He used nothing of the original (aside from lyrics), therefore it is fair use. For something to be fair use it has to be transformative from the original work. In the end, Roomie is in the right, and Billie's publisher is actually doing something illegal.
-
-
I'm happy to have a discussion, but
@mkate_ultra blocked me, so... Not sure why what I said could trigger someone, but
-
Oh, really? Well... I can see this from both sides. They are doing something, and laws could be an issue, but also YouTube has stayed mostly silent on how they're trying to please both sides. That's one thing YouTube really lacks, communication with consumers.
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
YouTube was almost sued out of existence by Viacom ($1 billion) for copyright infringement. That was the whole reason why the Content ID system was introduced. I get it, it's frustrating, but the costs of making a new broken system could be devastating, so it takes time.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I also agree that it's taken far too long. It's inexcusable for such a big platform, but you still have to consider everything they have to think about, the laws across the world and iron out issues that could ruin the platform. Changes are being made, albeit too slowly.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
, it's the big music companies abusing the broken copyright system. If YouTube were to make a proper, working system, the companies would lose out on huge profits and would either sue them into the ground or pull out of advertising.