Tech: Rumblefish, Copyrighting trad. tunes

Subject: Tech: Rumblefish, Copyrighting trad. tunes
From: GUEST,Kevin Tyler
Date: 15 May 12 - 08:16 AM

I am just wondering how the mudcat community feels about this. I am a musician, highland piper, guitarist and singer of traditional songs, all within the public domain. I went to my Mother's grave on Mother's Day 2012 this past Sunday and played three or four pipe tunes at the graveside, and recorded it on video which i later posted on youtube.
I received a notice from youtube that the content of my video, traditional songs that have been played by pipers for over 100 years are in violation of copyrights held by "Rumblefish". I am aghast and upset, from what I am reading, Rumblefish is stealing the traditional songs that are not under copyright, stealing our heritage to make money.
link follows
http://www.news.com.au/technology/rumblefish-accuses-simple-livings-weed-gathering-youtube-vegan-of-stealing-birdsong/story-e6frfro0-1226283953932

Subject: RE: Tech: Rumblefish, Copyrighting trad. tunes
From: Leadfingers
Date: 15 May 12 - 08:21 AM

It would be easier to comment if the link you posted went anywhere !

Subject: RE: Tech: Rumblefish, Copyrighting trad. tunes
From: GUEST,Kevin Tyler
Date: 15 May 12 - 08:23 AM

At the moment this is only a problem on youtube, since Google the owner of youtube has a deal with Rumblefish to make money from traditional music being performed on our vids, But the effect can be far reaching and cause problems for all of us who perform traditional music that heretofore was in the public domain. This seems to be fallout from the recent law passed in the US to supposedly protect copyrights.

Subject: RE: Tech: Rumblefish, Copyrighting trad. tunes
From: GUEST,Kevin Tyler
Date: 15 May 12 - 08:24 AM

I copied and pasted it into my browser and it worked for me.

Subject: RE: Tech: Rumblefish, Copyrighting trad. tunes
From: GUEST,Kevin Tyler
Date: 15 May 12 - 08:27 AM

For those who cant get the link to work, the article is as follows...

GOOD artists copy, great artists steal.
Picasso said that first - or Steve Jobs, depending on which smartphone you own or Wikipedia entry you believe.
But neither sentiment is particularly reassuring for YouTuber Daniel, otherwise known as "eeplox", a 28-year-old writer who went out to pick some wild salad vegetables just the other day.
It's a harmless enough video. Charming, even, as eeplox goes about his way plucking such things as mallow leaves, dandelions and wild water-cured olives, before squeezing a bit of street tree lemon juice on it all and scoffing it down to prove free salad can be edible.
In the background, some native birds tweet their approval.

And just hours after he posted it on his channel, eeplox was told by YouTube that he was using copyrighted material.
Huh?
The birds, eeplox. Those tweets are stolen.
"This baffled me," eeplox wrote in a post on the incident to Slashdot.
"So I asked some questions, and it appears that the birds singing in the background of my video are Rumblefish's exclusive intellectual property."
Who's Rumblefish?
Rumblefish call themselves "the world's largest catalog for social media".
They represent artists who want to sell their soundtracks as well as claiming their own copyright over audio samples.
They currently have more than 5.35 million tracks listed. About half a million are songs; the rest are "social soundtracks".
The idea being that if you want a soundtrack for your hilarious planking highlights video, build it using Rumblefish's database and they'll take care of the copyright concerns.
They make their money by creating soundtracks for media projects. The artists make money from the royalties each time the projects are used.
And they're extremely active, in particular when it comes to scanning YouTube videos for use - innocent or otherwise - of their samples.
Penalised
YouTube's immediate response was to start posting ads on eeplox's video, with the revenue from the ads split between Rumblefish and Google, the owners of YouTube.
After he disputed the notice, the video was sent to Rumblefish for verification.
Yep, Rumblefish assured, that's our birdsong.
"This is the first time this has happened to me," Daniel - who lists his occupation on YouTube as "Guardian of the Earth" and posts monthly videos under the title "Simple Living" - told news.com.au.
"I didn't notice the birdsong until I played the video back at full volume to try and figure out what sound in it could possibly be under copyright."
So Daniel did what any individual hassled by The Man does these days and hit the internets. Notably, Slashdot, where his complaint gained worldwide attention and most notably, that of Rumblefish CEO Paul Anthony.
Eventually, it was all sorted out as a "misunderstanding". By that time, Mr Anthony had move into PR crisis control, setting up a AMA (Ask Me Anything) thread on Reddit and claiming it all came about because YouTube "ID'd a song in our catalog improperly".
You too can eat free weeds
While pleased with the outcome, Daniel was left wondering if it's "a freak occurrence".
"I feel pretty violated by this, a mysterious entity claiming to own my content and apparently profiting from it with ads," he wrote.
On a positive note, Daniel's video is rapidly gaining hits and he's on the verge of becoming a poster boy for vegan foragers.
"I'm very pleased that this whole ordeal has brought foraging to a wider audience," he told news.com.au.
"A lot of people seemed to have no idea that they could be eating free weeds."
And for the record, Rumble Fish is also a book by S. E. Hinton and a film of the book by Francis Ford Coppola.
Oh, and a UK pop band from the 80s. And a fighting game developed for the PlayStation 2.
So it seems great artists think alike, hey Rumblefish?


