YouTube: Universal Music Abused the System

Double A

New member
Jul 29, 2009
2,270
0
0
Irridium said:
Double A said:
Hope they get what's coming to them.

Irridium said:
Indeed. SOPA would allow them to do this crap to entire websites.

Because piracy.

And (most of) Congress doesn't seem to even want to care to understand the bill. Because "they're no nerds and there's no reason to bring in the nerds to explain it" (actual god damn quote).
Source?

Not because I don't believe you, but because I want to endlessly mock that Congressman.
Right here [http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/compost/post/the-nightmarish-sopa-hearings/2011/12/15/gIQA47RUwO_blog.html]. It was said by a number of congressmen actually. And most seemed pretty happy with not understanding this thing.
Voting for things that are widely not understood seems to be the new fad in DC. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patient_Protection_and_Affordable_Care_Act]
 

Stevepinto3

New member
Jun 4, 2009
585
0
0
So basically what happened is that Universal, while trying to defend a bill for copyright and IP protection, is trying to ignore a copyright law.

If it weren't for the massive amount of money they rake in the hypocrisy would make their heads explode.
 

ResonanceSD

Elite Member
Legacy
Dec 14, 2009
4,538
5
43
I work for a giant corporation, and this pisses me off no end. Seriously, we're trying to get rid of the "needlessly evil" stereotype.
 

Slayer_2

New member
Jul 28, 2008
2,475
0
0
Jack Rascal said:
Slayer_2 said:
Jack Rascal said:
Slayer_2 said:
That ad was the most obnoxious one I've seen in a long time. Honestly, I made it to 1:17 before I wanted to simultaneously pull my hair out of my skull. Those annoying voices crooning "MMMEEGGGGGAAAAAAAAAAAA UUUUUUPPPPPPPPLLLLLLLLLLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOAAAAAAAAAAADDDDDDDDDD" grate hard. I'm never using MU again. Who the hell thought that ad was a good idea?
Dear god, I only made it to 00:25. That thing almost made my ears bleed. And to think they paid $3 million to produce that... Unbelievable.

I don't know anything about this case, I'm not on either side, but I do think the world would be a better place if that ad was never shown again.
You think the 3 mil could be used for something productive, instead of for making such a horrible film. Isn't advertising great?
Ads are great, but I wish only funny ads were allowed to air. Like this little gem:


But ads are supposed to attract customers (as you said as well Slayer). I am positive that based on that 25 seconds I managed to watch the MU video I will never enter that site. Ever.
That ad is hilarious, and the product looks like it is enjoyable to use (ahaha, bad one by me). Seriously though, wear a helmet, guys :p
 

TheNaut131

New member
Jul 6, 2011
1,224
0
0
Raiyan 1.0 said:
Never mind. Watch the video anyway.

<youtube=JhwuXNv8fJM&feature=youtu.be>
I love how in this very video, he points out that the Megaupload video should have never been taken down. It's funny, how he released this video only a few days ago and now said video has returned.

You don't think...nah.
 

(LK)

New member
Mar 4, 2010
139
0
0
It is not at all new that a company like UMG has used the DMCA to censor or remove content they do not own the rights to.

What is new is that someone is actually attempting to punish them for it.

They've been doing this exact same thing as a matter of course every day for a decade, and this is sincerely the first time I have ever seen anyone attempt to enforce the clause that is supposed to punish them for it.

Companies like UMG wholeheartedly believe that the DMCA is carte blanche to remove anything they want from the internet without consequence. Until now, they've been allowed to act upon that belief freely, and the worst outcome for them has been that a counter-notice would restore the content a couple weeks later.

Hopefully everyone remembers when Viacom sent out a mass of DMCA notifications and removed tens or hundreds of thousands of videos from youtube? Hopefully they remember that the vast majority of them contained no material copyrighted by Viacom, and some didn't contain anything that was even capable of being copyrighted by anyone? Remember the $0.00 in damages Viacom had to pay for history's most egregious violation of the part of the DMCA meant to punish notifications given in bad faith?