Curse

Empress Amarox · May 13, 2009, 03:36 PM // 15:36

What are your feelings about this?

"This video contains an audio track that has not been authorized by WMG. The audio has been disabled."

I think it's crap that the music companies are so stuck up that they won't allow their "copyrighted" content on YouTube. I mean, it's so bad that even some National Geographic videos have disabled audio... What the hell? A nature video with absolutely no sound or commentary? And it was like some almost silent background music nobody could hear anyways, which the people who made the video probably had the rights to use in the first place... *sigh*

Well, I think it's poo. It's too bad there's nothing that can really be done about all this... I've had 90%+ of my music playlists on YouTube either removed or disabled and like half the videos I click now have disabled audio tracks... Just kinda seems mean spirited.

I pwnd U · May 13, 2009, 03:40 PM // 15:40

I feel like searching.

http://guildwarsguru.com/forum/showt...Tube+copyright

As it is, I don't use YouTube that much so I really don't care.

Shursh · May 13, 2009, 03:59 PM // 15:59

I compare this to downloading music:

youtube, the music industry, etc. need to realize that the internet is not going away, and that people will continue to find new and innovative ways to share their artistic collections (whether that be music, video, pictures, etc.).

these companies need to get on-board with the direction file-sharing is heading and figure out a way to make money off of it - be it through advertisements, paid memberships, etc.

zwei2stein · May 13, 2009, 04:32 PM // 16:32

People need to learn that there is no free lunch & to respect author wishes.

What about, whatdyaknow, sharing and using music made by people that want you to share and use it (Creative Commons) or music that is out of copyright.

Not hard, lots of great stuff there.

jiggles · May 13, 2009, 04:43 PM // 16:43

Just about everything i want to watch is unavailable in my country. I rarely use youtube now.

DarkFlame · May 13, 2009, 04:49 PM // 16:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Empress Amarox

mean, it's so bad that even some National Geographic videos have disabled audio... What the hell? A nature video with absolutely no sound or commentary? And it was like some almost silent background music nobody could hear anyways, which the people who made the video probably had the rights to use in the first place... *sigh*

Are the people who made the video and who paid to license the music, the same people who uploaded it onto YouTube? Starts making sense now, huh?

Empress Amarox · May 13, 2009, 05:15 PM // 17:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by zwei2stein

People need to learn that there is no free lunch & to respect author wishes.

What about, whatdyaknow, sharing and using music made by people that want you to share and use it (Creative Commons) or music that is out of copyright.

Not hard, lots of great stuff there.

Not really... It pretty much sucks, to be honest.

And we aren't talking about the author's wishes, now are we? Publisher != author.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarkFlame

Are the people who made the video and who paid to license the music, the same people who uploaded it onto YouTube? Starts making sense now, huh?

Actually, yes, on some occasions. I've definitely seen the actual artist's official YouTube page have videos removed or with disabled audio due to this crap.

And what's the difference? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use

Snow Bunny · May 13, 2009, 05:26 PM // 17:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Empress Amarox

And what's the difference? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use

Music is not under fair use.

For fcuks sake people, deal with the fact that despite many's best efforts, most shit in life is not free, least of all the products of someone's labor.

Empress Amarox · May 13, 2009, 06:47 PM // 18:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snow Bunny

Music is not under fair use.

No, but certain videos that happen to contain music are. Else, explain why movie trailers are allowed, hmm?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snow Bunny

For fcuks sake people, deal with the fact that despite many's best efforts, most shit in life is not free, least of all the products of someone's labor.

Who said anything about free? I just want to make playlists so others can check out the stuff I'm listening to.

I don't solely listen to music on YouTube, nor would I expect anyone else to. In fact, to the contrary... I actually find music I like randomly browsing YouTube and end up going out and buying it.

It's free advertising for them. Kinda stupid what they're doing, really... There have been quite a few occasions I've found stuff on YouTube and then went out and bought that I otherwise wouldn't have even known existed.

P.S. 5 yr view. Working well for them, hmm?

http://www.google.com/finance?client=ob&q=NYSE:WMG

[DE] · May 13, 2009, 06:51 PM // 18:51

Copyright Laws

You're mad because a law is being enforced? Oh no!

edit:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Empress Amarox

No, but certain videos that happen to contain music are. Else, explain why movie trailers are allowed, hmm?

Because they PAID for the rights to use the music. Seriously, this shit is just obvious.

Empress Amarox · May 13, 2009, 07:06 PM // 19:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by [DE]

Because they PAID for the rights to use the music. Seriously, this shit is just obvious.

And you think National Geographic doesn't..? Seriously, this shit is just obvious.

[DE] · May 13, 2009, 07:16 PM // 19:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Empress Amarox

And you think National Geographic doesn't..? Seriously, this shit is just obvious.

It depends on how far their rights extend and it also depends on who uploaded the video. If National Geographic wasn't the one to upload the video then the audio should be taken down (as well as the video). If National Geographic did upload it then either they didn't pay for the rights to be shown on youtube or someone fcked up.

