youTube removed example 5 video because of copyright...

Discussion about everything. New games, 3d math, development tips...

youTube removed example 5 video because of copyright...

Postby veegun » Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:04 am

I was shocked to find an email from youtube claiming that the irrlicht example 5 video infringed on viacom's copyright.

I haven't a clue what it is that's in the example 5 video that viacom owns. Maybe they own the user-interface of irrlicht? :(

Here's the full email:

Dear Member:

This is to notify you that we have removed or disabled access to the following material as a result of a third-party notification by Viacom International Inc. claiming that this material is infringing:

Example 05: User Interface:

Please Note: Repeat incidents of copyright infringement will result in the deletion of your account and all videos uploaded to that account. In order to avoid future strikes against your account, please delete any videos to which you do not own the rights, and refrain from uploading additional videos that infringe on the copyrights of others. For more information about YouTube's copyright policy, please read the Copyright Tips guide.

If you elect to send us a counter notice, to be effective it must be a written communication provided to our designated agent that includes substantially the following (please consult your legal counsel or see 17 U.S.C. Section 512(g)(3) to confirm these requirements):
A physical or electronic signature of the subscriber.
Identification of the material that has been removed or to which access has been disabled and the location at which the material appeared before it was removed or access to it was disabled.
A statement under penalty of perjury that the subscriber has a good faith belief that the material was removed or disabled as a result of mistake or misidentification of the material to be removed or disabled.
The subscriber's name, address, and telephone number, and a statement that the subscriber consents to the jurisdiction of Federal District Court for the judicial district in which the address is located, or if the subscriberis address is outside of the United States, for any judicial district in which the service provider may be found, and that the subscriber will accept service of process from the person who provided notification under subsection (c)(1)(C) or an agent of such person.

Such written notice should be sent to our designated agent as follows:

DMCA Complaints
YouTube, Inc.
1000 Cherry Ave.
Second Floor
San Bruno, CA 94066

Please note that under Section 512(f) of the Copyright Act, any person who knowingly materially misrepresents that material or activity was removed or disabled by mistake or misidentification may be subject to liability.

YouTube, Inc.

Posts: 59
Joined: Mon May 29, 2006 1:58 am

Postby kornerr » Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:26 am

i'd like viacom to kiss my a$$
Open Source all the way, baby ;)
User avatar
Posts: 245
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2006 9:57 am
Location: Russia, Siberia, Kemerovo

Postby CuteAlien » Sun Feb 04, 2007 9:33 am

f*ck viacom and f*ck the stupid dmca!!!
User avatar
Posts: 8514
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 2:25 pm
Location: Tübingen, Germany

Postby CuteAlien » Sun Feb 04, 2007 10:42 am

Hm, they called you a thief in front of the whole webcommunity without a good reason. They are trying to destroy your online reputation. I'd say : SUE 'EM ALL!
User avatar
Posts: 8514
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 2:25 pm
Location: Tübingen, Germany

Postby sio2 » Sun Feb 04, 2007 10:55 am

Surely this is just a mistake? Perhaps the Complainant has a bot that scans for infringement and found a "false positive". Of course, the problem for us is that we now can't access the video in order to try and determine what was causing the infringement. :wink:

I wonder if this a naming issue (the video's name), a content issue (what you recorded) or an encoding issue (the codec used to encode the video)? Only the third one seems likely...
Competition winner
Posts: 1003
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2006 5:33 pm
Location: UK

Postby Sudi » Sun Feb 04, 2007 11:01 am

Can't u just ask them what their problem is?
We're programmers. Programmers are, in their hearts, architects, and the first thing they want to do when they get to a site is to bulldoze the place flat and build something grand. We're not excited by renovation:tinkering,improving,planting flower beds.
User avatar
Posts: 1685
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2005 8:38 pm

Postby niko » Sun Feb 04, 2007 12:48 pm

Sudi wrote:Can't u just ask them what their problem is?

Bitplane already did, waiting for a reply. This can get interesting, and I hope that this was a mistake. Fortunately it wasn't one of the more important videos :)
User avatar
Site Admin
Posts: 1759
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2003 4:44 am
Location: Vienna, Austria

Postby SiriusCG » Sun Feb 04, 2007 2:27 pm

Interesting... The fact that they did not specify *what* caused the infringement in their notice seems suspect to me... :?
User avatar
Posts: 58
Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2006 1:05 am

Postby Nodtveidt » Sun Feb 04, 2007 2:28 pm

It was probably a mistake; humans make mistakes sometimes. But it was likely a mistake made by human laziness, which is quite inexcusable.
We all live in a yellow subroutine.

(='.'=) Copy bunny into your signature to
(")_(") help him gain world domination.
User avatar
Posts: 67
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 4:41 am
Location: Isabela, PR

Postby afecelis » Sun Feb 04, 2007 2:36 pm

This totally sux! :twisted: :twisted: What can they claim of a user interface? Or has anyone seen such thing being used in one of their games? They should at least post a screenshot showing how much Irrlicht's copying theirs. These guys don't even know Irrlicht's written completely from scratch and all its code and contents are totally original creations focused on an open-source project!

This totally sux!
Posts: 3075
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2004 10:44 pm
Location: Colombia

Postby noreg » Sun Feb 04, 2007 2:49 pm

A sure sign, that they are massively exaggerating with their copyright issues. My best guess is, that this is related to some music group named Irrlicht and this is the long stinking arm of the MI.
I am afraid i am darn right. They don't even check the content the lazy bastards.
Posts: 158
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 6:01 pm
Location: continental europe

Postby SiriusCG » Sun Feb 04, 2007 2:51 pm

Considering that youtube has come under fire recently for other posted content, it might be wise to consider instead... :wink:

My best guess is, that this is related to some music group named Irrlicht

I would disagree, otherwise, it would become a *name* issue and I assume that would cause all the other "Irrlicht" videos on the site to become suspect as well.

It's all speculation until Bitplane gets a response anyway...
User avatar
Posts: 58
Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2006 1:05 am

Postby Midnight » Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:49 am

screw the video it's an obvious mistake

the interface is in overhual anyways make a new one later stop wasting time on this.
User avatar
Posts: 1772
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2004 2:37 pm
Location: Wonderland

Postby trunks14 » Tue Feb 06, 2007 2:37 am

let's all send trillions of emails to viacom
Not yet.
Posts: 45
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2004 7:30 am
Location: America

Postby Zitzu » Tue Feb 06, 2007 12:09 pm

So now we all know what it means when they say on the TV news "Viacom found 100000 videos on YouTube which infringes their copyrights": simply bullsh1t!
Posts: 26
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2005 9:18 am


Return to Off-topic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest