RonPaul2008dotcom account closed by YouTube

[angelatc]

It's only "ridiculous" to the crowd that thinks someone else's time, work and money belongs to them too, with no compensation.

Original works should earn money, but expecting an endless revenue stream once it's released into the wild comes at the cost of internet freedom. Congratulations.

 

[notsure]

Half of my subscribers now are terminated accounts.

 

[fisharmor]

As somebody who makes his living on the creation and distribution of intellectual property, this assertion is highly offensive to me and rather ridiculous.

We all use the product of our minds to make our living. Just because some of those products are more easily resembled in the physical world than others doesn't mean that they are any less deserving of being protected from theft or unprotected reproduction.

We're supposed to be supporters of property rights, people.

I await your lawsuit.

 

[CJPrinter]

To be honest, some of the grassroots supporters who create video file claims against the other Ron Paul grassroots accounts. It seems these supporters value their own video as if it is a commodity and get pissed when someone shares it via a secondary or alternative account that doesn't belong to the original source (their account).

I had a video someone created hosted on my account. It went viral with more than 30,000 views in less than a week. The video on his account had a few hundred views. He was upset and reported me to Youtube. I was asked to remove it in order for my account to be reinstated. I currently host hundreds of Paul video content. Of course I had to remove it and we lost the momentum and its potential to go viral. Seems some people are more interested in their personal recognition than the success of their message and the betterment of the campaign. No telling how far that viral movement could have gone. As it stands his uploaded version of the video has yet to surpass 2,000 views.

Not just grassroots...

One of the BIG PAC's issued a take-down notice to a project I was involved with because our site looked too much like theirs. What SUCKS with this mindset is we are basically infighting. I can understand intellectual property when personal profit is involved, but when we are all aiming at the same goal and the only funds it affects are in line with it, this type of BS just hurts us all.

 

[TheGrinch]

As somebody who makes his living on the creation and distribution of intellectual property, this assertion is highly offensive to me and rather ridiculous.

We all use the product of our minds to make our living. Just because some of those products are more easily resembled in the physical world than others doesn't mean that they are any less deserving of being protected from theft or unprotected reproduction.

We're supposed to be supporters of property rights, people.

Umm, perhaps you should take a look at the Fair Use Doctrine.

If it's not for profit and is for educational purposes only, then you are supposed to be covered by that, otherwise it prevents the spread of information.

What a shame.

 

[Constitutional Paulicy]

Not just grassroots...

One of the BIG PAC's issued a take-down notice to a project I was involved with because our site looked too much like theirs. What SUCKS with this mindset is we are basically infighting. I can understand intellectual property when personal profit is involved, but when we are all aiming at the same goal and the only funds it affects are in line with it, this type of BS just hurts us all.

Sorry to hear that. It really seems not only pointless but ridiculous.

 

[angelatc]

Umm, perhaps you should take a look at the Fair Use Doctrine.

If it's not for profit and is for educational purposes only, then you are supposed to be covered by that, otherwise it prevents the spread of information.

What a shame.

The problem that I see is that it's hard to distinguish entertainment from education. And even harder for YouTube to make the call. For example, if I take a clip, host it on YouTube, then blog about it, it's pretty clear that I'm attempting to educate somebody about something. But how does YouTube even know my commentary even exists?

 

[azxd]

As somebody who makes his living on the creation and distribution of intellectual property, this assertion is highly offensive to me and rather ridiculous.

We all use the product of our minds to make our living. Just because some of those products are more easily resembled in the physical world than others doesn't mean that they are any less deserving of being protected from theft or unprotected reproduction.

We're supposed to be supporters of property rights, people.

YES we are, but some seem to not grasp this aspect very well, and instead choose a more socialistic perspective of wanting things for free, while not understanding that ones freedom ends where anothers freedom begins.

 

[azxd]

Original works should earn money, but expecting an endless revenue stream once it's released into the wild comes at the cost of internet freedom. Congratulations.

What is your understanding of copyright laws, who they are designed to protect, and for how long ?

Would you be opposed to all information, anywhere having a charge placed upon it ?

That's what will happen IF people keep thinking they can stealing another individuals work, just because it is available.

 

[jmdrake]

Putting all of your videos in the YouTube basket, while convenient, is not strategically smart. Anyone doing a video channel should have multiple accounts on different networks and upload his videos simultaneously to all of them. That way if your YouTube account is shut down your Vimeo/Dailymotion etc still has the info.

Here's how:

 

[azxd]

I await your lawsuit.

