Pete here.
Does anyone know the situation with mirroring fundamentalist's videos on YouTube and what, if any, provision there is for this under fair use?
I've read that Fair Use covers clauses such as comment and criticism, as well as satire, but here's the problem:
As we all know, several mirror channels (those containing videos by VenomFangX and NephilimFree, among others) are being hit with DMCA's from the channels that the videos belong to. Now I'm sure that the only reason they're engaging in these behaviours is for the purposes of censorship. They want to control who can comment on their material, and so they disable ratings and enable comment approval, then they file DMCA actions against anyone who mirrors their videos and opens up the comments.
Is there anything that can be done about this?
I do know that there are several users on YouTube, who include annotations when posting said videos, in an attempt to provide commentary on what is being seen, and I know that sometimes a video is included in it's entirety when it is being commented against, such as those used by the ExtantDodos when they produce their Critical Analysis products, but can the same thing be applied to videos with annotations? I mean, essentially you're producing the video in it's entirety, without interruptions, but you're also providing an overlay of commentary on the video explaining why it is that the original video is flawed or wrong.
I know in my case, when I produce a video response to any user, I like to quote their video in full so that I cannot be accused of taking them out of context, and I'm also covered under the relevant articles of fair use (which I post in any video where I respond and use someone's material), because I'm responding on a point by point basis.
But I suspect the clauses are a little less usable in the instance of mirroring the videos and adding annotations.
Nephi recently commented on a video claiming that, because the annotations are "Macromedia Flash" (notwithstanding the fact that Adobe long ago bought out Macromedia), they don't count somehow. What a moron. But the question is: Is he right?
It doesn't matter much to me, since I never have and never will mirror videos without permission from the original posters, but there are several users who mirror videos simply to circumvent censorship policies of the fundies.
And in the end, if it's not legal to mirror videos, then is it possible to mirror portions of the offending videos and then linking to the originals? Of course, if said users delete their videos, this will result in broken links, but it's one possible solution.
What are your thoughts guys?
Does anyone know the situation with mirroring fundamentalist's videos on YouTube and what, if any, provision there is for this under fair use?
I've read that Fair Use covers clauses such as comment and criticism, as well as satire, but here's the problem:
As we all know, several mirror channels (those containing videos by VenomFangX and NephilimFree, among others) are being hit with DMCA's from the channels that the videos belong to. Now I'm sure that the only reason they're engaging in these behaviours is for the purposes of censorship. They want to control who can comment on their material, and so they disable ratings and enable comment approval, then they file DMCA actions against anyone who mirrors their videos and opens up the comments.
Is there anything that can be done about this?
I do know that there are several users on YouTube, who include annotations when posting said videos, in an attempt to provide commentary on what is being seen, and I know that sometimes a video is included in it's entirety when it is being commented against, such as those used by the ExtantDodos when they produce their Critical Analysis products, but can the same thing be applied to videos with annotations? I mean, essentially you're producing the video in it's entirety, without interruptions, but you're also providing an overlay of commentary on the video explaining why it is that the original video is flawed or wrong.
I know in my case, when I produce a video response to any user, I like to quote their video in full so that I cannot be accused of taking them out of context, and I'm also covered under the relevant articles of fair use (which I post in any video where I respond and use someone's material), because I'm responding on a point by point basis.
But I suspect the clauses are a little less usable in the instance of mirroring the videos and adding annotations.
Nephi recently commented on a video claiming that, because the annotations are "Macromedia Flash" (notwithstanding the fact that Adobe long ago bought out Macromedia), they don't count somehow. What a moron. But the question is: Is he right?
It doesn't matter much to me, since I never have and never will mirror videos without permission from the original posters, but there are several users who mirror videos simply to circumvent censorship policies of the fundies.
And in the end, if it's not legal to mirror videos, then is it possible to mirror portions of the offending videos and then linking to the originals? Of course, if said users delete their videos, this will result in broken links, but it's one possible solution.
What are your thoughts guys?