Thread: “Blatant Censorship”

Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 47
  1. #11  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    4,269
    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Tresch View Post
    I doubt all material used was copyright cleared. But the right to expose his opinion wheights in the "to allow" ballance IMHO.
    The corporatocracy has been challenging and narrowing the scope of fair use speech rights for decades. YouTube is one of the worst abusers of editorial fair use rights for the kind of documentary journalism this film represents.
    They will take down anything based on a complaint from a supposed copyright holder without any independent determination of whether it meets legal fair use standards or not.
    There are no free speech rights on corporate media platforms under current law.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #12  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    1,850
    Quote Originally Posted by Phil Holland View Post
    There likely will be an alternate cut where they get the correct permission to "fair use" copy-written material for it to be on YouTube.
    "fair use", Phil, you are really funny.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #13  
    Senior Member DJ Meyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    945
    Why is this in the Cinematography forum? I see no discussion of cinematography.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #14  
    Senior Member Jacek Zakowicz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,392
    Quote Originally Posted by DJ Meyer View Post
    Why is this in the Cinematography forum? I see no discussion of cinematography.
    REmoving content from delivery platform should be and is a concern for the content creators- i.e. film makers, Hence discussion on cinematography forum.
    Jacek Zakowicz, Optitek-dot-org, jacek2@optitek.org
    Professional Broadcast and Digital Cinema Equipment
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #15  
    Quote Originally Posted by DJ Meyer View Post
    Why is this in the Cinematography forum? I see no discussion of cinematography.
    Agree.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jacek Zakowicz View Post
    REmoving content from delivery platform should be and is a concern for the content creators- i.e. film makers, Hence discussion on cinematography forum.
    Disagree. I do think that topics like safety on set as related to smoke and haze *is* a cinematography issue. But I think that if we're going to talk about copyright abuse and cinematography, we should talk specifically about the recontextualization of the copyrighted work, be it a photograph, a car's exterior, a chair, a song AS IT RELATES TO THE CINEMATOGRAPHY IN QUESTION. Just posting a video and saying "Help! Help! I'm being repressed!" is not really a cinematography discussion. (With due respect to Monty Python.)
    Michael Tiemann, Chapel Hill NC

    "Dream so big you can share!"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #16  
    Senior Member Jacek Zakowicz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,392
    If the First amendment issues have become a taboo in the USA one could argue that some of us prefer the russian social model...
    Jacek Zakowicz, Optitek-dot-org, jacek2@optitek.org
    Professional Broadcast and Digital Cinema Equipment
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #17  
    Senior Member DJ Meyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    945
    Quote Originally Posted by Jacek Zakowicz View Post
    If the First amendment issues have become a taboo in the USA one could argue that some of us prefer the russian social model...
    First Amendment protects your speech from the government. It doesn't mean every private platform has to host your content, and it doesn't give one license to rip off copyrighted content.

    Anyway, any thoughts on cinematography?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #18  
    Senior Member Jacek Zakowicz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,392
    Not bad for a documentary. Maybe too much visual "urgency" but I think that was intentional- , Moore Style
    Jacek Zakowicz, Optitek-dot-org, jacek2@optitek.org
    Professional Broadcast and Digital Cinema Equipment
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #19  
    Moderator Phil Holland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    11,837
    I find it odd, especially on a forum full of content creators who don't understand the importance of licensed material being used without expressed written content.

    There has been more than one content creator and owner of the material who called out that their footage was used in a feature length documentary produced with a budget.

    You'll notice I won't discuss the message. You guys can chew the fat on that and whatever you side with.

    Personally I deal with my footage being used without my consent often. Often in commercial and promotional ways. Being used in ways that I wouldn't allow on products and projects I'm not a part of. Being used in ways that who I produced the content for would clearly not allow.


    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Tresch View Post
    I doubt all material used was copyright cleared. But the right to expose his opinion wheights in the "to allow" ballance IMHO.
    Quote Originally Posted by Misha Engel View Post
    "fair use", Phil, you are really funny.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jacek Zakowicz View Post
    REmoving content from delivery platform should be and is a concern for the content creators- i.e. film makers, Hence discussion on cinematography forum.

    Here's a fun thought. If they knowingly used the footage and put it on a platform that is rather on top of copyright infrigement. Why not themselves just embed it on their website. The film is a very small footprint. I have unlimited bandwidth, why don't they? The answer there is bigger and can get their whole website shut down very easily.

    It's also great advertising to produce a controversial documentary and get people to say "this was banned on YouTube" not really citing the real reasons a few people want it not shown at all until they are compensated or have their material removed.

    Most just want to be paid for their time and effort. Especially when used in applications such as this.

    I am a proponent of free speech. I'm always interested in learning new perspectives and counterpoints on various topics I'm cool with this doc, but you have to understand specifically if you are uploading to platforms that understand and obey copyright laws, you know what you're getting into if you knowingly have utilized any copywritten material without consent, composation, license, or image release.
    Phil Holland - Cinematographer - Los Angeles
    ________________________________
    phfx.com IMDB
    PHFX | tools

    2X RED Monstro 8K VV Bodies, 1X RED Komodo, and a lot of things to use with them.

    Data Sheets and Notes:
    Red Weapon/DSMC2
    Red Dragon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #20  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    1,850
    When someone uses your content without explicit permission, you can contact them... or blatantly censor them.

    All words and characters written in above, this and below scentence are cited and used by someone before, I couldn't reach all first users and license holders and I don't care.

    Seven year old children who are trying to play a piece of Chopin on a piano and upload the recording to youtube to show it to Grandma and Grandpa are banned from Youtube, Facebook, etc.. and not for the horrible performance, but for license infringment (Chopin died in 1849, so he is not complaining).
    Reply With Quote  
     

Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts