7 ms·
Universal Censors Megaupload Song, Gets Branded a “Rogue Label”
- thebigredjay 15y agoWhy isn't this video hosted on Megavideo?
- lomegor 15y agoI think it is. But they also hosted it on YouTube.
- xer0 15y agoWell of course UMG prevailed. They're the bigger, legitimate party, and they're who the DMCA was written for. The DMCA was never intended for us to use.
- DenisM 15y agoThe real problem here is Youtube who refuses to take counter-notice seriously. It's been many years and they still can't figure out that simple bit "counternotice filed".
- pyre 15y agoDo we really know if this isn't an over-zealous bot that say big names like P. Diddy and Snoop Dogg and decided that it was time to issue a notice? I still think it's an abuse of the DMCA power to have bots out there mining for things and sending notices without a human ever looking over its shoulder, but there's a difference between negligence and malice.
- chairface 15y agoI see no practical difference between a human issuing illegitmate DMCA takedown notices, or using a bot to do the same. The difference to the affected party is nil. "The bot made me do it" is not a legal defense.
- pyre 15y ago> "The bot made me do it" is not a legal defense. Please re-read my post instead of tearing down a straw man.
- burgerbrain 15y agoWhy should we care about the difference between negligence and malice? Should we respond differently? I would not be comfortable with that. Besides, let's not forget Grey's Law... (http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Greys_Law http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Greys_Law)
- pyre 15y agoFrom http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Greys_Law http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Greys_Law : > There is currently no text in this page. My point is not to get carried away by making claims like this: > “Dirty tricks in an effort to stop our massively > successful viral campaign.” If these claims turn out to be false, then you just end up looking stupid, even if UMG is still on the wrong side of the law.
- burgerbrain 15y agoHN seems to be eating an apostrophe between the y and s in that link. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Grey's_Law Regardless, nobody reasonable is going to fault anybody for assuming malice from class acts like the MPAA. And if you apply Grey's Law, then they deserve the criticism regardless.
- chairface 15y agoI reread it. It still looks like you're drawing a distinction between a person flagging an "infringing" work, and a bot doing the same. I still think that there is no practical use for this distinction. Where's the strawman?
- pyre 15y ago
- sp332 15y agoNo. The bots might find the videos, but the DMCA requires a statement made under penalty of perjury to be submitted along with the takedown. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DMCA_safe_harbor#Takedown_example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DMCA_safe_harbor#Takedown_exam...
- alexcoomans 15y agoI'd have to agree with sp332, since I don't see how a bot would be able to legally sign a document - the legal backlash could be significant if a bot signed a document and that document was submitted without any human checks. Then again, it doesn't always seem like the media has regard for the law unless it is benefitting them, so it wouldn't surprise me.
- pyre 15y agoPeople seem to be misunderstanding my post. I'm trying to differentiate between: "I hate those MegaUpload people. I'll issue a false take-down notice to shut them up! Bwahahaha! <twirls mustache>" and "Oh. Another hit from our crappy YouTube crawler bot. <rubber stamps take-down notice>" There is a difference between malice directed towards MegaUpload and (willful) negligence. [ Also, don't reply with something stupid like, "but that won't hold up in court." Because a careful reading of the above text will reveal a lack of me making any such statement. ]
- bdonlan 15y agoTo be honest, I don't think it really matters. The point is, Universal is blocking access to content they (allegedly - I don't know if the artists involved have copyright assignment agreements or something) don't own. Whether or not this was intentional, it shows that the system is broken, and that we cannot afford to give them any more power than they already have.
- NegativeK 15y agoDMCA takedowns are done under penalty of perjury. I can't imagine a judge or a bar association taking a liking to a lawyer whose defense is "I was just rubber stamping these things."
- pyre 15y agoIt's a little frustrating that all of the responses to my post are "THAT WOULD NEVER HOLD UP IN AS A DEFENSE IN A COURT OF LAW! BLARG!" It's been long-suspected that these DMCA take-down notices are just being rubber-stamped, yet not one penalty has been handed out. Color me disillusioned with the legal process.
- wnight 15y ago> there's a difference between negligence and malice. Initially, maybe. But when it keeps going on because it's profitable, it's malice.
- citricsquid 15y agocontroversy aside, what a terrible song. It's like a really poor TV jingle.
- rabidsnail 15y agoIt's not meant for you.
- Zarathust 15y agoTotaly, its not a "song", its more like a 4 minutes commercial. I feel dirty now
- eridius 15y agoIsn't the DMCA supposed to punish people who file fraudulent takedown notices?
- cynest 15y agoThere's a high transaction cost in someone filing a complaint against those, so it doesn't happen. It's quite a shame given that I've seen a few examples of videos taken down by actors with no connection. Eg Zenimax taking down a video related to a tv show.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- chairface 15y agoWe're floating conspiracy theories without a shred of evidence here now?
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- citricsquid 15y agoI've deleted my comments, the discussion would go no where as my point was pretty dumb. What I was trying to say is that assuming what he says his true ("Universal Censors Megaupload") that it's much more likely he has paid for that to happen than it is UMG have decided this video is a big threat to their business and they must sabotage it being "viral". The latter is completely absurd, the former is in my eyes much more likely. Personally I believe that it's an automated system that it's triggered when a video reaches a specific view threshhold, but he discounted this with his claim it's intentional.
- schwabacher 15y agoIt seems much more likely that Universal has something automatically flagging everything with "Kanye West" in the title then that there is some kind of conspiracy.
- pyre 15y agoI find this the most likely case, but it highlights the fact that UMG is probably flagging these videos without a person actually looking at any of the results (something a lot of people have known/suspected for a while). Hopefully they can sue the ass off of UMG for this, and bring to light how the flippant attitudes of the media industry towards the law when they feel that they are owed something.
- schwabacher 15y agoI was curious what the penalties are for issuing a false DMCA takedown request. According to this article (http://intellectual-property.lawyers.com/blogs/archives/10363-Consequences-of-filing-a-false-DMCA-Takedown-Request.html http://intellectual-property.lawyers.com/blogs/archives/1036...), the penalty is perjury, which is a felony. Does anyone know who would be responsible for bringing charges? Is it something that Megavideo can do, or would it have to be Google, who i assume would not press charges in order to keep their good relationship with Universal?
- dangrossman 15y agoI assume it would have to be a prosecutor at some level in government. Google, or any other corporation or citizen, cannot bring criminal charges... we can only file civil actions and report crimes to authorities in the appropriate jurisdiction (the police or FBI for example) who then report to prosecutors who decide whether to bring charges. Perjury is not just an offense at some specific person or organization, it's an offense to society, and society punishes through criminal prosecution (United States v. You, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. You, etc.). At least that's my "Civics 101" level understanding.
- ugh 15y agoI’m guessing that depends on the kind of agreement Universal has with Google. Google can allow Universal to do whatever they want, there don’t have to be any takedown requests involved anywhere in this story. Maybe Universal merely broke their contract with Google.
- rhubarbquid 15y agoMy understanding (though I'm not a lawyer) is that under the DMCA, Megavideo can sue. [edit: like dangrossman says, I don't think they can bring perjury charges, but the DMCA does allow them to sue] Some information here: http://targetlaw.com/consequences-of-filing-a-false-dmca-takedown-request http://targetlaw.com/consequences-of-filing-a-false-dmca-tak...
- ugh 15y agoBut was there a DMCA takedown?
- joelrunyon 15y agoNot the only abuse of the system. Interscope issued a takedown notice for UK rapper Skepta because they wanted to buy the beat from him. No actual copyright infringement at all...just blatant abuse of the system. link: http://www.sohh.com/2011/07/interscope_youtube_shakedown_rapper_for.html http://www.sohh.com/2011/07/interscope_youtube_shakedown_rap...
- spdy 15y agoOh this will be fun to watch if you know the history of Kim Schmitz aka Kimble aka Kim Dotcom [1]. He has quite a talent to get into the spotlight if he needs too and it looks like that he is able to legally re-appear in public again. But i would love to know how a trickster like him got this video together. Maybe he is running out of money again and needs some publicity. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Schmitz http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Schmitz
- sek 15y agoI still can remember when he was a celebrity here. I never felt sorry for the people he ripped of, it was so obvious. I always wondered about his secrecy, he seemed to be someone who needs the spotlight. It's quite impressive what he pulled off with Megaupload, it is a competitive market and his infrastructure has to be quite big. When you look at the numbers of MU, i don't think he is short of money.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- andrewflnr 15y agoIf you, like me, are wondering where he got a name like "Kim Dotcom", he apparently just calls himself that, according to this [1] reference on the Wikipedia page. [1] http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10697221 http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&obj...
- RandallBrown 15y agoMegaupload/megavideo is such a scummy site. It may have it's uses but it's covered in garbage. You can't even watch a video without clicking 2 or 3 ads. It's terrible. I know that Universal is doing something illegal but I guess I just don't mind that much because of how terrible megaupload is.
- dangrossman 15y agoDo you think there's any other way to run the site, at least in 2011? There's no other reasonable way they could make enough money to cover the expenses. The audience for these sites is, by design, children/teens with no access to money and adults who are there explicitly to avoid spending money. By the nature of the content they host, they're not going to get any first tier advertisers, so they have to make up for it in volume.
- RandallBrown 15y agoYes, it's designed to host illegal pirated content. I know there are plenty of legitimate uses for it, but it doesn't change that it's still a shitty site. I'm not saying that nothing should be done about this Universal thing. I actually enjoy seeing the music industry taken down a few pegs.
- ricardobeat 15y agoThat's like not minding that your fat ugly annoying neighbour is being mugged. Wrong is wrong.
- shinratdr 15y agoIf you use jDownloader, they differences between those sites become irrelevant.
- Dylan16807 15y agoOdd, I can't remember seeing any ads on megavideo. I haven't been there in a while but at that point it had a solid ux until it cut you off at 70 minutes to make you wait or pay.
- angrycoder 15y agoWell at least the anti-SOPA people now have a high profile, clear cut example of why giving these companies more power is a bad idea. These numb nuts very well have just shot themselves in the foot over a silly video.
- cleverjake 15y agohonest answer - was china not a good one to you?
- angrycoder 15y agoI am not the one who needs convincing. Anyhow, a headline that reads 'New internet law will make us just like China' sounds so ridiculous most people wouldn't think it was true, even though it is. But 'Record label shuts down song by P Diddy, Will.i.am, Alicia Keys, Kanye West, Snoop Dogg, Chris Brown, The Game and Mary J Blige.' grabs attention.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- Animus7 15y agoChina's far away. This example hits closer and is therefore much easier to consume. Of course, this isn't a logical argument. But lawmaking isn't fundamentally driven by logic these days anyway.
- fmota 15y ago> But lawmaking isn't fundamentally driven by logic, ever. Fixed that for you.
- derleth 15y agoYou can't honestly say that the Chinese Internet censorship policy is a reversal from the heady pro-liberty days of the 1970s, for example. The most you can say is that China lost another opportunity to not oppress its people.
- 15y ago
- ChuckMcM 15y agoNice hack. I wonder if they could get a court to issue an injunction against UMG from using its takedown tool until they have established a way to prove to Youtube that they do indeed own the copyrights to material. This would seriously limit their tool's usage :-)
- nextparadigms 15y agoThe labels going against the artists they pretend to "protect"? I love this. Because if the artists get angry with the labels for stuff like this, it means next time the labels will try to push a law like SOPA "in the name of the artists" - the artists will be there and call them on their BS, and say the labels are representing nobody but themselves. I predict this will become fun to watch.
- petercooper 15y agoKim is not one to back down easily, if ever. He loves to win. He placed first in the infamous Gumball 3000 rally twice, and on one occasion faced a certain loss so drove down a packed pedestrian promenade honking everyone out of his way (see around 9 minutes into http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qIXYuusRIxA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qIXYuusRIxA ). What a guy. In http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=boSUCzJB2Gw#t=6m35s http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=boSUCzJB2Gw#t=6m35s you can see him make an almost impossible gap in traffic at high speed, actually clipping another car, and.. he keeps on rolling :-) Not a guy I'd want to be taking on, that's for sure.
- damncabbage 15y agoWhat a guy. What a complete dick. Guts and determination is one thing. Risking other people's lives over a petty race is completely different.
- thwarted 15y agoHehe, that second video (voSUCz) returns "This video contains content from WMG and UMG, one or more of whom have blocked it in your country on copyright grounds."
- paulhauggis 15y agoWhile I don't agree with what they did here (or SOPA), I have a problem getting on the same side as a site that thinks piracy does no damage to the copyright holder.
- Hwee 15y agoThis is being done in our name and with our money. If you don't like it you might want to consider your choices when buying or requesting presents this festive season. Make it an RIAA- and MPAA-free Christmas and tell your friends and family why.