Read more: http://www.news.com.au/technology/rumblefish-accuses-simple-livings-weed-gathering-youtube-vegan-of-stealing-birdsong/story-e6frfro0-1226283953932#ixzz1uwNmWrYB

Subject: RE: Tech: Rumblefish, Copyrighting trad. tunes
From: GUEST,Peter Laban
Date: 15 May 12 - 08:27 AM

The link the OP posted is perfectly fine.

Click

Subject: RE: Tech: Rumblefish, Copyrighting trad. tunes
From: Richie
Date: 15 May 12 - 08:45 AM

Youtube doesn't know what's PD. Someone probably alerted them about your video- don't know why.

I have some youtube vids with covers of copyrighted songs- they haven't pulled them.

The only one they pulled was a PD song that someone complained about.

I'd repost on youtube with a different title, maybe it will be OK then

Richie

Subject: RE: Tech: Rumblefish, Copyrighting trad. tunes
From: GUEST,leeneia
Date: 15 May 12 - 08:50 AM

Other catters have had this problem and have solved it by informing YouTube (don't ask me how) that the songs are PD.

There are penalties for violating legitimate copyrights, but there are no penalties for claiming copyrights to which one is not entitled. So greedy people do it. Stand up to them, if you can.

Subject: RE: Tech: Rumblefish, Copyrighting trad. tunes
From: Tootler
Date: 15 May 12 - 03:03 PM

I've not actually had a video pulled but I have had videos of traditional songs flagged up as copyright.

When this happens, there is a link which takes you to a page where you can post an objection to the copyright claim. I've used this and while I have never had an acknowledgement (Isn't amazing how large organisations think they can ignore simple courtesies?) I have subsequently noticed that the copyright flag has been removed and no ads have appeared on the videos concerned.

My advice to the OP is to invoke You Tube's dispute procedure and see what happens. I'm sure he will be able to point to sources that show the material is out of copyright.

I think leeneia has a point there needs to be some sort of penalty for false copyright claims.

Subject: RE: Tech: Rumblefish, Copyrighting trad. tunes
From: GUEST,Kevin Tyler
Date: 15 May 12 - 06:06 PM

I have indeed countered and challenged their claims, the problem is that Rumblefish then has the exclusive authority to deny your challenge, and then google/youtube the places ads on your vids, and splits the profits with Rumblefish. The pipe tunes I play are and have been in the PD for over 100 years... so their claim is ludicrous.... and no one could have complained because the claim came within SECONDS of me uploading the video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SucwcA8BeQ0&feature=BFa&list=UU_sCRBDaiXmD3iJqf3Yj40A

Subject: RE: Tech: Rumblefish, Copyrighting trad. tunes
From: GUEST,Kevin Tyler
Date: 15 May 12 - 06:09 PM

I believe their bogus claims for copyright violation, stems from the new law Congress passed allowing them to copyright songs that were previously UN-copyrighted. Looks to me like a scam to allow corporate america to make money off of the huge traditional music genre.
I hope I am wrong and youtube/google do the right thing here, but i am not holding my breath

Subject: RE: Tech: Rumblefish, Copyrighting trad. tunes
From: GUEST,chufty
Date: 15 May 12 - 06:09 PM

something fishy.. and they've been rumbled ???

Subject: RE: Tech: Rumblefish, Copyrighting trad. tunes
From: GUEST,Kevin Tyler
Date: 15 May 12 - 06:12 PM

I am being told by youtube, for example, that Rumblefish owns the copyright on the tune "Going Home" composed by Antonin Dvorak.

Subject: RE: Tech: Rumblefish, Copyrighting trad. tunes
From: GUEST
Date: 15 May 12 - 06:20 PM

Antonin Dvorak (1841-1904) well into the 100+ years PD methinks

Subject: RE: Tech: Rumblefish, Copyrighting trad. tunes
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 15 May 12 - 06:28 PM

Disgusting that people would do that..but they will...my feeling is unless Nike wants one of my tunes and makes millions off it, anyone who wants it can have it for free..maybe up to a point where there is serious money..not that that is likely...but to copyright songs your grandmother sang..evil I think if it is public domain. mg

Subject: RE: Tech: Rumblefish, Copyrighting trad. tunes
From: GUEST,999
Date: 15 May 12 - 06:48 PM

The only answer at this time is to take your music OFF YouTube and place it elsewhere. THEN if some asshole at Rumblefish or Google or YouTube says it is in violation of copyright, tell them to sue you. NO judge will allow that to go against you. This is corporatism at its ?? finest? worst?.

In the words of the prophet, FUCK 'EM!

Subject: RE: Tech: Rumblefish, Copyrighting trad. tunes
From: Sandy Mc Lean
Date: 16 May 12 - 12:26 AM

Ditto Bruce. Sage advice and expressive as well!

Subject: RE: Tech: Rumblefish, Copyrighting trad. tunes
From: GUEST,999
Date: 16 May 12 - 12:33 AM

Sandy, glad you posted. Message me, svp. I need your mailing address.

Subject: RE: Tech: Rumblefish, Copyrighting trad. tunes
From: stallion
Date: 16 May 12 - 02:30 AM

Why not start an e- petition requesting rumblefish's activities to be investigated, Richard Bridge will no doubt clear this up, but as i see it if one claims royalties from an organisation for public domain material then one is diminishing the pot, and permanently depriving genuine writers and composers of their rightful share, isn't that a fraud?

Subject: RE: Tech: Rumblefish, Copyrighting trad. tunes
From: Bert
Date: 16 May 12 - 02:34 AM

...The only answer at this time is to take your music OFF YouTube and place it elsewhere...

If any Mudcatter wants to put a tune or video up on my website I would be only too happy to oblige. Just send it to me at [e-mail].

Subject: RE: Tech: Rumblefish, Copyrighting trad. tunes
From: Leadfingers
Date: 16 May 12 - 05:59 AM

So Rumblefish stops people posting on You Tube ! So BIG DEAL . If you NEED to have anything on Internet there are plenty of other places
Get a Boycottt of You Tube going - IF you get enough support , they may well change their attitude

Subject: RE: Tech: Rumblefish, Copyrighting trad. tunes
From: mg
Date: 16 May 12 - 04:19 PM

It is a big deal if they have stolen the peoples' songs..mg

Subject: RE: Tech: Rumblefish, Copyrighting trad. tunes
From: ollaimh
Date: 16 May 12 - 08:25 PM

the whole american copyright legislative system is exactly to enrich music corporations and all other rights claimants.the american claims are not enforceable in canada not i suspect the uk. the present tory government is putting forth legislation to follow the american lehal rules, which would be a disaster. the federal court of appeal in canada has refused to allow law suits for copying material for personal use. so the music compqny lqw suits stopped in canada.

