84

A malicious law enformement officer or a criminal can exploit copyright laws to prevent criminal activities to be posted on mainstream platforms. Read the article for a real life example.

No matter your stance on copyright laws, I think we can all agree there needs to be an exemption to copyright laws where if a video or audio recording contains copyrighted material but also contains unrelated content (like police violence or other criminal activity), then that should be exempt from copyright laws. Beside, who wants to listen to music that also has a cop screeching in the background, therefore, this wouldn't affect music subscriptions services in any way.

Even with such law, I don't have hopes of youtube changing their policies. I'm honestly sad for the future.

top 19 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] DebatableRaccoon@lemmy.ca 19 points 1 year ago

Typical scum being scum.

[-] TWeaK@lemm.ee 15 points 1 year ago

So in other words, the officer is committing copyright infringement by publicly playing music for others to hear.

[-] darcy@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago

i mean... is it illegal to play music in public (not counting noise disturbance)

of course the cop is evil though

[-] TWeaK@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago

Playing music in public isn't illegal, if you're playing it for yourself. Playing music for the purpose of sharing it with other people would be though.

Think of it like a movie. You can watch a DVD at home no problem, but if you set up a cinema out in the park and open to the public, that would be copyright infringement. The intent is what makes the offense.

[-] mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

It's a civil case, but technically yes.

[-] darcy@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

There's a good reason why ACAB is sprayed everywhere around the world.

[-] Bison1911@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 year ago

Everyone should watch Tom Scott's video on copyright law to see just how outdated the laws currently are and how that hurts online platforms' ability to fairly moderate this.

[-] Kissaki@feddit.de 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)
[-] PipedLinkBot@feddit.rocks 4 points 1 year ago

Here is an alternative Piped link(s): https://piped.video/watch?v=1Jwo5qc78QU

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source, check me out at GitHub.

[-] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 1 year ago

I remember this bullshit. Fuck any cop who does this.

[-] JBloodthorn@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

Not literally, though. Whoever reads this, you can do better.

[-] 4onTheFloor@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

I could agree to this. YouTube definitely shouldn't be doing their copyright bullshit for shit like this. Cop knows exactly what he's doing. Prick.

On another note, you could probably use some audio software to remove the audio altogether, attempt to separate the music and the vocals from the cop and people talking. Remove the song, reapply the audio to the video and upload. I've done it before but the quality never came out as good in the end. Pain in the ass but there's definitely ways around this.

[-] jormaig@programming.dev 1 points 1 year ago

Doesn't this usually fall under the Fair Use policy? Like, how you are allowed to post copirighted content if you are using it as a joke or as a comentator and such?

[-] golli@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago

I think you are right in theory, but it looks very different in practice. These automatic takedowns are done by the company hosting the files without any official legal regulator getting involved.

The rightsholder of such music licenses usually have vastly more resources and there are no negative consequences for false flags. This means it is better to overregulate which leads to a form of censorship.

[-] 001100010010@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 year ago

I'm not a lawyer, but they need to make it absolutely clear that recordings that include copyright music shouldn't be copyright infringement unless the recording is solely containing the music and nothing else. Like if someone is talking over it, it should be automatically exempt. (Most pirates wouldn't talk over music just to avoid copyright laws. Most pirates are gonna want the original, high quality version, not one where there are people talking over it.)

I think such a change would be acceptable to most people, even those who are against piracy.

[-] bouh@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Death to copyrights!

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 10 Jul 2023
84 points (98.8% liked)

Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ

54716 readers
227 users here now

⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.

Rules • Full Version

1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy

2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote

3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs

4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others



Loot, Pillage, & Plunder

📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):


💰 Please help cover server costs.

Ko-Fi Liberapay
Ko-fi Liberapay

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS