Brazen YouTube Ripper musichistory111

[Valecnik]

Great job Shane!

Since I subscribed to a lot of channels I double checked to make sure I'd not subscribed to musichistory111 some time back. Fortunately I was clean.

By the way, there IS a way to post Norman's material with his blessing. Before posting the below video, I asked Norman then with his agreement posted it giving him the proper credit. I believe I've put the link here before but here it is again.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ayjTjsW41c[/youtube]

[gramophoneshane]

Weird...when you click on his channel, it says this user has closed his account, but all his videos are still up??
It used to be that once an account was closed, that persons videos disappeared with them.
Perhaps his videos will disapear too soon.

I see they've approved your copyright claim for "There is no deception there" though Norman.
Congratulations!! Hopefully Youtube are processing your other songs as we speak.
Maybe this clown will think twice before uploading other peoples material in the future

[Lenoirstreetguy]

Seems to be gone. I logged in to give my " unlike" but I was too late.
Jim

[TinfoilPhono]

Both are gone. One says that the uploader closed his account, the other says the uploader removed it. I would rather see that Youtube closed his account for violation of terms of service, but either way I'm glad they're gone. A big thumbs up for that.

[WDC]

Yep, YouTube did accept my complaints and must have forced them down. It indeed appears that all the other transfers are gone too. Can't be more happier, who knows where the others were taken from, which I did could not identify.

I relieved it finally came to an end, although I had preferred if this person had simply added my credits to the description. Some do never learn.

But it had not been half as easy without your member support!

Thank you so much for your help!!

ps.: Bruce, your video is great, thanks for doing it!

[Swing Band Heaven]

Success!

Yes Norman - I haven't played my copy of KCK for a while but I might now - it is a real toe tapper! It still amuses me to remember how this particular tune came to be so widely known amongst the on-line phono community

S-B-H

[OrthoSean]

It still amuses me to remember how this particular tune came to be so widely known amongst the on-line phono community

S-B-H

I bought one of Norman's cylinders of this and a couple of others, they're first rate!

Ah, yes, KCK became famous very quickly, didn't it?

Sean

[edisonphonoworks]

The odd thing about Edison titles is the fact that they are not public domain, which I also thought was the case like all of you. Again remember, if you use the Edison likeness, trademark, on a product, you need to get in touch with The Charles Edison Fund, this goes for decals, and reproduction cylinder boxes. They claim to own the trademark, and likeness of Thomas A Edison, and they do have a license fee, I had several hours of chatting with John P Keegan, and he said they have been lax for about 20 years, but are now going to pursue with vigor. That is why I changed my name to Borri Audio Laboratories.


Some title I am a little sore that are out, I also was the first to reproduce Kansas City Kitty by Billy Murray in about 2002 , in an abridged format, and I also made pink lambert like blanks, though in metallic soap format. I noticed some titles that are now out I pioneered too, so do I own the copyrights on those?? Just food for thought. Take Me Out to the Ball game, and I certainly was the first to reproduce the 1888 Edison Trip Around The world, which sold many copies, I also had an Edison sound bite cylinder in 2003 I produced which had Edison's Mary Had A Little Lamb, an excerpt from Greetings from the Bunch at Orange. So you see where all this gets muddled??

[52089]

The odd thing about Edison titles is the fact that they are not public domain, which I also thought was the case like all of you. Again remember, if you use the Edison likeness, trademark, on a product, you need to get in touch with The Charles Edison Fund, this goes for decals, and reproduction cylinder boxes. They claim to own the trademark, and likeness of Thomas A Edison, and they do have a license fee, I had several hours of chatting with John P Keegan, and he said they have been lax for about 20 years, but are now going to pursue with vigor. That is why I changed my name to Borri Audio Laboratories.


Some title I am a little sore that are out, I also was the first to reproduce Kansas City Kitty by Billy Murray in about 2002 , in an abridged format, and I also made pink lambert like blanks, though in metallic soap format. I noticed some titles that are now out I pioneered too, so do I own the copyrights on those?? Just food for thought. Take Me Out to the Ball game, and I certainly was the first to reproduce the 1888 Edison Trip Around The world, which sold many copies, I also had an Edison sound bite cylinder in 2003 I produced which had Edison's Mary Had A Little Lamb, an excerpt from Greetings from the Bunch at Orange. So you see where all this gets muddled??

I would be extremely surprised to find out that any Edison recording is still covered by copyright because the US Government now owns the masters, which should automatically make the recordings public domain. Do note that many of the post-1923 songs are still covered by copyright even if the recordings aren't.

As for remastering "rights", I always thought the concept was hogwash. If I "remaster" a Beatles album, no one in their right mind would think I owned rights to the result - the current copyright holder does. Same with public domain material, except that the copyright owner is - nobody - and therefore nobody owns the copyright on the restoration either. I find it a bit easier to believe that the Edison trademarks might still be valid, but since it's unlikely they have been in continuous use, they may have expired from lack of usage and the Edison Fund doesn't want to deal with that. I also suspect their lawyers are a lot more expensive than mine.

Remember too that copyright requires creativity, which means that restoration (from a copyright perspective), while requiring skill and effort, does not create anything "new", it simply attempts to re-create something old.

Again, this is MHO, and not intended to be legal opinion.

[WDC]

This is an advantage when producing in Europe. I do pay a license fee for each record that has the late content and can reproduce them legally. But it is still nasty paperwork to cope with. The Charles Edison Fund has also registered several trademarks in Europe bearing the name Edison, which cover different sections of according to the Nice list of goods and services. If a certain product is within that registered range you'll have to get in touch with them to obtain a license.

The YouTube thing is even a different problem, because YT has contracts in most countries with most right owners to give the a great portion of their advertising earnings if some video is determined to touch their rights. Here in Germany we have a different problem: YouTube was not able to negotiate so far, causing many videos with music content to be blocked by IP filters. In such a case, I have a use a US ip address to bypass this. Globalization is only for the big players, not for individuals.