5 ms·

Right, thats an excellent point and I glossed over that. A lot of this touches on a very gray area. In general I'm for copyright and I'm talking about the huge

Right, thats an excellent point and I glossed over that. A lot of this touches on a very gray area. In general I'm for copyright and I'm talking about the huge number of people who think there's nothing wrong with pirating movies, music, and software and have a long list of excuses for it. Now, even I can get on board with what you're saying. The 15 year old kid who uses some copyrighted video or audio in a YouTube video should not be prosecuted. And there are lots of cases like that where it would be silly to prosecute. Now, in the case of the Pulp Fiction scene reordering from the post, I don't think anyone should get in trouble and I personally think there's no need to take it down but that's not my call and I think if the creators decide that it shouldn't be published we need to respect that. We have to remember that the YouTube system is automated though so they can't review things manually. That means no one is there to judge that gray area. So even in cases where we think something has been taken down for some silly copyright related reason we really can't bitch because A) it's automated and B) copyright is the law and the holders do have their rights.

icebraining 15y ago
In general I'm for copyright and I'm talking about the huge number of people who think there's nothing wrong with pirating movies, music, and software and have a long list of excuses for it. Frankly I think this reveals a strong bias, since that sentence directly contradicts itself: An excuse is something people have to justify something they see as wrong. I think the fact that you assume they have excuses shows you can't really put yourself in a position where copyright infringement isn't in fact perceived as wrong. I think if the creators decide that it shouldn't be published we need to respect that. Do we? Why? So even in cases where we think something has been taken down for some silly copyright related reason we really can't bitch because A) it's automated and B) copyright is the law and the holders do have their rights. Bitching against Youtube¹ is certainly pointless, but we can "bitch" if we believe the law itself is wrong. ¹ at least in cases where the takedown is mandated by law. There were plenty of cases where works covered by fair use were taken down automatically by their algorithms.

icebraining 15y ago

In general I'm for copyright and I'm talking about the huge number of people who think there's nothing wrong with pirating movies, music, and software and have a long list of excuses for it. Frankly I think this reveals a strong bias, since that sentence directly contradicts itself: An excuse is something people have to justify something they see as wrong. I think the fact that you assume they have excuses shows you can't really put yourself in a position where copyright infringement isn't in fact perceived as wrong. I think if the creators decide that it shouldn't be published we need to respect that. Do we? Why? So even in cases where we think something has been taken down for some silly copyright related reason we really can't bitch because A) it's automated and B) copyright is the law and the holders do have their rights. Bitching against Youtube¹ is certainly pointless, but we can "bitch" if we believe the law itself is wrong. ¹ at least in cases where the takedown is mandated by law. There were plenty of cases where works covered by fair use were taken down automatically by their algorithms.