SilvaGunner got banned from YouTube

[big giant circles]

You're still kind of a douche. But thanks for clearing shit up for me.

Not quite sure how I qualify as a douche because I pointed out that you were ignorant on a subject. Do you even know what ignorant means?

Ignorant: adj. "Lacking education or knowledge."

You lacked knowledge. I and others educated you. You resorted to name calling. And somehow I'm the douche here.

'Atta boy.

[ftninja]

while you were looking up 'ignorant', you should have also looked up 'condescension'.

taken from dictionary.com:

con·de·scen·sion

/ˌkɒndəˈsɛnʃən/ Show Spelled[kon-duh-sen-shuhn]

–noun 1. an act or instance of condescending.

2. behavior that is patronizing or condescending.

3. voluntary assumption of equality with a person regarded as inferior.

I might need to fix my sarcasm detector, but from what I understand, you took my ignorance as inferiority. So, I became defensive and belligerent.

[big giant circles]

If I wanted to be condescending, I would have taken cheap shots at you. Instead, I merely pointed out the flaws in your understanding and corrected them and gave examples. Hell I even threw in a smiley. Sorry you took my replies that way. Not sure what else to tell you. If you can't stand to be corrected, do your research before posting your opinions I suppose.

[Bleck]

you're both being condescending to each other by implying the other doesn't know what condescending means

take this shit to pm

[Jillian Aversa]

^ What Bleck said.

Jimmy, you didn't have to start off your conversation by quoting him and then stating: "This made me lol." I think we can understand why someone would respond defensively to that.

Moving on... This news doesn't surprise me. It's kind of a bummer for judging purposes here since it'll make finding source tunes (as reference) more difficult, but we'll survive. ^_~ I agree with the decision. He should have known better, and so should others.

[Arrow]

Easy fix to that Jill: from now on, everyone must submit the source tune AND their remix in the file. Let's see how long it takes to break the submission e-mail. XD

[Rozovian]

I agree with the rest of your post Roz, but just out of curiousity, do you feel the same way about, say, movie or television soundtracks? (I'm only curious, not actually trying to push the discussion that way)

Just because you brought it up:

Buy the movie, buy the entire movie. Interviews, behind-the-scenes material, director's cut, soundtrack, the whole thing.So a bit different. Not sure why, here's what I can come up with atm:

Games can be so much more complex, and they're longer than movies anyway, so they're worth more than a trip to their movie theatre-equivalent single playthrough. Buy the movie, get the rest. Games, being so much more, don't need all the bonus stuff to sell, so it can be released for free. Games could diverge into multiple separate storylines (something movies don't usually do), each playthrough could be a significantly different experience, so there's a lot more value to a game disc (with "just" the game) than a movie disc with just a movie.

Those are my thoughts atm, not really something I've thought about much. (reading what I wrote before, the "pay for the game, pay for everything" thing is kind'a what I wanna see with movies and tv shows. meh, should sort these things out and blog about it, it'll probably make more sense then.)

[Dhsu]

Moving on... This news doesn't surprise me. It's kind of a bummer for judging purposes here since it'll make finding source tunes (as reference) more difficult, but we'll survive. ^_~ I agree with the decision. He should have known better, and so should others.

Grooveshark.

[Liontamer]

This whole discussion is based on the assumption that a game company or several game companies issued the YouTube copyright takedowns. That would be fine to argue about, except that's not what happened, as I pointed out earlier. It's a moot point.

FYI: Game companies did not issue the copyright takedowns that got SilvaGunner's channel YouTube suspended.

[Bleck]

yeah if anything the discussion should be around whether or not YouTube should take down videos or accounts for what apparently amounts to no reason at all

[EC2151]

I will say that, no, youtube should not do so.

Especially when channels like this and OSTation are oft-harassed by people posing as FAKE companies.

[Bleck]

I mean the recent Pokemon thing is a good example of a bunch of websites (and by extension hundreds or thousands of people) getting fucked over by trolls and pranksters

[big giant circles]

Just because you brought it up:

Buy the movie, buy the entire movie. Interviews, behind-the-scenes material, director's cut, soundtrack, the whole thing.So a bit different. Not sure why, here's what I can come up with atm:

Games can be so much more complex, and they're longer than movies anyway, so they're worth more than a trip to their movie theatre-equivalent single playthrough. Buy the movie, get the rest. Games, being so much more, don't need all the bonus stuff to sell, so it can be released for free. Games could diverge into multiple separate storylines (something movies don't usually do), each playthrough could be a significantly different experience, so there's a lot more value to a game disc (with "just" the game) than a movie disc with just a movie.

Those are my thoughts atm, not really something I've thought about much. (reading what I wrote before, the "pay for the game, pay for everything" thing is kind'a what I wanna see with movies and tv shows. meh, should sort these things out and blog about it, it'll probably make more sense then.)

fair enough, I'm not saying I'm for or against, necessarily, I was only curious.

[Enetirnel]

Moving on... This news doesn't surprise me. It's kind of a bummer for judging purposes here since it'll make finding source tunes (as reference) more difficult, but we'll survive. ^_~ I agree with the decision. He should have known better, and so should others.

My apologies for this, but as a long-time lurker on here I do respect everyone's thoughts on here and just thought I'd ask you this if it's alright...

In your opinion, would it have been a fair decision if he had sent messages or requests to the composers and/or companies to be allowed to upload them for reference purposes?

Just thought I'd ask as personally - I've been speaking to a few composers and/or official arrangers to get their permission to have it online for the sake of it to:

1) Be an online reference due to the main soundtrack in particularly being of a low print amount and no longer in print.

2) All involved in the soundtrack enjoy hearing that people like the music for it and due to the lack of quantity/general availability of it to have it online for fans of the game OR of the composers/arrangers work to enjoy as Capcom barely bothered with promotional work for it or the game in general and the chance of any re-releases are extremely unlikely to happen.

During the discussion when I asked the main composer if it would be fine to upload the tracks in the full-forum, if it would be permitted as long as I included all of the information, copyright free-use section and links to where it is found in pre-owned stock pages on Play-Asia, CDJapan and the like pointed out in English and Japanese via annotations - to which I provided an example by using the first track and the response was "Awesome!" - considering how humble and nice on the overall they all are I took it as permission being granted and uploaded it.

If SilvaGunner had done something similar in regards to the music, would it be the same opinion on that matter regarding video game music uploads? Or, would I also be one who should know better as I've taken the time to ask permission before proceeding?

[big giant circles]

Not that this actually answers your question, but I just wanted to throw out a reminder that "composers/arrangers" are often (and sadly) not the copyright owners.

[Enetirnel]

Not that this actually answers your question, but I just wanted to throw out a reminder that "composers/arrangers" are often (and sadly) not the copyright owners.

I do realize that, I have spoken with a few staff from the company and the general sort of feeling is that they don't really seem to care for the game and/or merchandise for it in question sadly.

So, with the other remaining composer who is still with the company responding rarely with comments that are more or less unsure I figured I would ask the more active ones involved on the project if they in their time with the company felt it would be alright considering the general approach to the game with the lack of marketing and that more or less the Japanese, American official pages for it are broken in parts and clearly abandoned.

More or less, I've asked the staff repeatedly and asked other staff not involved with the development if they could give some sort of general direction as to whom I would need to specifically contact at the company to which the general response is - e-mail/messages have been read, ignored, replied with they can't say/are unsure or they feel it should be fine.

So sadly, that's been the best I've been able to get out of the company I'm afraid.

[Jillian Aversa]

To answer your question, Enetirnel, Jimmy's response there is part of the equation: composers/arrangers are often not the copyright owners, but rather the companies who developed or produced the games.

If they are the copyright owners, though, and you've asked for their permission... no, I don't think it's wrong. However, you have to keep in mind that there will always be the risk of someone flagging the videos regardless - or YouTube taking them down by their own accord. Even if you write in the description or video itself that you received permission to upload it, anyone could claim to have done the same, so it would become nearly impossible to determine which claims are real and which aren't. Such is life. :/

[Enetirnel]

To answer your question, Enetirnel, Jimmy's response there is part of the equation: composers/arrangers are often not the copyright owners, but rather the companies who developed or produced the games.

If they are the copyright owners, though, and you've asked for their permission... no, I don't think it's wrong. However, you have to keep in mind that there will always be the risk of someone flagging the videos regardless - or YouTube taking them down by their own accord. Even if you write in the description or video itself that you received permission to upload it, anyone could claim to have done the same, so it would become nearly impossible to determine which claims are real and which aren't. Such is life. :/

Yes, the copyright regarding it is bit interesting as it's been copyrighted as the artist with the company's name included in brackets within half of the bits of information regarding it and the other is simply with the company - but the ones with simply the company have also had completely incorrect information oddly enough.

I have tried to find out more, it's a little bit tricky but even the main composer agreed that things may be done without them being aware of it in regards to the music so I've tried my best regarding getting proper permission for it and that's so far what has happened.

More or less after seeing how much they've been porting things or stating that things are being targeted at a wider range more or less for a better profit margin - I figured it would be best to ask since they're rather focused on the profit and some things could cause them to lose it.

Such as at the time I had also repeatedly reported copyrighted material being profited from and it's been blatantly ripped from concept art, music, voice acting and the like and from what I've seen no response or action was done when I had requested if there was say, an e-mail address of a staff member to contact regarding such copyright violations and/or to request for permission.

Though with what you've said, that's sad but true considering that the system on YouTube leaves a fair amount of questions unanswered until some sort of notice appears on the account regarding it.

Which is quite a shame on the overall seeing as more or less if there was general response to public requests/reports and the like between the staff and the people then it would clear some issues up before it happens due to some troll flagging something on YouTube simply because they can.

Anyway, thank you both for your opinion on this topic. ^^

[Jillian Aversa]

Yeah, maybe at some point they'll implement a copyright approval process or watermarking system so that approved content displays a special tag... I dunno. The music industry always seems to be one step behind when it comes to this stuff.

[Enetirnel]

Yeah, maybe at some point they'll implement a copyright approval process or watermarking system so that approved content displays a special tag... I dunno. The music industry always seems to be one step behind when it comes to this stuff.

A watermarking system or something of the manner as you've mentioned wouldn't exactly be hard for them to do considering the overlays to see what video quality it's in, the site of origin and that annotations can also be put as an overall.

More or less it could be an additional section of a video upload to have an approved content watermark somewhere on it that requires specific information from the company or a contact address and/or number to confirm and finalize it before it gets that watermark. *Shrugs* I don't know, there's a fair amount of good verification processes that could be implemented but they just haven't been in regards to things such as YouTube.

Sadly so, I do wish that something of the manner was implemented sooner than later as it does disappoint me when it comes to the troubles to organize, have approval and prove that approval to avoid having marks on accounts or things taken down.

[zircon]

I suppose that's the point of Creative Commons. It's designed to let people share their work freely (with varying levels of rights restriction.) I'd imagine at some point we'll see some sort of integration between CC and YT.

[Radiowar]

I think video game music should be free. Pay for the game, pay for everything. But... no.

i'm not sure this is right. when you pay for a video game, at most you are entitled to the music (and all other content) in the context it's presented in. the same goes for film. you wouldn't say that since you purchased a dvd that you own all the props used in a film.

it's hard to feel sympathy for the video game companies in this situation though, even though they are entirely within their rights blahblahblah. it's not as if people like silvagunner are taking soundtrack revenue away from them when most of the music he had posted were from soundtracks that were either long out of print or not available commercially in the first place.

[Rozovian]

i'm not sure this is right. when you pay for a video game, at most you are entitled to the music (and all other content) in the context it's presented in. the same goes for film. you wouldn't say that since you purchased a dvd that you own all the props used in a film.

Everything (on the disc), for personal use. Like I said, I need to think my position through and put it on my blog instead. If you got any cool thoughts about it, you can PM me (cool thoughts only! ).

[NegimaSonic]

Personally, I kind of think the same thing about the pay for the game = paid for the music already (I kind of wrote it before but meh...too long).

But now I just thought of another way of looking at this. If I applied the same thinking to the games models, that probably wouldn't be quite right. I mean buying say Halo Reach and being able to use the models for free...

Though as someone else wrote, if this was all just for personal use, I think it should still be ok. It's like when you buy DRM free music.

[DarkeSword]

Though as someone else wrote, if this was all just for personal use, I think it should still be ok. It's like when you buy DRM free music.

Not really, because when you buy DRM free music, you're buying DRM free music.