Originally posted by Leon Retro
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Battle of the Ports
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Yakumo View PostOh, they will. Victor Japan have even gotten my Ridge Racer video banned in certain countries. Here's the video. can it be seen in the UK?
I can watch your Ridge Racer video -- and the music is included. Watching it reminded me how much I dislike Ridge Racer 64.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Leon Retro View PostIt would be the same as Nintendo claiming the Super Mario Bros. tune in a review video.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Yakumo View PostThey demonetised one of my videos because I showed 20 seconds of NES Mario.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Team Andromeda View Post#respect
There needs to be respect for people making review videos -- and YouTube needs to use fairness and common sense when it comes to people making claims for any music included in such videos. People shouldn't have to worry about making gaming documentaries and review videos
Comment
-
Originally posted by Leon Retro View PostPlus: #fairness #common sense
There needs to be respect for people making review videos -- and YouTube needs to use fairness and common sense when it comes to people making claims for any music included in such videos. People shouldn't have to worry about making gaming documentaries and review videos
Comment
-
Originally posted by Team Andromeda View Postand with looking to target Rom sites (that host old games) makes me sick.
Probably a 'Rimmer' from Red Dwarf type of person.Last edited by Leon Retro; 16-02-2019, 17:42.
Comment
-
'Article 11' and 'article 13' have been accused of being a 'meme ban' that could lead YouTube to ban Europeans from uploading videos
Articles 11 and 13, they make a final vote on it late next month.
It's supposed to put legal rules in place throughout the EU to protect online copyrighted property. It means that 'platforms' will have to pay a fee anytime a link to another site is created. It also could mean that Youtube would have to remove all user generated content that includes copyrighted material that the creator of the video doesn't own, essentially shutting down half the website. If I'm correct in understanding, I wouldn't even be able to link to these articles in the forum, post screenshots etc because Bordersdown doesn't own the copyright to any of them.
The entire thing is about as well thought out as you'd expect:
Article 13 of the EU's new copyright directive has sparked huge controversy online, with YouTube campaigning strongly against the proposal. We explain why
An example in this link is that if you had a video of your kids playing in a sports event you couldn't upload the video online because you wouldn't have the rights to the event.
The usual thing where groups ABC think it'll result in more money for them but groups XYZ know how the internet works, how impossible it is to implement and how severely damaging it would be.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Superman Falls View Posthttps://www.independent.co.uk/life-s...-a8779101.html
Articles 11 and 13, they make a final vote on it late next month.
It's supposed to put legal rules in place throughout the EU to protect online copyrighted property. It means that 'platforms' will have to pay a fee anytime a link to another site is created. It also could mean that Youtube would have to remove all user generated content that includes copyrighted material that the creator of the video doesn't own, essentially shutting down half the website. If I'm correct in understanding, I wouldn't even be able to link to these articles in the forum, post screenshots etc because Bordersdown doesn't own the copyright to any of them.
The entire thing is about as well thought out as you'd expect:
Article 13 of the EU's new copyright directive has sparked huge controversy online, with YouTube campaigning strongly against the proposal. We explain why
An example in this link is that if you had a video of your kids playing in a sports event you couldn't upload the video online because you wouldn't have the rights to the event.
The usual thing where groups ABC think it'll result in more money for them but groups XYZ know how the internet works, how impossible it is to implement and how severely damaging it would be.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Superman Falls View PostIt also could mean that Youtube would have to remove all user generated content that includes copyrighted material that the creator of the video doesn't own, essentially shutting down half the website. If I'm correct in understanding, I wouldn't even be able to link to these articles in the forum, post screenshots etc because Bordersdown doesn't own the copyright to any of them.
When it comes to using bits of copyrighted music and video footage, I think it should be fine in the context of a review, documentary, satire etc.. People should be able to use music and video footage if it's just for illustrative purposes. I think government should be supporting that and standing against corporations who want to completely stop people from making review and documentary videos.
Hopefully common sense and fairness will prevail. It would be a very sad day if things get worse rather than better when it comes to this sort of thing.
Comment
-
It's pretty much exactly as you describe, so for something like Bordersdown it would effectively mean a ban on links, videos and screenshots
Apparently, the UK government would prefer something even more restrictive than what the EU has planned. It's just the typical thinking MP's etc come up with, they have no concept of how the internet works and keep thinking they can command some kind of control over it that they never will
Comment
Comment