Synched Out removed from Youtube

Updates & comments about the movie that exposed the 9/11 scam

Postby ozzybinoswald on September 12th, 2010, 7:34 am

YouTuber SpreadThisInfo reupped the original here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FcXdIlAK0e4

Censorship pisses people off.
ozzybinoswald
Member
 
Posts: 288
Joined: October 20th, 2009, 12:52 pm

Postby Mudkipz on September 12th, 2010, 11:30 am

I get to take credit for sharethisinfo's upload, he is from Concen.

Here is a list of the uploads of the video to youtube that I am aware of:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FcXdIlAK0e4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fa_w_d3GVTE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5iUXJXAPUUg

Thanks again

Peace and mudkipz
Mudkipz
Member
 
Posts: 40
Joined: September 12th, 2010, 12:11 am

Postby simonshack on September 12th, 2010, 12:45 pm

I got this response in my personal e-mail box today from noreply@google.com:




Stefanie Damm has posted an answer to the question "My video "SYNCHED OUT" was removed due to "terms of violation". WHY?":


The best thing is to refer yourself to the source of your content- in your case that is http://www.archive.org

Check the terms: http://www.archive.org/about/terms.php and note that the first sentence in the second paragraph states: "Access to the Archive’s Collections is provided at no cost
to you and is granted for scholarship and research purposes
only" and after that the third paragraph gets heavy on copyright and mentions fair use which clearly tells me that they do NOT give you the legal licence to broadcast the content of the site.

And then the audio- it was not just recorded in your studio but was also your own composition, yes?





http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/y ... 61e4&hl=en

Any expert on the 'fair use' terms here?

And the music is :
-first part (sitar solo): An improvised intro to my song "Hope" by Luca Osscech, a part-time member of my band and fellow recording engineer.
-second part : An extract of my song "Hope", a tune of my composition duly registered under my name with the swedish STIM (ASCAP equivalent).

Thanks for any help in responding about the 'fair use' stuff !
http://www.septemberclues.info
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6405
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
Location: italy

Postby brianv on September 12th, 2010, 1:03 pm

I see Simon's video as an objective analysis of the publically available TV broadcasts during a defining moment in history!

Nothing to do with fair-use or copyright. It was "flagged" and summarily removed!
brianv
Member
 
Posts: 3914
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 11:19 pm

Postby nonhocapito on September 12th, 2010, 3:01 pm

Absurd!

here's that part of the Web Archive terms of use:


In particular, you certify that your use of any part of the Archive's Collections will be noncommercial and will be limited to noninfringing or fair use under copyright law.



Here's what wikispedia tells us:


Fair use is a doctrine in United States copyright law that allows limited use of copyrighted material without requiring permission from the rights holders, such as for commentary, criticism, news reporting, research, teaching or scholarship.



Isn't SYNCHED OUT clearly in the realm of news report, commentary, criticism and research?

Hypocrites...
nonhocapito
Administrator
 
Posts: 2503
Joined: July 10th, 2010, 6:38 am
Location: Italy

Postby hoi.polloi on September 12th, 2010, 3:04 pm

Since when does YouTube qualify as a 'broadcast'?

When a video gets more than a few thousand viewers? :lol:

TV broadcasts to millions and they continually show the contents of the archive and credit NARA for that matter as well. Exception for billionaire companies but not the average joe?

Methinks I smell a rat ... like Martin C. Faga.
hoi.polloi
Administrator
 
Posts: 4848
Joined: November 14th, 2010, 8:24 pm

Postby Maat on September 12th, 2010, 3:17 pm

Simon, this doesn't sound like any copyright claim was made by anyone, or YouTube would be required to state that in the notice they sent you (which would also include links to 'learn more' with a copyright dispute form).

When any copyright material is either auto-matched (audio content) or reported, the notice received always refers to it as such. e.g.

Image

As I discovered when the Emerson, Lake & Palmer song I uploaded was blocked for matched copyright content (evidently an automatic program on YT), it also automatically UNblocked it as soon as I submitted the copyright dispute form (pending copyright holder's response). i.e.

2. This video uses copyrighted material in a manner that does not require approval of the copyright holder. It is a fair use under copyright law.
Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for 'fair use' for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.

The odd thing is, that second copyright claim was made by Sony on the same vid only a few days ago, blocking it in Germany (which I've also disputed citing 'fair use').

If they take down your re-upload as well, I would phone/fax YouTube asking them to cite what TOS 'violation' they are claiming with a proper explanation for removal, as this smells like harassment to me. :angry:
"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." ? George Orwell
Maat
Moderator
 
Posts: 1423
Joined: September 9th, 2010, 2:14 am

Postby simonshack on September 12th, 2010, 6:02 pm

Thanks Ma'at - much appreciated

Well, I re-uploaded a renamed copy of the video. It was blocked straight away - but this time because of...

Image

"Content inappropriate?" "Terms of use violation"? Which one is it ? :huh:
http://www.septemberclues.info
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6405
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
Location: italy

Postby Brutal Metal on September 12th, 2010, 8:14 pm

I can guarantee there's tens of thousands of vid clips presently running on You Tube with TV's running in the backround showing national chains in commercial ads and there's just as many with songs playing in the backround that are copyright protected, this is simply a Witch Hunt being brought down on a knowledgable 911 researcher Nothing more nothing less!! Looking for reasons for the Deletion are pointless since we already know!!
Brutal Metal
Member
 
Posts: 401
Joined: July 22nd, 2010, 4:58 am

Postby nonhocapito on September 12th, 2010, 8:50 pm

Simon can we access this version of Synched out on some part of your website(s) so that we can download it and then try to upload it ourselves to youtube? Just to try...
nonhocapito
Administrator
 
Posts: 2503
Joined: July 10th, 2010, 6:38 am
Location: Italy

Postby Postal44 on September 12th, 2010, 9:36 pm

I don't really see how archive.org can hold any copyright for any of the material on their site. They essentially only have anything on their site because they "recorded" it from other sources, or material was uploaded to their site by the person who actually holds the copyright to the material.

