Copyright Infringement Reports (Review guidelines in post #1 before posting here)
- Thread starter Aaron Kennedy
- Start date
David Drummond
Member
You guys might want to check the following clip for video belonging to yourself or someone you know. I found about 9 seconds of some of my own video in there, and I am fairly sure one or two of those tornadoes were shot by chasers active on ST.
http://everythinglubbock.com/content/fulltext/?sid=e10a8275c82da797e6f1bc5fd8bb24ac&cid=5617
I am not sure at this point how long the video will be up. I have a backup copy however.
http://everythinglubbock.com/content/fulltext/?sid=e10a8275c82da797e6f1bc5fd8bb24ac&cid=5617
I am not sure at this point how long the video will be up. I have a backup copy however.
Brian Emfinger
EF4
I stumbled upon this site a few days ago:
http://www.extremeweathernet.com/index.php
I noticed the tornadovidoes.net video from May 4, 2008 on there without their copyright logo so I let them know and Reed confirmed he didn't know anything about that site. There aren't too many videos on there but many look familiar and some were certainly shot by members here. It also looks like many were uploaded by the same person:
http://www.extremeweathernet.com/seemore.php?load=membersvid&uid=21
http://www.extremeweathernet.com/index.php
I noticed the tornadovidoes.net video from May 4, 2008 on there without their copyright logo so I let them know and Reed confirmed he didn't know anything about that site. There aren't too many videos on there but many look familiar and some were certainly shot by members here. It also looks like many were uploaded by the same person:
http://www.extremeweathernet.com/seemore.php?load=membersvid&uid=21
Dennis Sherrod
EF5
====================================================
I immediately contacted this site about their posting of copyrighted materials. Below is the the site's spokeperson's response. Definitely a positive response. If your material is used on this site without your consent, please contact the below person at the listed email address to have it removed.
EDIT: It "appears" that at least one, maybe 2 of the 3 members at this site may be members from this site comparing bios. Only a possibility, but a good one.
====================================================
From: Mark Palmer ([email protected])
Sent: Thu 5/01/08 1:08 PM
To: [email protected]
Dennis,
We will be more than happy to remove the copyrighted videos that you feel are in violation, however, links to those videos would be helpful.
Mark
Name Dennis Sherrod
Email [email protected]
Original Message Type - Complaint
Comments
You are hereby notified via site email on this 1st day of May, 2008, that several of your video segments posted are in violation of the U.S. Copyright Code. It is in the best interest of all involved and aggrieved parties that these issues are resolved forthwith.
Regards,
Dennis Sherrod
Last edited by a moderator:
David Drummond
Member
You you can't really "notify" someone of copyright violation, unless it is your own copyright that was violated, and then you have to be very specific. In other words, you can't represent anyone but yourself unless someone else gave you permission in writing to represent them. Either way, you have to be very specific as to your(or the person you rep) ownership and where it's located on their website.
Dennis Sherrod
EF5
David,
If you are referring to me and what I sent to this site, then please reread what was written and sent to that site.
The wording is very specific of it's wording and is explicitly non-representative of any person, group, or entity. There was no mention of specific names, places, segments, etc that would place a particular violation upon one particular posting. (ie: "several of your video segments posted are in violation of the U.S. Copyright Code.")
(ie:If your material is used on this site without your consent, please contact the below person at the listed email address to have it removed.)
That statement expressly states that whomever may own any of the copyrighted materials should contact that person listed to have it removed.
And again, if your comments are directed at me and what I wrote, please explain and show me the law that states someone can not write a memo, letter, or other correspondence of the nature that I wrote. Also, please explain how what was writen affected you in any manner. Otherwise, please reread the "law" that you are referring to and be specific in your statements.
As you did not say who you are referring to, if this was not directed at me, then please disregard.
If you are referring to me and what I sent to this site, then please reread what was written and sent to that site.
The wording is very specific of it's wording and is explicitly non-representative of any person, group, or entity. There was no mention of specific names, places, segments, etc that would place a particular violation upon one particular posting. (ie: "several of your video segments posted are in violation of the U.S. Copyright Code.")
(ie:If your material is used on this site without your consent, please contact the below person at the listed email address to have it removed.)
That statement expressly states that whomever may own any of the copyrighted materials should contact that person listed to have it removed.
And again, if your comments are directed at me and what I wrote, please explain and show me the law that states someone can not write a memo, letter, or other correspondence of the nature that I wrote. Also, please explain how what was writen affected you in any manner. Otherwise, please reread the "law" that you are referring to and be specific in your statements.
As you did not say who you are referring to, if this was not directed at me, then please disregard.
David Drummond
Member
What I am saying Dennis, is sending a blanket "you screwed up" statement to them will serve no purpose. I am talking about the email you quoted above that you sent to them. Even if they wanted to, they can't act on that.
What I am saying is, they can only act on removing any copyrighted content if it is:
A) SPECIFICALLY outlined in the notice EXACTLY what content is in violation and EXACTLY where it's located on their site, and;
B) The notice comes from the copyright holder, or their authorized representative.
Reasons for this are mostly because, while we are pretty sure they have tons of violating content there, unless we are a representative of each particular piece of content, we don't really KNOW for sure that they don't have some agreement with the original copyright holder.
That would sorta be like your neighbor borrowing your lawnmower, and me assuming that he stole it and go and jump on him for it, because I didn't know you let him borrow it.
All that said, yeah, we (members here at ST) pretty much realize that most if not all of the videos on that site are probably ripped, it has to be up to the individual owners to contact them about it. I know a few people that don't even really care if their stuff gets passed around.
Hope that clears up what I was trying to say. I am telling you this coming from an owner myself of several websites and hosting many, many others. There are certain things we have to have per the Digital Millinium Copyright Act to be able to take said offending materials down. Otherwise, anyone and everyone could come along and say anything is violating copyright. I hope you understand what I am trying to tell you here.
What I am saying is, they can only act on removing any copyrighted content if it is:
A) SPECIFICALLY outlined in the notice EXACTLY what content is in violation and EXACTLY where it's located on their site, and;
B) The notice comes from the copyright holder, or their authorized representative.
Reasons for this are mostly because, while we are pretty sure they have tons of violating content there, unless we are a representative of each particular piece of content, we don't really KNOW for sure that they don't have some agreement with the original copyright holder.
That would sorta be like your neighbor borrowing your lawnmower, and me assuming that he stole it and go and jump on him for it, because I didn't know you let him borrow it.
All that said, yeah, we (members here at ST) pretty much realize that most if not all of the videos on that site are probably ripped, it has to be up to the individual owners to contact them about it. I know a few people that don't even really care if their stuff gets passed around.
Hope that clears up what I was trying to say. I am telling you this coming from an owner myself of several websites and hosting many, many others. There are certain things we have to have per the Digital Millinium Copyright Act to be able to take said offending materials down. Otherwise, anyone and everyone could come along and say anything is violating copyright. I hope you understand what I am trying to tell you here.
Dennis Sherrod
EF5
David,
Thanks. I do understand what you are saying also. Yet, what I did by sending this "notice", received the exact kind of response and cooperation that I believe we would all want from the owner/rep of the site. And..that is his statement of desire to resolve the errors.
This then places the engagement process of the owner of the videos to act with the owner / rep of that site if they so desire to have it removed.
One of my goals in initiating this process was to help stop some of the long, drawn out posts that we are all prone to slamming around here and to help see if we can nip some of these violations quickly.
I definitely realize what you have knowledge of in your field and what you do, as you nicely and adequately host my site also. But, I am also familiar with my area of practice even if I have not actively practiced in that field for a couple of years, thus my usage of very specific wording in what I sent to that site.
No hard feelings at all, David. Case Closed. (i hope)
Thanks. I do understand what you are saying also. Yet, what I did by sending this "notice", received the exact kind of response and cooperation that I believe we would all want from the owner/rep of the site. And..that is his statement of desire to resolve the errors.
This then places the engagement process of the owner of the videos to act with the owner / rep of that site if they so desire to have it removed.
One of my goals in initiating this process was to help stop some of the long, drawn out posts that we are all prone to slamming around here and to help see if we can nip some of these violations quickly.
I definitely realize what you have knowledge of in your field and what you do, as you nicely and adequately host my site also. But, I am also familiar with my area of practice even if I have not actively practiced in that field for a couple of years, thus my usage of very specific wording in what I sent to that site.
No hard feelings at all, David. Case Closed. (i hope)
Gerrit Gulden
EF4
I typed in Natures Fury on Youtube to see if Jim reed uploaded some footage and found this clip.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TPyfBIpezyA
Opening picture is Eric Nguyens, Then I see a Jeff Smith photo and tons more without Copyright Text.
The person that Posted is female, from Canada and doesnt seem to be affiliated with any stormchasers. Her Interests dont even include "weather".
---------Found Another-------------
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H46YQKzi-qw&feature=related
Person used StormVideo.Com clips and didnt give credit in the description which shows this person had no permission.
-gerrit
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TPyfBIpezyA
Opening picture is Eric Nguyens, Then I see a Jeff Smith photo and tons more without Copyright Text.
The person that Posted is female, from Canada and doesnt seem to be affiliated with any stormchasers. Her Interests dont even include "weather".
---------Found Another-------------
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H46YQKzi-qw&feature=related
Person used StormVideo.Com clips and didnt give credit in the description which shows this person had no permission.
-gerrit
Last edited by a moderator:
Jeff Smith
EF3
Just to clarify, that is another Jeff Smith--not me. I'm not sure that he's a member of ST but he's a great photographer...
...too many Jeff Smith's in the world...lol...
...too many Jeff Smith's in the world...lol...
rdale
EF5
For a little backgrounder on copyright law - take a look at the lectures from http://webcast.berkeley.edu/course_details.php?seriesid=1906978514
Jim Saueressig
EF5
Attn: Mike Hollingshead
http://www.flickr.com/photos/znaddanz/sets/957280
What an excuse:
More of Mikes work:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/waltzing_broonhilda/sets/72157600050856217
http://www.flickr.com/photos/26944087@N03/2519894053/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/buglugs/18846548
The Full Search
http://www.flickr.com/photos/znaddanz/sets/957280
What an excuse:
More of Mikes work:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/waltzing_broonhilda/sets/72157600050856217
http://www.flickr.com/photos/26944087@N03/2519894053/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/buglugs/18846548
The Full Search
Jim Saueressig
EF5
Mike Hollingshead
If I had to guess, they lifted that from the Daily Mail article(looks like that one they had in there). If that's the case, it would have been real simple to find out whose image it was. One almost gets used to it! Thanks Jim.
Jim Saueressig
EF5
I suppose it comes with being a great photographer but it does stink that you kinda have to get used to it.
