Atlantic Records vs a guy who pays riffs online for fun?

Legionreturns

Douche bags, but should serve as a warning to anyone posting stuff. Apparently multi billion dollar companies feel threatened by hobby guitarists sharing their hobby on social media. 


What bell ends

photek

That seems ridiculous! What is the guy called on YouTube?

Edit: Truck Driver Shawn

Legionreturns

Truck driver Shaun

DiscoStu

He's managed to get a new vid up on The Riff Of The Day Facebook page.

Moominpapa

Bit Black Mirror-ish when an algorithm kicks in and suddenly a whole part of your social presence vanishes.

ThorpyFX

This is appalling behaviour, the fact that no human from Facebook has been involved in it makes it worse.

i hope he can get all his memories back

impmann

I wonder if he gets paid for the views of his videos... if so, they probably have a point.

guitarfishbay

impmann said:

I wonder if he gets paid for the views of his videos... if so, they probably have a point.

Watch the video. He says he does not profit from what he does.

It is a shit situation re: the content. I hope it can be restored.

impmann

guitarfishbay said:

impmann said:

I wonder if he gets paid for the views of his videos... if so, they probably have a point.

Watch the video. He says he does not profit from what he does.

It is a shit situation re: the content. I hope it can be restored.

I got part way through and stopped, being honest.

Although, playing devils advocate for a moment.... the pitchforks come out each time we see someone selling a Chibson or a "Fake" Fender as these big corporations should be able to protect their intellectual property. Isn't it the same for artists, who wrote this stuff and get nothing for its use... how many of of you play in covers bands without a thought to the thorny issue of paying the royalties on the songs you are playing (and earning money from playing)?

I'm not saying that it couldn't be handled differently/better but I understand blanket useage policies...

lustycourtier

impmann said:

guitarfishbay said:

impmann said:

I wonder if he gets paid for the views of his videos... if so, they probably have a point.

Watch the video. He says he does not profit from what he does.

It is a shit situation re: the content. I hope it can be restored.

I got part way through and stopped, being hon Isn't it the same for artists, who wrote this stuff and get nothing for its use... how many of of you play in covers bands without a thought to the thorny issue of paying the royalties on the songs you are playing (and earning money from playing)?

I'm not saying that it couldn't be handled differently/better but I understand blanket useage policies...

Venues you play at pay PRS. Now, realistically you are supposed to submit a set list for every gig so that the artists get PRS (even bands playing own material should do this, and usually do) so when you go to watch Muse, or anyone else, they are getting PRS money from the venues contribution. 

peglegpete

Quote from the vid - “I’ve been compleatly banned from Facebook for playing guitar”

Nope - you’ve been banned from Facebook for “publishing” copyrighted material without permission from the rights holder!

You can learn the guitar parts, you can play the guitar parts, you can even record/video yourself playing the guitar parts... all without permission...but... you cannot publish any of it unless you have permission to do so!... 

57Deluxe

so would they do the same if you were la la la-ing and singing any old song too?

peglegpete

57Deluxe said:

so would they do the same if you were la la la-ing and singing any old song too?

Probably not if you were just la la la-ing a song that they own the rights to... however... they would be well within their rights to do so!...

lustycourtier

57Deluxe said:

so would they do the same if you were la la la-ing and singing any old song too?

To a backing track you mean? See how quick a live video disappears if it has a juke box playing in background...

peglegpete

The key point here is “publishing”.

he has uploaded a video of himself playing copyrighted guitar riffs and “published” them without permission.

doesnt matter if he makes £££££’s or nothing at all... he has “published” or “made public” copyrighted material.

It sucks that Facebook shut his account down but he has broken copyright law! And I agree Facebook could have handled it better, maybe given him a chance to remove to material with just a warning?

That said, it’s in facebooks t&c’s that you have to own the rights to what you upload... and in short, he doesn’t!!!

Johnnyseven

This is much like The Fretboard opening themselves up to legal action if they are seen to allow fake guitars to be sold on the forum. Facebook are only minimising the risk of them being sued for allowing copywrited material to be published by removing the offending material.

Ravenous

Bear in mind even if he doesn't profit from his online distribution of his playing, someone does (facebook and their advertisers I suppose.)

So someone's got to pay.

One of those first world problems in my opinion...

Modulus_Amps

So much to say, but this is just silly.

I had a guitar amp builder friend in Sweden get his facebook page deleted and then his business page too, he only had demo vidoes and pictures on his facebook page

peglegpete

Ravenous said:

Bear in mind even if he doesn't profit from his online distribution of his playing, someone does (facebook and their advertisers I suppose.)

So someone's got to pay.

One of those first world problems in my opinion...

It’s not about anyone profiting from his publishing... its more about someone “not profiting”.

In this instance Atlantic could argue that because he has made “whateversong” public they (or the rights holder) will lose revenue as a result.

I very much doubt that if he uploaded the guitar part to “the pretender” it would effect sales of the original in anyway what so ever and they would have to prove damages in a court of law.
But they have to draw a line somewhere!. If only to protect their own interests...

and the fact “it’s law”!

impmann

Johnnyseven said:

This is much like The Fretboard opening themselves up to legal action if they are seen to allow fake guitars to be sold on the forum. Facebook are only minimising the risk of them being sued for allowing copywrited material to be published by removing the offending material.

There's an echo in here. ;-)

Exactly... you may not agree with the decision but much like the rules on here, the T&C are pretty clear on Facebook. Youtube did a clamp down a while back but have gone back to being lax. This is all about protecting IP and you may think it "silly" but it protects the recording artists/owners of the song rights.

Simple way around it - play original stuff to demo stuff that hints at famous songs but doesn't reference it outright. If you do play covers and publish them, ensure you have proof you are paying the correct PRS.

FatPete

Ravenous said:

Bear in mind even if he doesn't profit from his online distribution of his playing, someone does (facebook and their advertisers I suppose.)

This is the crux surely. Atlantic's issue in this case isn't with some dude posting videos, it's with Facebook not paying them a share of their ad revenue. Facebook, whether human or AI, don't give a shit, so just shut the guy down.

When I posted a video on Youtube that contained some music, their system quickly recognized the copyrighted material and they sent me an email telling me that any ad revenue would be paid to BMG (or whoever it was). I'm sure they're delighted with the cheque for the 30 views it got, but this seems a much more reasonable approach.