# YouTube Silences the Heathens



## ZigZag13 (Jan 20, 2009)

YouTube Now Mutes Videos With Unauthorized Copyrighted Music



> Perhaps this has been going on for a while, but Iâ€™ve never noticed it before. YouTube users often create an original video using their favorite popular song as the audio. Iâ€™m afraid that they wonâ€™t be able to do that much longer, since YouTube has started muting videos that use unauthorized copyrighted music (and that pretty much means all user-created videos.)
> 
> You can see some examples here, here and here.
> 
> ...


----------



## Tycho (Jan 20, 2009)

Fuck YouTube.

Fuck Viacom too.  They've been making a nuisance of themselves on YouTube.


----------



## Runefox (Jan 20, 2009)

Well, it's not really Youtube's fault here, and I was wondering when people would start getting in trouble for using commercial music for their crappy videos.


----------



## fangborn (Jan 20, 2009)

DAME YOU YOUTUBE! DAME U!


----------



## Yojimaru (Jan 20, 2009)

Oh for Pete sakes... GROW SOME FUCKING BALLS YOUTUBE!  They've been letting Viacom step all over them for the better part of a year now, and it's getting ridiculous.  Pretty soon, you won't be able to upload ANYTHING without Viasuck throwing a shit fit.


----------



## Runefox (Jan 20, 2009)

Unfortunately, balls is bad for business. People will still use Youtube, and Youtube has nothing to fear from lawsuits from Viacom by doing this. So... Yeah. It's pretty sound. Honestly, I'd be glad to see a lot of these "music videos" drop off Youtube and indeed the face of the planet, myself.


----------



## WarMocK (Jan 20, 2009)

Another good reason to use free music you can find on the web. If they started muting that as well you could kick youtube's ass. ^^


----------



## Wolf-Bone (Jan 20, 2009)

B-B-B-B BUT THEY'RE JUST PROTECTING THEMSELVES AS A BUSINESS! THINK OF ALL THE MONEY THAT POOR OPPRESSED MULTI-GAZILLION DOLLAR COMPANY IS LOSING SOMEHOW BECAUSE OF THIS! ALSO, SOMETHING ABOUT PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY!


----------



## Yojimaru (Jan 20, 2009)

It's not like the users are turning a profit by using "copyrighted music" in their videos, and most of them (I should hope) don't claim the music as their own, so I really don't see why the music companies have such a stick up their collective asses over what is essentially free advertising.


----------



## PeppermintRoo (Jan 20, 2009)

I like this, actually.  I feel it's a better solution than deleting the submission outright.  There's plenty of free (aifsnfb) music available for use in such productions.  In the multimedia courses I took, I either used free music or (much more likely) simply made my own for whatever animation/videogame I made.  I don't see why the internet patrons can't do the same.   

If the users really want to QQ so badly over not being able to make Lincoln Park anime music videos, they should write letters to the band and recording studio asking permission to do so.


----------



## Skittle (Jan 20, 2009)

Wow. This is gay. This is really gay. They are gonna have a bitch of a time keeping up with this.


----------



## ToeClaws (Jan 20, 2009)

Well... one upside: I don't have to listen to people's horrid choice in music to dub over their lame family/friend videos.


----------



## Ainoko (Jan 20, 2009)

Do NOT click the kink, it ha s a trojan embedded! I was forced to reboot my PC in order to stop the trojan in it's tracks.

I am in the process of virus scanns to totally destroy the trojan.


----------



## PeppermintRoo (Jan 20, 2009)

Ainoko said:


> Do NOT click the kink, it ha s a trojan embedded! I was forced to reboot my PC in order to stop the trojan in it's tracks.
> 
> I am in the process of virus scanns to totally destroy the trojan.



I'm not seeing anything suspicious on that page.


----------



## ToeClaws (Jan 20, 2009)

I didn't open it in the first place - was not required to understand the nature of the thread.   Probably just trying to throw on a tracking cookie.


----------



## WarMocK (Jan 20, 2009)

ToeClaws said:


> I didn't open it in the first place - was not required to understand the nature of the thread.   Probably just trying to throw on a tracking cookie.



Tell that to pheonix. He got a trojan that killed his hard drive in this way, including the novel he was about to submit. :-(


----------



## ToeClaws (Jan 20, 2009)

WarMocK said:


> Tell that to pheonix. He got a trojan that killed his hard drive in this way, including the novel he was about to submit. :-(



Ouch!  Was it an ActiveX or Javascript push?


----------



## WarMocK (Jan 20, 2009)

IIRC it was a pretty bad exploit, at least FF + noScript didn't stop it, so it must have been on the OS level (Windows: broken by design ).

I think it's best if you ask him yourself.


----------



## ToeClaws (Jan 20, 2009)

WarMocK said:


> IIRC it was a pretty bad exploit, at least FF + noScript didn't stop it, so it must have been on the OS level (Windows: broken by design ).
> 
> I think it's best if you ask him yourself.



Ah.  Yeah, those utilities only go so far when using Windows, particularly with IE as the browser.  Poor guy.


----------



## WarMocK (Jan 20, 2009)

Erm ... FF = Firefox? ;-)


----------



## RailRide (Jan 20, 2009)

Um, this time it's Warner Music Group

I had a video muted. I simply deleted it and re-uploaded one without the music--I made two versions expecting this to happen (took a year and three months), but the music didn't really add anything other than a visual pun.

While I was at it, I reported a rip of one of my own videos. We'll see how long that takes to produce results.

---PCJ


----------



## ToeClaws (Jan 20, 2009)

WarMocK said:


> Erm ... FF = Firefox? ;-)



Oops.  For some reason, the abbreviation didn't even register.  That's all the more sad then.  

While on that topic, here's something I suggest y'all take a look at implementing on your systems (Windows or *nix):

http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm

It's not a 100% infallible block (nothing is), but it's at least more protection than normal, plus it makes using the Net a lot nicer 'cause you don't see most of the ads.


----------



## Endless Humiliation (Jan 20, 2009)

Oh no.

No....


MY NARUTO AMVs WITH THE LINKIN PARK


Where will I find you now....?  





:evensadder:


----------



## AlexInsane (Jan 20, 2009)

Where's the YouTube alternative?

The one that doesn't suck tremendous hairy balls?


----------



## Tycho (Jan 20, 2009)

The absence of retarded AMVs won't make me cry, at least...


----------



## Endless Humiliation (Jan 20, 2009)

AlexInsane said:


> Where's the YouTube alternative?
> 
> The one that doesn't suck tremendous hairy balls?



PornTube?



Oh wait...That has tremendously hairy balls-sucking, excuse me.


----------



## Tycho (Jan 20, 2009)

Isn't there one named Viddler?


----------



## Ainoko (Jan 20, 2009)

*


----------



## Endless Humiliation (Jan 20, 2009)

Tycho The Itinerant said:


> Isn't there one named Viddler?



Yeah.



I prefer LiveLeak myself.


----------



## Runefox (Jan 20, 2009)

Why is this a big deal, again?


----------



## Endless Humiliation (Jan 20, 2009)

Runefox said:


> Why is this a big deal, again?



I was about to post my video of Invader Zim clips set to "You'll Rebel To Anything".


It was fucking mind-blowing, friend.

It was going to re-energize the paradigms of Web 2.0 user-submitted video sites!


----------



## Tycho (Jan 20, 2009)

Runefox said:


> Why is this a big deal, again?



It's just YouTube being spineless, to the detriment of amateur video makers.  Which is kinda what YouTube is all about.  Amateur Videos.


----------



## Endless Humiliation (Jan 20, 2009)

Tycho The Itinerant said:


> It's just YouTube being spineless, to the detriment of amateur video makers.  Which is kinda what YouTube is all about.  Amateur Videos.



Except most of those amateur videos sucked, even by amateur video standards.


As it goes, amateur videos are ranked best to worst in the following categories: Pornography, bootleg concert vids, vids of user's pets/kids doing wacky/adorable things, vids of user's shitty band, fandubs, then AMVs, then videos of whales/furry porn set to Yanni/Sarah Brightman


----------



## Tycho (Jan 20, 2009)

Load_Blown said:


> Except most of those amateur videos sucked, even by amateur video standards.
> 
> 
> As it goes, amateur videos are ranked best to worst in the following categories: Pornography, bootleg concert vids, vids of user's pets/kids doing wacky/adorable things, vids of user's shitty band, fandubs, then AMVs, *then videos of whales/furry porn set to Yanni/Sarah Brightman*



WHAT THE SHIT.

GET THAT CRAP OFF OF MY YOUTUBE.


----------



## Endless Humiliation (Jan 20, 2009)

Tycho The Itinerant said:


> WHAT THE SHIT.
> 
> GET THAT CRAP OFF OF MY YOUTUBE.



Video removed due to violation of terms of service.


I'm sure you can find some examples.

Just make sure you don't get caught in an argument over whether or not Kanye West is a gay faggot who can't rap.


Oh, I forgot all those charming YouTube "celebrities" like Phil and the Sexman.

Fuck them. 


And fuck Phil doubly hard you are such a prick you have an annoying voice you don't know how to edit you are so white and don't even know it and you shame your race everytime you open your mouth

I wish it weren't possible to have a more annoying delivery than Glenn Beck but somehow Phil pulls it off.


----------



## Runefox (Jan 20, 2009)

Tycho The Itinerant said:


> It's just YouTube being spineless, to the detriment of amateur video makers.  Which is kinda what YouTube is all about.  Amateur Videos.



Mmkay, but Youtube has ultimate authority as to whether or not it wants to cover its own ass against lawsuits because high school kids can't find anything better to do with their time than to clip together a bunch of scenes from an anime/etc and run it against commercial music, ultimately proving that they are the lowest form of "amateur video makers" out there.


----------



## WarMocK (Jan 20, 2009)

Runefox said:


> Mmkay, but Youtube has ultimate authority as to whether or not it wants to cover its own ass against lawsuits because high school kids can't find anything better to do with their time than to clip together a bunch of scenes from an anime/etc and run it against commercial music, ultimately proving that they are the lowest form of "amateur video makers" out there.



If the vids would look cool at least ...


----------



## Wolf-Bone (Jan 20, 2009)

Yes, make your own music just to do amateur vids, because it's not like that takes any time/skill/money.


----------



## Runefox (Jan 20, 2009)

Wolf-Bone said:


> Yes, make your own music just to do amateur vids, because it's not like that takes any time/skill/money.



Actually, that would be part of the process of making a video. If you can't be bothered to do that, then... Well...


----------



## WarMocK (Jan 20, 2009)

Wolf-Bone said:


> Yes, make your own music just to do amateur vids, because it's not like that takes any time/skill/money.



Meh, no, thanks a lot. We already got enough audio crap on Jamendo that makes my ears bleed. 
If you make music, please try to make it good so others can listen to it without suffering sudden deafness. If you see that you can't do it, type "Creative Commons" in the search bar of your favorite browser, press ENTER and check out the results. It shouldn't be that hard to find some music that fits your needs.


----------



## Gavrill (Jan 20, 2009)

You know it took youtube almost 2 weeks to take down child porn, and 1 day to take down Family Guy clips?

Yeah.


----------



## Kuekuatsheu (Jan 20, 2009)

wat

t-that means... I can't... download my fav gamesoundtracks anymore? ;~;


----------



## WarMocK (Jan 20, 2009)

^ It looks that way. Sorry.

looks like they don't like free advertising for their work.


----------



## Gavrill (Jan 20, 2009)

AMVs are how I find new music artists and anime! T.T


----------



## Wolf-Bone (Jan 20, 2009)

Runefox said:


> Actually, that would be part of the process of making a video. If you can't be bothered to do that, then... Well...



So basically what you're saying is you should be able to do it all. By yourself. With no budget. And probably with a job/life outside making YouTube videos on top of that. Right.


----------



## Zero_Point (Jan 20, 2009)

Wellp, that's approximately every single Audiosurf video gone.

I don't see how they're losing money off of this, if I come across a video with music that I like, I hunt down the name/artist and then buy it on iTunes.


----------



## Runefox (Jan 20, 2009)

Wolf-Bone said:


> So basically what you're saying is you should be able to do it all. By yourself. With no budget. And probably with a job/life outside making YouTube videos on top of that. Right.



"Broadcast _yourself_".

Well, either use something from the public domain, get someone else to do it, ask permission from someone else, or don't include a soundtrack at all. It's a pretty simple concept - You're creating something that you've put a marginal amount of effort into, using materials provided by others, without any consent, and then you start bitching when they get taken down for legal reasons? Oh my.

There are plenty of videos out there (and plenty more flash animations out there) that either make their own music or get someone to do their music for them, so I'm not entirely certain what the big problem is. As far as I'm concerned, the fewer AMV's out there with shitty soundtracks the better, and the same goes for video game clips with that shitty background music. These take zero talent and skill, and are a waste of server resources.

So, go Youtube. Awesome.


----------



## PeppermintRoo (Jan 20, 2009)

I fully agree with and support youtube's decision on this.  I don't see what the problem is.  Using music for productions without getting proper licensing is in violation of international copy right laws.  Why on Earth should youtube support violations of said laws for the sake of low quality AMV's?  

You have six different options:
1) Use free music.
2) Make your own music.
3) Get permission from the recording studio and artists to use their song.
4) Petition your government officials to pressure alterations of international copyright laws.
5) If none of the above: STFU.

When you buy a 'popular' song, you are only licensed to listen to it.  You do not own it.  You cannot do whatever you please with it.  If you disagree with a prouct's licensing, then I strongly urge you to dissassociate yourself with that product entirely.  If you cannot do so, but insist on using the product, then respect its licensing.  

I'm sorry if my input offends anyone, but I honestly feel much of this discussion is absolutely insane.


----------



## Mr. Goblet (Jan 20, 2009)

There are decent music videos out there. But I've seen many terrible ones that don't sync up to the music, have irrelevant lyrics, and contrasting moods. I don't bother with any AMV's.

I think the reason they don't delete the videos is so they can send a message to all who try to see it. 

(Man, I hope they don't get MY video.)


----------



## Armaetus (Jan 20, 2009)

Looks like JewTube and their corporate masters got what they want.

I'mma laugh when their traffic plummets due to this.

I also have a couple of videos with soundtrack audio but the music bitrate is no more than 96kbps at most AND it is NON-RIAA as well.


----------



## Endless Humiliation (Jan 20, 2009)

mrchris said:


> Looks like JewTube and their corporate masters got what they want.
> 
> I'mma laugh when their traffic plummets due to this.
> 
> I also have a couple of videos with soundtrack audio but the music bitrate is no more than 96kbps at most AND it is NON-RIAA as well.




WHATA REBELL

STICK IT TO EM


I don't see what the problem is.

I'm sure most of the songs that will be affected by this are songs that are already on YouTube anyway.

Good riddance to bad everything.


----------



## Gavrill (Jan 20, 2009)

Come on now, stuff like this is awesome.


----------



## Endless Humiliation (Jan 20, 2009)

Shenzi said:


> Come on now, stuff like this is awesome.



Bull pucky.

I can listen to Sigur RÃ³s at home while watching the same footage in High-Definition on a bigger screen.


AND I can get stoned at the same time.


----------



## Gavrill (Jan 20, 2009)

Load_Blown said:


> Bull pucky.
> 
> I can listen to Sigur RÃ³s at home while watching the same footage in High-Definition on a bigger screen.
> 
> ...


But you can't watch it in that exact sequence.


----------



## Wolf-Bone (Jan 20, 2009)

Have you ever seen any of David Firth's stuff? He scarcely does a single video/cartoon that doesn't use someone elses music, and they wouldn't have the same feel without it. And has already been mentioned, it's free publicity. I wouldn't even know who those artists were otherwise (Firth actually does his own music btw, but uses other music because it inspires a lot of his ideas).

You can argue about YouTube "covering their ass" and artistic integrity and yaddayadda all you want, but the reality is unless someone is making money off someone elses stuff, the only purpose it serves is for YouTube/other corporations to flex their ePeenz just because they can.



Runefox said:


> "Broadcast _yourself_"



Broadcast these nuts.


----------



## Endless Humiliation (Jan 20, 2009)

Shenzi said:


> But you can't watch it in that exact sequence.



Who cares 

Planet Earth is pretty mind blowing regardless


----------



## Gavrill (Jan 20, 2009)

Load_Blown said:


> Who cares
> 
> Planet Earth is pretty mind blowing regardless


Agreed.


----------



## Kesslan (Jan 20, 2009)

Wolf, I'm pretty sure Youtube isnt doing this sort of thing because it gets their jollies off.

More than likely they've been threatened with legal action, that even if they won, would cost them far more money than it's worth to them compared to going through all the content and 'muting' it.

Largley because of the odd concept the legal system has allowed in that makes it so that a content hoster must know the content of every single item they host, no matter how many random people upload things a day/minute/second blah blah blah.

I'm pretty sure, that dispite the buyout, Youtube doenst actually make a whole ton of money (Compared to what they can be potentialy sued for and run up in legal defence costs)


----------



## Wolf-Bone (Jan 20, 2009)

note I said Youtube/other corporations.


----------



## Runefox (Jan 20, 2009)

Anyway, long story short, boo-hoo, no more shitty home-made AMV's and no more amateurs riding on the popularity of (x song or musician).

I will continue to rejoice.


----------



## Kesslan (Jan 20, 2009)

Wolf-Bone said:


> note I said Youtube/other corporations.


 

That may be the case but such a statement indicates you still lay plenty of blame etc with Youtube. Even if it's potentially entirely out of their hands. I certainly dont know the specifics of what ever caused this current trend.

Also, I find it kinda funny Runefox says there are now less crappy videos on youtube because of it, when allt he videos are still there, they are simply muted. Tough perhaps arguably this could be an improvement in some cases if htey have picked music rather poorly. However often I find it's rather the opposite. Good music, crap video. 

Ah well, the world is at last proving the claim that the internet cannot be controled is a total and complete lie.


----------



## pheonix (Jan 21, 2009)

Man that sucks, youtube just lost some major cool points cause of this.


----------



## .Ein. (Jan 21, 2009)

Youtube had cool points?

Pretty soon you won't be able to beat off without getting sued by Warner or something. =P


----------



## WarMocK (Jan 21, 2009)

.Ein. said:


> Pretty soon you won't be able to beat off without getting sued by Warner or something. =P



Simply look for some free content in the web. They can't sue you for NOT using their music you know. ;-)


----------



## Kesslan (Jan 21, 2009)

WarMocK said:


> Simply look for some free content in the web. They can't sue you for NOT using their music you know. ;-)


 
I wouldnt put it past them to move onto that once they finish suing everyone for using it without their permission.


----------



## WarMocK (Jan 21, 2009)

Yeah ... right ... ;-)
And based on what law exactly? No state that calles itself a democracy could bring up a law that forces its citizens to buy something. No matter what the morons from the IFPI say and do, they cannot forbid you to get something somebody else published for free. ^^


----------



## Beastcub (Jan 21, 2009)

this.....really kinda sucks

yes there are alot of lame things on youtube like the "hey look what i found on deviant art and put together with music" crap but there are some fan-based music videos where they put alot fo work into arranging anime/movie/game clips to music for a really cool effect or for a very commiciall effect and it sucks that they will be gone


----------



## Kesslan (Jan 21, 2009)

WarMocK said:


> Yeah ... right ... ;-)
> And based on what law exactly? No state that calles itself a democracy could bring up a law that forces its citizens to buy something. No matter what the morons from the IFPI say and do, they cannot forbid you to get something somebody else published for free. ^^


 
I trust in Corporate America to find a way. Afterall the North American legal system is responsible for allowing buglers the like to sue their victims for all sorts of crap. One case that comes to mind from Canada I belive, was one crook who was up on some one's roof trying to break in through the skylight over the kitchen. Below the skylight was a 'island' table. He falls through, lands on a kitchen knife which was sitting on the counter, gets it impaled part way into his leg, and then successfully sues the home owners for something the lines of injury due to 'Hazardous Environment' or some similar BS.

And he won.

So have many other people in similar cases. There's even at least rumors I've heard of some one successfully suing some one else for accidentally stepping on their toe.

I wouldn't put it past them to some how find some legal loop hole. Especially in a world where one can patent breathing, making a sandwich and hyperlinks amongst other inane things.


----------



## whoadamn (Jan 25, 2009)

does this actually mean i shall finally be able to witness the end of the amv?

oh my jesus i think its time to celebrate


----------



## nedded (Jan 26, 2009)

To quote from VulpVibe's homepage:


> music piracy is looked down upon by large, greedy record and distribution labels. We are not either of those, and we understand that music piracy helps to spread the word better than any other means of advertising. So please, share your purchased mp3s with your friends...



Why can't Viacom and Warner grasp this concept?


----------



## Wolf-Bone (Jan 26, 2009)

They just don't learn. They went through this shit with VHS tapes, cassettes, CD-R/DVD-R. I mean MP3s have been around for _how long_ without the record industry needing Washington to bail them out?


----------



## Kesteh (Jan 26, 2009)

All I gather from this is less AMVs and shit.


----------



## GatodeCafe (Jan 26, 2009)

I'm looking forward to anon thinking up some retarded workaround.


----------



## Endless Humiliation (Jan 26, 2009)

GatodeCafe said:


> I'm looking forward to anon thinking up some retarded workaround.



They should just replace all the copyrighted originals with MIDIs

Have you heard the MIDI of "God Bless the USA"?

It's just as stirring as the original


----------



## Captain Howdy (Jan 26, 2009)

*Scratches head* Weren't people...NOT meant to be posting the stuff that is now being removed? I figured somewhere in the agreed ToS, that it probably states something like "Don't post shit, unless you created it, or have explicit permission to post it (i.e., actually contacting the person who made it)).

So...They're probably enforcing a rule that was most likely there to begin with, because a bunch of lawsuits probably popped up with the growing popularity. Yeah, it kinda sucks that they enforce something like that half-way in, but that's how the legal world turns :/


----------



## RailRide (Jan 26, 2009)

Kesslan said:


> That may be the case but such a statement indicates you still lay plenty of blame etc with Youtube. Even if it's potentially entirely out of their hands. I certainly dont know the specifics of what ever caused this current trend.



In a nutshell:

Google and Warner Music were negotiating royalties for stuff YouTube users were putting in their videos. Warner wanted more than Google was willing to pay. Lawyers got butthurt, and YouTube killed the audio on offending videos.

YouTube offers a feature called Audio Swap, where you can embed commercial music _that has been licensed_ in your videos (so money presumably changes hands whenever someone plays a video with an audioswapped soundtrack), but Warner isn't part of this, for reasons outlined above.

And YouTube isn't making a profit--it's still losing $$

---PCJ


----------



## EmoWolf (Jan 31, 2009)

oh no, its not as if people wouldn't start finding a song online without a crappy fan made video.


----------

