote innovation and creativity. To do that, we allow creators a limited monopoly on the reproduction of their work with the understanding that it will expire after a set term to allow other people the opportunity to use them to create new works. There is simply no reason why someone should have a lifetime monopoly on their creative works. As you said:

A shorter copyright term for myself? Well.... if I can't come up with something new to sell in 28 years, I should probably find another line of work. I'm not happy with the idea, but I could live with it.
Which raises the idea of second party copyrights. After something becomes "public domain", whoever owns the original object (painting, reel of film, whatever) can release their own copies of it under a NEW copyright.
This is a terrible idea, sorry. When a copyright expires, then the work should become public domain, allowable to anyone to do what they wish with it. Allowing a second copyright to someone that isn't doing anything creative with it would serve the same function as keeping the original copyright forever.

Also keep in mind that if you take a public domain work and substantially transform it into a new creative work, that new work is then under copyright. That's why West Side Story is still under copyright (although it should no longer be, in my opinion) and Romeo and Juliet isn't.

So, expiring copyrights still don't mean that everything eventually becomes public domain. It just means that Disney doesn't get to sit on everything forever.
What is so scary about the public domain? I really don't get it. It allows for maximum innovation and creativity while allowing creators to exert a monopoly on their creations for a limited period of time. If you can't make your money on something in 28 years, you're probably never going to make money on it.
Old 05-30-08, 10:24 AM
  #32  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Mrs. Danger's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: With Nick Danger
Posts: 18,277
Likes: 0
Received 97 Likes on 59 Posts
There's nothing scary about public domain.

I was pointing out that, just because something is Public Domain, does not mean the public is going to get to see it.

The law already allows for what amounts to a new copyright.

For instance, someone who owns a reel of film that is not copyrighted can release it on DVD as a new digital creation, that is copyrighted.

Since they have control of the original film, they have essentially copyrighted the film.
Old 05-30-08, 11:09 AM
  #33  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 25,058
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Mrs. Danger
There's nothing scary about public domain.

I was pointing out that, just because something is Public Domain, does not mean the public is going to get to see it.
True. But the current system, whereas pretty much everything after 1923 is still copyrighted yet 95% of it has limited commercial value, means that no one gets to see it, either. If it's the public domain it's not impossible for it to get seen.

The law already allows for what amounts to a new copyright.

For instance, someone who owns a reel of film that is not copyrighted can release it on DVD as a new digital creation, that is copyrighted.

Since they have control of the original film, they have essentially copyrighted the film.
That is simply not true. In your example the company releasing it on DVD does not control the original public domain film. They don't even get copyright protection for their DVD of it, unless it constitutes a new creative work (such as commentary tracks, extras, etc.).

For example, think about Shakespeare. New editions of Shakespeare plays are not copyrighted, because you cannot copyright pagination, etc. That is not a new creative work. However, if the publisher adds to the text through explanatory text, etc. it can be copyrighted- but only that edition. The original text of the play is still in the public domain.
Old 07-03-08, 01:51 PM
  #34  
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Glendale, next to L.A.
Posts: 18,486
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
http://gizmodo.com/5021838/youtube-f...-video-watched

YouTube Forced to Reveal Username and IP Address of Every Video Watched

Remember Viacom suing YouTube and Google for one BILLION dollars eons ago? That's still going on! And while a judge ruled yesterday that while Google doesn't have to reveal its secret search sauce to the multimedia giantface, he did grant Viacom's request for YouTube to turn over records of "every video watch by YouTube users," and that includes their username and IP address. Yeah that's right, Viacom will know every time you watch "Pork n Beans" or need to refuel your day with Powerthirst. (Or watch Viacom's The Daily Show, you bastard.) And like that, the illusion of YouTube privacy was gone. [YouTube]
Chris
Old 07-03-08, 01:57 PM
  #35  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Summerfest
Posts: 1,224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by mrpayroll
Old 07-03-08, 02:02 PM
  #36  
DVD Talk Godfather
 
DVD Polizei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 53,604
Received 132 Likes on 96 Posts
I doubt Viacom is going to sue people who WATCH their videos.
Old 07-03-08, 02:54 PM
  #37  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Nick Danger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Albuquerque
Posts: 24,071
Received 138 Likes on 101 Posts
Originally Posted by DVD Polizei
I doubt Viacom is going to sue people who WATCH their videos.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spamigation
Old 07-03-08, 05:40 PM
  #38  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 11,570
Received 4 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally Posted by DVD Polizei
I doubt The Gestappo is going to sue people who WATCH their videos.
fixed

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


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.