Don't you really mean you await the destruction and/or control of many things, because you think you deserve what someone else creates.possesses ?

Remember that you are willing to let additional measures restrict your ability, because you want to take from another

Is it wrong to steal from another ?
Does this violate the principles of liberty ?

 

[azxd]

Umm, perhaps you should take a look at the Fair Use Doctrine.

If it's not for profit and is for educational purposes only, then you are supposed to be covered by that, otherwise it prevents the spread of information.

What a shame.

The perfect socialist excuse ... Everything should be free, because someone might learn something.

Talk about a great way to stifle creativity.

 

[1stAmendguy]

Ron Paul YouTube Channel Shutdown Due to Copyright Infringement

http://z6mag.com/politics/ron-paul-...own-due-to-copyright-infringement-168502.html

 

[heavenlyboy34]

Yet another reason why the concept of "Intellectual Property" is ridiculous.

+a zillion

 

[jmdrake]

Don't you really mean you await the destruction and/or control of many things, because you think you deserve what someone else creates.possesses ?

Remember that you are willing to let additional measures restrict your ability, because you want to take from another

Is it wrong to steal from another ?
Does this violate the principles of liberty ?

How do you "possess" and idea? That's where the whole IP thing breaks down. It's one thing for someone to break into your home and try to steal your stuff. It's another thing if your idea is spread across the planet, and you're trying to control what others do with it once it is in their possession. Now you have to invade their home (computer hard disk whatever) and try to take possession of what you were no longer possessing.

Anyway, this is short sited. There are other ways to make sure content creators are paid other than government force. It just takes a bit of imagination. I saw a video (on YouTube of course) where someone talked about the idea of content creators selling a bit of their screen real estate to advertisers. (Wish I kept a link so I could post it). Under that kind of scenario, it doesn't matter how many times people copy it. In fact the more copies made the better.

 

[Ivash]

You can complain to the Youtube administration- but aside from that I am not sure what you can do.

 

[jmdrake]

The perfect socialist excuse ... Everything should be free, because someone might learn something.

Talk about a great way to stifle creativity.

Which was more creative? This?



or this?

 

[azxd]

The problem that I see is that it's hard to distinguish entertainment from education. And even harder for YouTube to make the call. For example, if I take a clip, host it on YouTube, then blog about it, it's pretty clear that I'm attempting to educate somebody about something. But how does YouTube even know my commentary even exists?

This mentality will be the demise of places like youtube.

Youtube is not an Internet police force, but they are held liable for what they allow on their website, and they do not have the ability to read minds.
Therefore they cannot determine your intent to educate someone.

Youtube is no different than the ronpaulforums.

If the owner allows people to actively pursue a plan to overthrow the government, or plan anything that could harm another, the owner WILL be held liable for anything that happens.
They can also be held liable for not reporting said activity to proper authorities, and they can also be held liable for permenantly deleting such activity, if a subpeona is issued against the owner, and it can be shown that evidience has been removed.

Am I upset over the suspension of the account mentioned in the OP ?
Sure !!!
Has anyone contacted the campaign and asked why ?
I doubt it, but do enjoy the diversionary direction this thread is taking.

 

[azxd]

Putting all of your videos in the YouTube basket, while convenient, is not strategically smart. Anyone doing a video channel should have multiple accounts on different networks and upload his videos simultaneously to all of them. That way if your YouTube account is shut down your Vimeo/Dailymotion etc still has the info.

If you want control ... create it, and host it yourself

The majority of everything political could be scrubbed from all of these hosting sites, just by a complaint from C-SPAN, and one or two other news stations.

 

[azxd]

How do you "possess" and idea? That's where the whole IP thing breaks down. It's one thing for someone to break into your home and try to steal your stuff. It's another thing if your idea is spread across the planet, and you're trying to control what others do with it once it is in their possession. Now you have to invade their home (computer hard disk whatever) and try to take possession of what you were no longer possessing.

Anyway, this is short sited. There are other ways to make sure content creators are paid other than government force. It just takes a bit of imagination. I saw a video (on YouTube of course) where someone talked about the idea of content creators selling a bit of their screen real estate to advertisers. (Wish I kept a link so I could post it). Under that kind of scenario, it doesn't matter how many times people copy it. In fact the more copies made the better.

Possessing an idea is actually very simple ... Do not share it until you have legal safeguards in place.
During the process, you have people sign disclosure statements that safeguard what you are about to explain.

Research patent laws ... They are much more easy to understand than copyright laws, yet both work under the same principle.
Protection of an individuals or companies works for a period of time.

To not do this, is to freely give the idea away.