the best example i know of the inequitey is the song the :lion slees tonight" it was written by solomon lindy , and his lyrics in zulu were a straught translation, however he got nothing from his creative work and the guy who translated the words" in the jungle the mighty jungle, the lion sleeps tonight" got the whole thing. the american rules do not protect artists. at hearings i have several times submitted that if they want to protect artists(as they falsely claim) then all they have to do is make origional artists copywrite un transferable by law. then companies could only lease the works and the artist could revoke the licence at any time(with in reasonable legal rules). they all go silent and make to response to that idea. the music companies know full well that would send the money to artists and their exploitation would be ended.

gene mqacclelland lost his right s to his songs to an unscrupulous manager, and got mothing in a totally unfair contract. canadian law does protect many groups from unfair contracts, its high time we extend that protection to artists of all kinds

so companies often register a copywrite on traditional tunes and songs that they collected. hwoebver all you have to do is make your own arrangement and their calim fails. they will ot sue, they might threaten but they will not sue as they are making the most extreme claims possible.

in the big picture this is the last gasp, or grasp, of american capitalism they want everything to be a property right because they don't make things much anymore. i dobt they will suceed. china and the east do not follow american laws. canada shouldn't

Subject: RE: Tech: Rumblefish, Copyrighting trad. tunes
From: GUEST,999
Date: 16 May 12 - 09:10 PM

Hear, hear, ollaimh.

Subject: RE: Tech: Rumblefish, Copyrighting trad. tunes
From: GUEST
Date: 17 May 12 - 12:02 AM

baidu dot com

This has been an interesting thread...there are MANY places in the world besides G and UTub. Why use them?

Sincerely,
Gargoyle



BTW    ftp AND TCP still work.


Not to forget usenet and news groups....glad to see the "illicet " bringing more to the nether world

Subject: RE: Tech: Rumblefish, Copyrighting trad. tunes
From: Sandy Mc Lean
Date: 17 May 12 - 12:10 AM

I e-mailed Rumblefish last night asking if they were really "stupid" enough to try and copyright a birdcall. So far no reply so I suppose that speaks for the affirmative.
Bruce, I sent my address as a PM to your Mudcat name. I have your e-mail address somewhere but I am away from home for a time.
                                 Sandy

Subject: RE: Tech: Rumblefish, Copyrighting trad. tunes
From: Green Man
Date: 17 May 12 - 07:16 AM

I am known to fart tunefully at times. (Its a side effect of real ale) I wonder if they own the copyright to that.

After all its a prelude to cr*p

GM

Subject: RE: Tech: Rumblefish, Copyrighting trad. tunes
From: Bee-dubya-ell
Date: 17 May 12 - 07:59 AM

From the Department of Subtle Irony:

Rumblefish "borrowed" its name from the title of S. E. Hinton's 1975 novel Rumble Fish. What would you say the chances are that Ms Hinton has received any sort of payment, licensing fee, or other compensation from Rumblefish for ripping her off?

Subject: RE: Tech: Rumblefish, Copyrighting trad. tunes
From: Tootler
Date: 17 May 12 - 08:20 AM

Perhaps Ms Hinton should pursue Rumblefish for royalties.

That might stir things up a bit.

There again, I might see some rather large pink animals flying over.

Subject: RE: Tech: Rumblefish, Copyrighting trad. tunes
From: GUEST,leeneia
Date: 17 May 12 - 08:30 AM

Suppose I had videos of traditional tunes. Suppose further that people locate them, not by title, but by my name, because they are my friends. I believe I would spell the tune names wrong to foil evil search engines.

Do you suppose that would help? Might be worth trying.

Subject: RE: Tech: Rumblefish, Copyrighting trad. tunes
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 17 May 12 - 04:19 PM

A copyright is simply a claim. If you can demonstrate that there's prior art, let them sue.

Subject: RE: Tech: Rumblefish, Copyrighting trad. tunes
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 18 May 12 - 03:17 AM

They claim copyright on birdsong
Did they have the birds under contact?
Have they got assignments of copyright signed by the performers?