Respect Other People's Work and Don't Steal It

[BrendanWenzel]

I've noticed a huge problem in the Ron Paul community of downloading other people's YouTube videos and then reuploading them on their own accounts with 0 attribution to the original creator that made the video. You know what they call this? COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT

Blows my mind that we talk about respecting people's private property and then do things like this. My time is considered my private property and when someone puts a lot of time into making a video for Ron Paul, it's wrong to take their video to promote your own agenda. There are ways to share videos you really like. It's called making a playlist and making the video a favorite.

Biggest thing is when people download the videos from the official channel and then reupload them with their own links in the description instead of the official RonPaul2012.com (look at the RonPaul2008dotcom channel for an example). Do you realize you're actually hurting the campaign by doing this? You're taking views away from the official video and new subscribers away from the official channel. Not to mention all the traffic that's now going to your site instead of being introduced to the actual campaign. By siphoning off views from the official campaign videos, you're taking away from their total view counts and thus the channel's authority.

Personally, this is one thing that is completely unacceptable to me. If you want more videos on your channel, contribute to the movement by making unique videos that help further the cause. Unless you first have permission, don't use other people's on your channel. Simple as that.

 

[Bruno]

Brb, I'm going to get some popcorn for the discussion on intellectual property and copyright laws.




Back - I can see how this would upset someone for sure that put the hard work into it.

 

[belian78]

And yet people are still able to watch the videos and experience Ron Paul. Even though the message isn't being sent by the official campaign, people are getting it all the same. That's what matters, right?

 

[IndianaPolitico]

I think the biggest example is the new "The One" ad from the campaign. Right after it was uploaded, the RonPaul2008dotcom channel uploaded it as their own as usual. It took away over 150,000 views! That is alot of traffic lost.

 

[TheTyke]

This is a really good point... re-uploading videos seems to hurt viral potential by diluting the view count. It's absolutely counterproductive but it seems almost standard procedure now. I don't understand why people even do this. Are some deliberately trying to undermine us?

 

[r3volution]

i understand what you are saying , but it is not necessarily COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT .

 

[Romulus]

I agree that one video with 500k views is better than 100 videos with 50 views.

 

[specsaregood]

Brb, I'm going to get some popcorn for the discussion on intellectual property and copyright laws.

Better bring enough for everybody.

 

[BrendanWenzel]

I think the biggest example is the new "The One" ad from the campaign. Right after it was uploaded, the RonPaul2007dotcom channel uploaded it as their own as usual. It took away over 150,000 views! That is alot of traffic lost.

And where do they send the traffic? To their own landing page of course. It's ridiculous.

i understand what you are saying , but it is not necessarily COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT .

Yeah, it's not necessarily always copyright infringement. News interviews I wouldn't consider infringement. But when someone edits stuff and make it a unique piece of work, it falls into that category.

 

[teacherone]

yay! another 50 pages!

in b4 conza.

 

[pipewerKz]

I don't think its any kind of property right. You are displaying a video to potentionally billions of people on a public site, the only way to keep an idea private is to never show it to anyone.

That being said...

Likes:
Videos sometimes have better titles and are better to share because they will attract more people.
Videos are more available to pop up as a recommended video.

Dislikes:
Not putting a link to RonPaul2012.com
Not giving credit to the original uploader
Takes away views from the offical upload site.

You can't forget about the fact that channels like MoxNews always upload Ron Paul interviews regardless of whether or not the campaign or other channels do. Are we to ask them to stop? People can do what they want to spread the message, but be respectful to other peoples productivity and don't pass it off as your own.

 

[FSP-Rebel]

I'm protesting this thread right outta the gate this time

 

[brushfire]

Does posting to youtube imply some sort of copyright?

I had thought it was the public domain... People have copied my videos and just added a character or something to the title. In my line of "political business" that's called increasing surface area (exposure). I agree that it shows poor character/taste to not cite the original sources. I think that an a$$hole takes someone else's video and portrays it as their own... Still, a fond friend of the good Dr Paul once said: "There is no limit to what you can accomplish if you don't care who gets the credit."

I say suck it up, and keep producing material that people want - you must be doing something right.

 

[MJU1983]

I think the biggest example is the new "The One" ad from the campaign. Right after it was uploaded, the RonPaul2008dotcom channel uploaded it as their own as usual. It took away over 150,000 views! That is alot of traffic lost.

That one (pun) bothered me as well. I mean, click favorite and let Dr. Paul get the hits.

 

[IndianaPolitico]

That one (pun) bothered me as well. I mean, click favorite and let Dr. Paul get the hits.

It is REALLY annoying when it happens to yourself. I uploaded a short film I worked on for months, and right away someone uploaded it as their own! I got it taken down, but it drove a good bit of traffic away from mine.

 

[teacherone]

It is REALLY annoying when it happens to yourself. I uploaded a short film I worked on for months, and right away someone uploaded it as their own! I got it taken down, but it drove a good bit of traffic away from mine.

so?

 

[BrendanWenzel]

You can't forget about the fact that channels like MoxNews always upload Ron Paul interviews regardless of whether or not the campaign or other channels do. Are we to ask them to stop? People can do what they want to spread the message, but be respectful to other peoples productivity and don't pass it off as your own.

Absolutely not. Like I said above, interviews wouldn't fall into this category. It's more about videos that were obviously edited and took someone time to make.

I'm protesting this thread right outta the gate this time

Cool, I got a protester!!

Does posting to youtube imply some sort of copyright? I had thought it was the public domain...

If you want to allow people to use your video, then you can mark it with the creative commons license. Here's how to do it: http://www.youtube.com/t/creative_commons

 

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Absolutely not. Like I said above, interviews wouldn't fall into this category. It's more about videos that were obviously edited and took someone time to make.



Cool, I got a protester!!



If you want to allow people to use your video, then you can mark it with the creative commons license. Here's how to do it: http://www.youtube.com/t/creative_commons

How exactly is taking other's clips and editing them together any different? I would think a Ron Paul supporter would like to see the message get to the most people -- so I don't see how restrictions will spread the message faster, or to more people. As far as IP, once you put it out in the public domain you can't honestly expect to control other's property can you? They haven't stolen anything from you -- you still have your video and people can still view it at the same place if they want. You restricting the use of anothers property is a violation of property rights. It would be like complaining that people are replicating your replicator machine that you patented and sold. It's patently absurd! (Ha pun intended)

 

[dusman]

i understand what you are saying , but it is not necessarily COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT .

It absolutely, without a doubt is. Copyrights are established as soon as the creator makes anything that comes from their own mind, whether explicitly declared or not even considered from the originator.

I second this motion. It's a very serious problem and not only to do with videos. In my case, one of the sample ads I created that used a photo comp (copyrighted) was then used elsewhere, putting me and the re-distributor at risk of copyright infringement.

There should be no excuse whatsoever from the community on this.

We need to patrol our areas and when this occurs, we should all take up the responsibility to report these to the original creator and ask them to communicate with those who are imposing on their copyrights.

 

[LibertyEagle]

I've noticed a huge problem in the Ron Paul community of downloading other people's YouTube videos and then reuploading them on their own accounts with 0 attribution to the original creator that made the video. You know what they call this? COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT

Blows my mind that we talk about respecting people's private property and then do things like this. Time is considered private property and when someone puts a lot of time into making a video for Ron Paul, it's wrong to take their video to promote your own agenda. There are ways to share videos you really like. It's called making a playlist and making the video a favorite.

Biggest thing is when people download the videos from the official channel and then reupload them with their own links in the description instead of the official RonPaul2012.com (look at the RonPaul2008dotcom channel for an example). Do you realize you're actually hurting the campaign by doing this? You're taking views away from the official video and new subscribers away from the official channel. Not to mention all the traffic that's now going to your site instead of being introduced to the actual campaign. By siphoning off views from the official campaign videos, you're taking away from their total view counts and thus the channel's authority.

Personally, this is one thing that is completely unacceptable to me. If you want more videos on your channel, contribute to the movement by making unique videos that help further the cause. Unless you first have permission, don't use other people's on your channel. Simple as that.

I totally agree.