In addition to being a great repository of long lost videos and concert footage, YouTube was always a great place to find embarrassing footage of your favorite stars. There was a wasted Britney sputtering gibberish in a hotel room; there was Hasselhoff sloshed and sorting through a hamburger; Paula Abdul clearly off her rocker on morning news…
But with the sale of YouTube to Google, thus folding it under a massive corporate umbrella, how much longer can we expect these gems that humanize our heroes? Ok, nobody considers Paula Abdul a hero, but you get my drift.
A search today of “Beyonce Falls” leads me to believe our days are numbered. Notice that fan footage of Ms. Knowles face planting at a recent Orlando show has been removed from YouTube by dint of a “copyright claim by Sony BMG.” Copyright to what? Beyonce hitting the floor? The video I attempted to view was all of 13 seconds so I think any claim to the music could be written off as fair use. So why has YouTube caved? Because Big Business helps Big Business.
Party’s over, assholes. Back on you heads.
Email
Comments
The key to this, clearly, is starting a GloNo viral video site. Until someone offers you a cool bil and you sell out to the man, as well.
remove the sound so theres no copytight issue? i wouldnt wanna hear that hack anyways
lol, i remember reading about a week ago that sony bmg got contacted by one of those remove content services for a video the record company itself uploaded to youtube. figures that they have no sense of how rediculous this is.
The EFF is suing these motherfuckers for similiar abuses of bullshit copyright claims.
And they're winning cases!
PS - The problem here isn't really in the hands of Google/YouTube. User-driven sites and ISPs are obligated under the DMCA to take down anything that gets complained about, until the claim is provn invalid. Shoot first, ask questions later. Or as Xeni Jardin puts it, "The DMCA is so poorly conceived and written that even the nuttiest, most deranged of trolls can abuse it into silencing constitutionally-protected online speech."
The law needs to be changed. Until then, this will continue to happen. Unless, of course, the EFF keeps winning cases and some badass judges award some serious punitive damages against the bastards filing bogus claims...
There was a big issue on YouTube not too long ago involving some footage of the Sadies & Neko Case from a performance on one of the late night talk shows. Bloodshot Records kept putting it up and the network (NBC I think) kept demanding it be taken down. Shouldn't the record label have more authority than the venue?
Well, I'm pretty sure the network owns the broadcast rights. But it's still stupid. They're certainly not protecting the artist by taking down those clips.
I can (sort of) see the argument that maybe people won't watch the program on TV if they know they can find the part they want to see (ad-free) on the internet... So they fear a decrease in viewership.
But in reality the opposite is true: Look at SNL and the "Lazy Sunday" clip. Most (younger) people had given up on SNL before that clip shot around the internet. Its ratings went up after that.
YouTube talks to MTV re: pulling the Beyonce clips:
Two words: FAIR fucking USE.