Just like if I were to use any number of mediums to record a tv show from my tv or a song off the radio. Just because I hold a recording of whatever doesn't give me a copyright to that same material. If it did, it would essentially negate the entire reason of the copyright in the first place.

So I don't think that even though archive.org has all that legal jargon on their website that it would actually hold up in court, since they really have no legal basis to back it up, unless they have documents proving that the stuff on their website has had the copyrights transferred to them for the content on the site, which I doubt they have.

The only ones who could possibly have complained about the material being used would have to be the news organizations themselves. They would be the ones who hold the copyrights to the news footage. It possible that they have a standing request with the folks at Youtube to take down certain material, but we all know that 90% of what's on Youtube, if not more, is copyrighted material.

This is a paragraph taken from Wikipedia about the term "Fair Use".

Fair use is a doctrine in United States copyright law that allows limited use of copyrighted material without requiring permission from the rights holders, such as for commentary, criticism, news reporting, research, teaching or scholarship. It provides for the legal, non-licensed citation or incorporation of copyrighted material in another author's work under a four-factor balancing test.

And here is a paragraph taken from Wikipedia about the term "Balancing Test".

Another balancing test occurs in the copyright domain, when analyzing whether a particular usage of a copyrighted work constitutes "fair use". The World Trade Organization Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs) Article 13 allows for uses "which do not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work and do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the right holder."

As you can see, the last sentence about "Balancing Test" could be what they are using to remove Simon's video, since his video obviously conflicts with what news organizations want you to believe about the clips he used. They want you to believe that an airplane hit the 2nd tower and Simon is using those clips to show that the opposite has to be true.
Postal44
Member
 
Posts: 43
Joined: February 11th, 2010, 8:42 am

Postby Maat on September 13th, 2010, 12:21 am

simonshack 4 Sep 12 2010, 11:02 AM wrote:Thanks Ma'at - much appreciated

Well, I re-uploaded a renamed copy of the video. It was blocked straight away - but this time because of...
"Content inappropriate?" "Terms of use violation"? Which one is it ? :huh:


Ah huh, this has nothing to do with copyright! As I said, they would be legally obligated to state that explicitly in the official notice they sent you, plus the name of any copyright holder(s) making claim.

This is obviously a flagging campaign by person or persons unknown ? probably specifically complaining about the text at the end. I suspect that was the ammunition they used against it, where it states explicitly that there were no planes, no passengers and probably no victims died.

You know, "Waah, waah, he's disrespecting the poor victims and their perpetually weeping families" :rolleyes:

The problem is, once YouTube starts issuing "Terms of Use Violations" on an account, it counts as a "strike" ? I think it may only take 3 for them to delete the whole account.

Best I can suggest is, no more attempts to upload that particular one on your simonshack channel. Maybe open a second test account (e.g. simonshack2) to try again (unless they have the audio auto-matched now as a trigger-flag on you). In which case, change the audio track before uploading to a new account (perhaps even edit the explicit text conclusion at the end and/or only leave the septemberclues.info site ref). i.e. not to 'self censor' per se, but only thwart their ability to cite specifics. e.g. pose it as a question rather than a statement?

I do know of an Arab speaking ex-Muslim YouTube user who got his channel flagged and shut down for "TOS, inappropriate content" violations because of educational, expository audio vids critical of Islam and the Koran. He simply opened another channel and continued as before.
"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." ? George Orwell
Maat
Moderator
 
Posts: 1423
Joined: September 9th, 2010, 2:14 am

Postby simonshack on September 13th, 2010, 2:01 am

nonhocapito 4 Sep 12 2010, 07:50 PM wrote: Simon can we access this version of Synched out on some part of your website(s) so that we can download it and then try to upload it ourselves to youtube? Just to try...



I have uploaded "SYNCHED OUT" (126M) on http://septclues.com (next before last file at bottom of page).
You can download it to your hard-disk from there just by right-clicking and "save as".


Yeah, please do that, folks: Upload it on your own YT channel so that this censoring thing backfires completely. (already 4 other YT users have done so).


ps: Thanks again Ma'at: I think I'll follow your wise advice.
http://www.septemberclues.info
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6405
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 9:09 pm
Location: italy

Postby proloft on September 13th, 2010, 4:35 am

simonshack 4 Sep 13 2010, 01:01 AM wrote:Yeah, please do that, folks: Upload it on your own YT channel so that this censoring thing backfires completely. (already 4 other YT users have done so).



Thanks for the idea. ;)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9P9k7Et4zUk
proloft
Member
 
Posts: 93
Joined: October 18th, 2009, 10:58 pm

Postby CP9712 on September 13th, 2010, 4:56 am

To Simon

posted it to my youtube channel at youtube.com/CP9712

big fan of all the other september clues vids

Jason R. Pelton

(as of 12:58am This video has been removed due to terms of use violation.)
CP9712
Newbie
 
Posts: 1
Joined: September 13th, 2010, 4:53 am
Location: Toronto, Canada

PreviousNext

Return to September Clues - the movie

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests