I wasn't meaning to kick off a general political debate, I just wanted to clarify to what extent either this site (as it seems: barely) and/or Lemmings LPs on YouTube (as it seems: more so) are going to be affected
. My opening post was a question based on what I knew, nothing that claims to be a comprehensive summary of accurate information only.
2) Article 13: On this site every post gets read by some admin or moderator within a few hours. This is better by far than anything article 13 demands, which in particular does not force websites to check every upload for copyright infringements. The "expensive automatic upload filtering software" is only needed for the huge platforms, which due to their huge data volume cannot apply any other means.
I simply hadn't considered that, because usually this is too much effort for any site, so most major platforms people frequent don't even have this option and hence will be bound to introduce the filters if they are situated in the EU. So even if that were the case for this site, that's the upside of being a small community, not having to give away sovereignty to bots!
I am not really surprised that mails are getting ignored, if they are based on misleading information, similar to the one you share here (although I believe you are doing that not on purpose).
I won't deny there are probably misinformed people among those who are writing; however, the politicians don't ignore the mails themselves, they do respond, but instead of going into detail about to what extent those asking might be misinformed, they just call everything "fake news" and dismiss it without further explanation. (Source: Kanzlei WBS-channel on YouTube)
For such use-cases as reviews you can still use trailer material or other officially published and openly available material. And sorry, but I really don't see why anyone should be allowed to cover copyrighted songs and openly publish their cover!
That's why few Germans are doing it, but we seem to be pretty alone with this mindset
.
Most artists know it increases their visibility when people either cover their songs or put up videos of their concerts. This is different from uploading a studio track which people can then download illegally rather than buying the song: Most amateur cover versions are not so professionally produced that people would take that
instead of the original, only in addition to it. But even things like lyric- or fan-made music videos serve to increase visibility. Moreover, on YouTube the original rights owners usually simply monetise your cover / fan-made music video and thus can make money off of it - which they miss out on if they prevent the upload to begin with. This may not be much for a single user with a small channel, but if you add together the revenue you make from all the people covering any one of your songs, this piles up quickly
!
It's also probably much more expensive to have somebody at your music label answer mails about whether or not amateur musicians are allowed to cover one of your songs - with the content ID-system, musicians and labels can simply "let the people come" and then monetise their videos automatically without any mail exchange having to take place. The amateur musicians can show their output, the labels and musicians get their money, everybody wins!
There are also services like DistroKid that take care of acquiring a license for you, that way you can even cover other people's songs commercially. And I still have no idea how the filters are going to be able to distinguish people who acquired a license through such a service from those who are uploading stuff without one for non-commercial use - which, again, is fine by the American understanding of fair-use, and since that's where YouTube is located, usually no-one complains.
I could easily switch to just uploading my own songs, but if they happen to be similar - even if only a short part of it - to a song I don't even know myself, but the bot does, then it can be blocked even though it's completely self-written. There are only 12 notes on the keyboard, after all, and everyone knows how many "4 chord songs" exist out there.
Do you have a better suggestion than forcing Youtube and other companies to care a little more?
As far as I know, YouTube already made deals with most music collecting societies (Verwertungsgesellschaften) like GEMA etc.?
Lemmings is still copyrighted. However being a legitimate owner of Lemmings (which I believe we all are) gives the right to play the game and publish recordings of your gameplay, so Youtube won't need a license.
Okay, good to know - how does YouTube check if you own the original game, though?
And it's not like NeoLemmix itself tests whether there is a valid installation of Windows Lemmings on your computer when you try to install or start it.
And as said before, graphic sets appearing in levels, being images, can also be snatched by the filters. Or is there an explicit permission stored somewhere here on this site for every tile from every graphic set released so far?
less copyright infringements and more revenue for actual content creators
The former is true, the latter only for article 11, if I understand this correctly
.
Since the filters enforced on major websites through article 13 prevent uploads altogether, revenue created by things like YouTube's content ID system is lost.
All of you are welcome to continue debating the merits and demerits here, but you should probably consider other channels than here when it comes to advocacy (regardless of sides) if you actually want to try influencing the final outcome (good luck?).
Influencing the outcome is not what I'm trying to do with this thread, don't worry!
In fact, I only opened it because I consider the outcome inevitable by now, despite all the massive protest.
Hopefully those platforms would also provide some guidelines to help you work through the cases where your video/stream is getting blocked by their filters.
With the content ID claims there's the possibility to refute them in case e.g. a self-written piece of music got incorrectly identified as someone else's work. But so far I only got content ID claims for videos as soon as they were uploaded completely (for three of them, all of them reading "the owner allows the usage, but ads may appear on your video", as I explained above). If the upload itself is prevented already, I'm not sure to what extent people responsible at YouTube are even going to be able to see these videos and check whether the claim is accurate or not.