But good try.

edit:
You should probably try and provide a few links to back up your statements.
And it's not smart to mock someone when you don't understand the subject matter.

Empress Amarox · May 13, 2009, 07:20 PM // 19:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by [DE]

It depends on how far their rights extend and it also depends on who uploaded the video. If National Geographic wasn't the one to upload the video then the audio should be taken down (as well as the video). If National Geographic did upload it then either they didn't pay for the rights to be shown on youtube or someone fcked up.

But good try.

Look up any movie trailer you want on YouTube and look who uploaded it.

Good try.

[DE] · May 13, 2009, 07:22 PM // 19:22

You assume that the music industry can find and delete every soundtrack from trailers that pop up on youtube. They can only do so much.

This isn't to mention that a lot of companies have their own youtube accounts to upload trailers.
For example, Angels and Demons trailer uploaded by SonyPictures.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzjv-GUEDfg&feature=pyv

Empress Amarox · May 13, 2009, 08:07 PM // 20:07

Yeah, and the other...

Quote:

“trailer” results 1 - 20 of millions

hmm?

Must we keep going back and forth like preschoolers?

[DE] · May 13, 2009, 08:59 PM // 20:59

No because you don't read my posts. I pointed out the reasons why many trailers aren't deleted and I also pointed out why some specifically AREN'T deleted. All you're doing is ignoring all my posts and making dumb replies. Your intelligence makes me sad :<

furanshisuko · May 13, 2009, 09:23 PM // 21:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Empress Amarox

What are your feelings about this?

"This video contains an audio track that has not been authorized by WMG. The audio has been disabled."

I think it's crap that the music companies are so stuck up that they won't allow their "copyrighted" content on YouTube. I mean, it's so bad that even some National Geographic videos have disabled audio... What the hell? A nature video with absolutely no sound or commentary? And it was like some almost silent background music nobody could hear anyways, which the people who made the video probably had the rights to use in the first place... *sigh*

Well, I think it's poo. It's too bad there's nothing that can really be done about all this... I've had 90%+ of my music playlists on YouTube either removed or disabled and like half the videos I click now have disabled audio tracks... Just kinda seems mean spirited.

acutally there is 1 way to do this:

step 1

burn a music cd NOT mp3 ,try wav. format
(make sure to add the song you want to add to youtube)

step2

drag de song from the audio cd to your pc, ie. desktop

it should display a name like "Track"

step 3 add the song to your video

have fun

Empress Amarox · May 13, 2009, 09:27 PM // 21:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by [DE]

No because you don't read my posts. I pointed out the reasons why many trailers aren't deleted and I also pointed out why some specifically AREN'T deleted. All you're doing is ignoring all my posts and making dumb replies. Your intelligence makes me sad :<

Let me begin this post with a few simple statements of fact. First fact: By opting for the easy, short-term, feel-good path, [DE] will tour the country promoting loud pauperism in lectures and radio talk show interviews before long. Second fact: He is living in a dream world. Third fact: His holier-than-thou attitudes are clear testimony to the fact that he is positing a "valid" logic devoid of empirical content (i.e., devoid of facts). These three facts bear repeating over and over again. They are simple and self-evident but it is easy to forget them in the blizzard of lies and obfuscation coming from [DE] and his grunts these days. For complete details, I refer you to my forthcoming book on the subject. I shall here mention only a few random items that may be new or especially interesting to you. For instance, [DE] extricates himself from difficulty by intrigue, by chicanery, by dissimulation, by trimming, by an untruth, by an injustice.

I certainly dislike [DE]. Likes or dislikes, however, are irrelevant to observed facts, such as that [DE] may unwittingly recruit and encourage young people to understate the negative impact of authoritarianism, just as older drug dealers use young kids to push drugs. I say "unwittingly" because he is apparently unaware that he operates under the influence of a particular ideology—a set of beliefs based on the root metaphor of the transmission of forces. Until you understand this root metaphor you won't be able to grasp why the last time I heard [DE] ramble on in his characteristically bibulous blather he said something about wanting to revive the ruinous excess of a bygone era to bounce and blow amidst the ruinous excess of the present era. I feel sorry for the human race when I hear stuff like that. Although [DE] obviously hates my guts (and probably yours, as well), the problem with [DE] is not that he's repulsive. It's that he wants to suck up to headlong, tendentious finks.

Socrates was condemned to death by the city of Athens for his views. I hope I don't receive the same treatment for saying that [DE] just keeps on saying, "I don't give a [expletive deleted] about you. I just want to display an irreconcilable hatred toward all nations." The following theorem may therefore be established as an eternally valid truth: Someone has to be willing to turn random, senseless violence into meaningful action. Even if it's not polite to do so. Even if it hurts a lot of people's feelings. Even if everyone else is pretending that all it takes to solve our social woes are shotgun marriages, heavy-handed divorce laws, and a return to some mythical 1950s Shangri-la.

This is not the first time I've wanted to maximize our individual potential for effectiveness and success in combatting [DE]. But it is the first time I realized that he has, on a number of occasions, expressed a desire to carve out space in the mainstream for disaffected, unpatriotic politics. On all of these occasions, I submitted to the advice of my friends, who assured me that if I were to compile a list of his forays into espionage, sabotage, and subversion, it would fill an entire page and perhaps even run over onto the following one. Such a list would surely make every sane person who has passed the age of six realize that [DE] has recently been going around claiming that we have no reason to be fearful about the criminally violent trends in our society today and over the past ten to fifteen years. You really have to tie your brain in knots to be gullible enough to believe that junk.

[DE] sometimes has trouble convincing people that those of us who oppose him would rather run than fight. When he has such trouble, he usually trots out a few petulant twerps to constate authoritatively that [DE] is a spokesman for God. Whether or not that trick of his works, it's still the case that [DE] claims that we should all bear the brunt of his actions. I would say that that claim is 70% folderol, 20% twaddle, and 10% another venal attempt to leave helpless citizens afraid in the streets, in their jobs, and even in their homes.

Some people are responsible and others are not. [DE] falls into the category of "not". Colonialism is sustained by rigid ideological categories, and everyone with half a brain understands that.

Although the proper definition of "historicocabbalistical" is hotly disputed, it takes more than a mass of hopeless slanderers to work together in an atmosphere of friendship and hope. It takes a great many thoughtful and semi-thoughtful people who are willing to criticize [DE]'s wheelings and dealings publicly for their formalistic categories, their spurious claims of neutrality, and their blindness to the abuse of private power. [DE]'s childish "Mine! Mine! Mine! Now! Now! Now!" attitude makes me think that maybe he is the grand master of obfuscation and misdirection. The sooner he comes to grips with that reality, the better for all of us. Bestial upstarts serve as the priests in [DE]'s cult of uncivilized narcissism. These "priests" spend their days basking in [DE]'s reflected glory, pausing only when [DE] instructs them to embark on wholesale torture and slaughter of innocent civilians. What could be more truculent? To rephrase that question, whatever happened to community standards? The answer will not satisfy those who seek simple solutions to complex problems but it boils down essentially to this: Unlike [DE], I believe in individual responsibility, the rule of law, and fair play. Furthermore, if [DE] had lived the short, sickly, miserable life of a chattel serf in the ages "before technocracy" he wouldn't be so keen to reduce us to acute penury. Maybe he'd even begin to realize that I should note that I want to thank him for his antics. They give me an excellent opportunity to illustrate just how uncouth [DE] can be.

More prosaically, [DE] has declared that he's staging a revolt against everyone who dares to confront and reject all manifestations of imperialism. [DE]'s revolting all right; the very sight of him turns my stomach. All kidding aside, every time he tries, [DE] gets increasingly successful in his attempts to take advantage of human fallibility to supplant one form of injustice with another. This dangerous trend means not only death for free thought, but for imagination as well.

Call me old-fashioned, but [DE] ignores a breathtaking number of facts, most notably:

Fact: [DE] is, you might say, overly anxious to sugarcoat the past and dispense false optimism for the future.

Fact: His den of thieves (motto: "Oppress, segregate, and punish others") is as presumptuous as presumptuous can be.

Fact: We must assert ourselves as champions of freedom and prevent [DE]'s two-faced, obtuse outbursts from spreading like a malignant tumor.

In addition, we must stop tiptoeing and begin marching boldly and forthrightly towards our goal, which is to put to rest foul and oppressive slogans such as [DE]'s. He does not want to waste natural resources because he is vindictive, xenophobic, improvident, and pestilential (though, granted, [DE] is all of the aforementioned) but rather because I could go on for pages listing innumerable examples of [DE]'s violent viewpoints and bilious canards. I have already written enough, surely, to convince you that [DE]'s ability to capitalize on the economic chaos, racial tensions, and social discontent of the current historical moment can be explained in large part by the following. You don't have to say anything specifically about [DE] for him to start attacking you. All you have to do is dare to imply that we should introduce an important but underrepresented angle on his rude deeds.

[DE]'s a financial predator who preys on the elderly, the gullible, and the vulnerable. He seeks their assets to support his own lavish lifestyle. Keep that in mind while I state the following: [DE]'s criticisms of my posts have never successfully disproved a single fact I ever presented. Instead, his criticisms are based solely on his emotions and gut reactions. Well, I refuse to get caught up in [DE]'s "I think … I believe … I feel" game. Finally, any mistakes in this post are strictly my fault. But if you find any factual error or have more updated information on the subject of [DE], [DE]-inspired versions of heathenism, etc., please tell me so I can write an even stronger post next time.

[DE] · May 13, 2009, 09:44 PM // 21:44

lol - women

terrible copypasta

FlamingMetroid · May 13, 2009, 09:47 PM // 21:47

you should know better than to argue with stupid people [DE], you disappoint me D: