[Art]

I also posted this at another site to perhaps shed some light on the subject. It came about from using another person's copyrighted song (music and / or lyrics) in a video and posting same.
Here's the gist of the subject matter:

Copyrights, Patents, Trademarks and Infringement

Initially only covering books, copyright law was revised in the 19th century to include maps, charts, engravings, prints, musical compositions, dramatic works, photographs, paintings, drawings and sculptures. In the 20th century copyright was expanded to cover motion pictures, computer programs, sound recordings, choreography and architectural works.
############################################

Duration of Copyright Protection
# Musicians and conductors are given copyright protection automatically after their work has been made available for public consumption. A song produced for personal or noncommercial purposes can be protected for up to 70 years after the creator's death with an approved copyright application. Recording labels and musicians can protect work for hire or commercial music for up to 95 years by applying for copyrights. Writers, movie producers and web designers must request permission to reproduce music from copyright holders unless they use public domain music. Public domain music is anything created before 1923 that has not been protected in perpetuity by its owners and descendants.
Read more: Copyright Laws in Music | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/about_4793153_copyright-laws-music.html#ixzz17HK3M9cD
#############################################

Copyrights vs. Patents
# Patents protect technological creations. Copyrights protect works of authorship, generally of an artistic nature. Sometimes it is difficult to determine whether a particular work is a work of technology or a work of authorship--computer programs are an obvious example. U.S. copyright law, along with the copyright law of most other nations, protects computer programs under copyright.
Read more: What Are Copyright Laws Used to Protect? | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/about_5375515_copyright-laws-used-protect.html#ixzz17HKmBZP1
##############################################

Copyrights do not protect designs or logos intended to distinguish among products or producers, because these are protected under trademark law.
Read more: What Are Copyright Laws Used to Protect? | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/about_5375515_copyright-laws-used-protect.html#ixzz17HL6NwiL
##############################################

Examples of copyright infringement include downloading music using file-sharing technology, creating and publicly displaying a work of "fan fiction," or selling a burned music CD or DVD. Any of these activities can be performed without penalty as long as the prior permission of the copyright holder is secured.
Read more: What Are Copyright Laws Used to Protect? | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/about_5375515_copyright-laws-used-protect.html#ixzz17HLRmNNF

[DaveMorton]

Good stuff, Art! I'm glad that this came up, as we all need to be reminded from time to time.

[Data]

This leaves me wondering, how do Youtube get away with things like this:



Obviously copyrighted material but its allowed, it seems that there are grey areas too.

[Art]

Well, those gray areas are WHY we have Lawyers and usually the client with the most money has the best lawyer.

[Freddy]

Talking of copyright laws and YouTube.  I saw someone say simply mirror the video (ie left to right ) and avoid the copyright issue.  Surely it's not as simple as that.

I have seen one video mirrored so far.

I doubt that counts as a significant change ?

[Data]

As far as I have worked out from here and there, YouTube has a bot that listens to songs, if it matches copyrighted material it gets removed.

There are ways of fooling the bot, changing the speed very slightly or cutting out bits from the song. (So I’ve heard).

But there must be humans that go through the videos and remove them that way too, so to my mind if a video has been up for a couple of years or so, its quite likely to be a video that isn’t breaking copyright too badly.

I haven’t heard of a bot that watches the videos before, but it doesn’t surprise me, how effective it would be at spotting naughty videos though hmmm.

I have no way of proving anything I just posted    

[GT40]

[Art]

As far as I have worked out from here and there, YouTube has a bot that listens to songs, if it matches copyrighted material it gets removed.
I have no way of proving anything I just posted    

=================
Well, there's Tuniac, Barberpole, iPhone's Shazam and the ever popular  http://www.midomi.com/

Hum or sing the tune and the program will tell you the name / artist!

Scary huh!!??

[Data]

Yeah ... scary.

Sing? Me I cant sing 

Now I wonder how these bots can tell a cover version from the original.   

[photostill]

This is such a gray area. Lawyers spend an extra couple of years just learning copyright law in addition to the regular to pass the bar exam.

There's a lot doesn't meet the eye on these things. For instance, you can't tell if the major label that owns the recording rights provided the links to the material. Oh, that sounds odd doesn't it?

It's been unofficially acknowledged that in most cases, those suing for music infringement often as not, provided the matter themselves so that they would know it was there. Ain't that a shocker? Turned up with the first part in The Pirate Bay case and again with the ICE domain seizures. Those two were not isolated instances either.

In the ICE domain seizures, the site dajaz1[dot]com it was revealed that the agent Reynolds, listed four songs as being infringing works. What is not mentioned is that the labels gave the site owner these songs to put up to generate interest in these new works coming down the pipes.

source:

Code

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101222/02112912376/more-bigger-mistakes-discovered-homeland-securitys-domain-seizures.shtml

You get into some really twisted situations where the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing.  The point of this post is that all is not always as it seems when you read the print of some news.

[Art]

Good point Photostill,

As often happens in Hollywood, the actor's career is slightly teetering for lack of recent work so they are instructed to create some attention. This is often done by a number of things, shoplifting at a well known store, ramming their car or similar fender bender, drinking or drugging to excess, getting a "convienient" picture taken while in various states of undress, etc., etc.

I would imagine they were told, "Any publicity is good publicity!!"

Keeps their name and image on the mind of the adoring public! Heck of a gig!

[Freddy]

Really ? Was Winona Ryder (sp?) really following orders do you think ?  I kinda hope she was now, as I always liked her, but didn't her career go down the pan after that ?  A step too far maybe...

[Art]

Yeah, it's hard to figure. Kinda goes with who you are and who is pulling on your reins if anyone.

The lovely (?) heiress, Paris Hilton? Family reputation, values, dignity, etc. She practically sucked a golf ball through a garden hose and her life and family seem unfazed and unaffected by it. No embarassment and her adoring fans still love her! Simply a very rich tramp IMO!

Yeah, I've always liked Winona Ryder as well. We may never know....