Forums > Queen - Serious Discussion > DAVID R FULLER'S ACCOUNT TERMINATED

forum rss feed
Author

MadTheSwine73 user not visiting Queenzone.com
God Save The Queen
MadTheSwine73
Royalty: 1013 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 13 Jun 11, 16:22 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

This is what it says on YouTube:

YouTube account DaveRFuller has been terminated because we received multiple third-party notifications of copyright infringement from claimants including:
Web Sheriff

I hate copyright....


Any way the wind blows...
The Real Wizard user is on Queenzone.com
The Real Wizard
Deity: 18636 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 13 Jun 11, 19:21 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Yeah, stupid copyrights...

Why should artists be paid for what they do?  Only people who work "real jobs" should get paid, right?

He posted some officially released material, so his account was taken down.  Sounds pretty straight-forward to me.


"The more generous you are with your music, the more it comes back to you." -- Dan Lampinski



http://www.queenlive.ca
Adam Baboolal user not visiting Queenzone.com
Adam Baboolal
Deity: 4986 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 13 Jun 11, 19:42 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Official stuff aside, what now happens to all the videos he DID upload? Are they gone from Youtube? I also wonder if he had some kind of backup after the last time it happened.

Adam.

pestgrid user not visiting Queenzone.com
The Miracle in A Winters Tale

Bohemian: 163 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 13 Jun 11, 20:54 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

ask moog


Open Your Eyes and Keep Yourself Alive
MadTheSwine73 user not visiting Queenzone.com
God Save The Queen
MadTheSwine73
Royalty: 1013 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 13 Jun 11, 21:09 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Sir GH wrote: Yeah, stupid copyrights...

Why should artists be paid for what they do?  Only people who work "real jobs" should get paid, right?

He posted some officially released material, so his account was taken down.  Sounds pretty straight-forward to me.

Dude, that's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that his account was taken down for posting SOME officially released material. More than half of the stuff he posted wasn't official. I'll give you another example: MsMamapapa. His account was taken down to, and I don't remember him posting ANY official material. Another example: Gregsynthbootlegs. His account is always getting warnings. I find it stupid that the copyright people take down the whole channel when there are only 4 or 5 videos. Instead, they take down all 500 videos he had for only a few videos. The only official ones I remember him having were the guest appearances, and the karaoke versions. None of the interviews or demos were official.
Either way, I respect their objective, but I don't agree with it.
But that's not the discussion. His account is gone, along with all his videos, subscribers and friends. I'm letting everyone know, and I want to know what people think of it.


Any way the wind blows...
guild93 user not visiting Queenzone.com
Melbourne, Australia
guild93
Bohemian: 310 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 13 Jun 11, 23:02 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote



It's kinda like going to a supermarket and stealing a few items and telling the police officer "Only SOME of the things in my trolley are stolen, the rest I paid for!"

emrabt user not visiting Queenzone.com

Royalty: 1118 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 14 Jun 11, 01:01 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

MadTheSwine73, whether officially released or not queen own the copyright on everything the members create, none of that stuff has fallen into the public domain, and probably never will, Gregs channel has 100's of songs performed and written by, yes you've guessed it, QUEEN, Daverfuller had 100's of things he didn't own, the interviews are owned by the radio or TV stations, the demos by whoever wrote / recorded them, live audience shot footage is owned by whoever filmed it, but the sound is technically owned by Queen.
People are so thick when it comes to copyrights. Seriously, it’s not just you, but some of this stuff is simple logic that even an 8 year old can work out.

And don’t get me started on people who think that posting movies and stuff on youtube counts as "private archiving" under the fair use / fair dealings act.

Jamie1977 user not visiting Queenzone.com

Rocker: 17 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 14 Jun 11, 03:52 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

This topic is understandable, but yet again not.

I've always watched the special songs/demos/other rarities on David's account with a lot of enthusiasm and surprise.  Don't know how he does it, but he almost always amazes us. The fact that QP doesn't  release a lot of these gems is a shame. But yet again, it's their call. They own the rights and to be honest we all have to respect that. Don't say that I like it, but it also amazes me that a lot of people find it normal to get access to material guarded by all sorts of rights these days. It really seems normal but it isn't. Although I have to admit that the people from YouTube are quite hypocrite too. They allowed it for so long, deleted his account several times but still every time he could eventually restore it. 

Again, I don't like the fact that David's account has been deleted because of all the special features. Let's just hope that QP wake up someday...........;)

Isle0fRed user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 143 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 14 Jun 11, 06:40 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Sir GH wrote:

Why should artists be paid for what they do?  Only people who work "real jobs" should get paid, right?

Define "real job"

thomasquinn 32989 user not visiting Queenzone.com
thomasquinn 32989
Deity: 6256 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 14 Jun 11, 07:48 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Sir GH wrote: Yeah, stupid copyrights...

Why should artists be paid for what they do?  Only people who work "real jobs" should get paid, right?

He posted some officially released material, so his account was taken down.  Sounds pretty straight-forward to me.

========

You're closing your eyes to some serious injustice here. Copyright as a system is defective. I will give you some very telling examples out of real life:

Back in the 1960s, an idealistic artists' rights lawyer started a record label for avant-garde artists, the label being called ESP Disk'. Artists recorded for ESP, but were given a non-exclusive contract, meaning they were free to take the recordings they made for ESP to another label if they so desired. After a few years, a number of artists were given contracts with other labels, and these labels DID make them sign exclusive contracts. ESP records were re-released, and...during the 1970s these record companies started successfully suing ESP-Disk' over supposed 'copyright infringement': the *original releases* were now labelled PIRATED, with exclusive copyright going to the goddamn criminals who reissued them. Result: ESP-Disk' went bankrupt. This happened THREE TIMES.

That is not justice, but it is copyright.

Point two: artist dies, some years pass. Rights are about to expire - so unscrupulous corporate lawyer has rights extended under company name. Result: exclusive rights stretching out to infinity for some corporate machine with no ties to the original artist whatsoever.

Point three: expensive lawsuits by multi-million dollar bands against bands just starting out. Some of these are truly idiotic: one, I forgot the name of the band, actually claimed exclusive rights to the use of the F7 chord. They would never win in court, but because of the prohibitively high costs of going to trial, they get what they want anyway.

The system is broke. Copyright should be buried and replaced by something just. For starters, it should be impossible for copyright to reside in anything other than a flesh-and-blood person. No company or other anonymous structure should be able to exercise copyright.


Not Plutus but Apollo rules Parnassus

Bad Seed user not visiting Queenzone.com
Bad Seed
Bohemian: 520 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 14 Jun 11, 09:03 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Just like the majority or law's, copyright is not perfect, but in most circumstances it does its job.
These tracks are not public property. If the band don't want these made public, then its up to Youtube to regulate itself properly and take them down. Otherwise Queen will be suing their arse off, and rightly so.

emrabt user not visiting Queenzone.com

Royalty: 1118 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 14 Jun 11, 09:06 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Point two: artist dies, some years pass. Rights are about to expire - so unscrupulous corporate lawyer has rights extended under company name. Result: exclusive rights stretching out to infinity for some corporate machine with no ties to the original artist whatsoever.

The system is broke. Copyright should be buried and replaced by something just. For starters, it should be impossible for copyright to reside in anything other than a flesh-and-blood person. No company or other anonymous structure should be able to exercise copyright.

=======================

The Disney corporation not only constantly renews expiring copyrights, but has also successfully lobbied and changed US law practically making it impossible for things to fall into the public domain; they keep creating / finding loopholes.

The character of Popeye fell into the public domain in the UK a few years ago (from cigars original thimble theatre comics.), but because the image and name are trademarked by king features it’s still impossible to do anything with the character without permission.

Copyright law really needs to be reviewed, re-written and updated, but get rid of copyright and the average man on the street will not be able to protect his work.

Any way DaverFuller is still in the wrong.

Thistleboy1980 user not visiting Queenzone.com
You wanna ring the bell?
Thistleboy1980
Deity: 3053 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 14 Jun 11, 09:20 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

This discussion again?  FFS.

Look, it's all simple - whether you like it or not, NONE of the stuff he posted on YouTube was his to do so.  As emrabt says, it's all owned by Queen, radio stations, TV companies etc.  And there was NOTHING that Dave Fuller had on YouTube that isn't available elsewhere.  FFS, most of us have it all already anyway.  I know that is not right legally, but it's fact.

RE Thomas Quinn's point - that's ESP's fault.  They opened the door to that, so the companies who latched on done nothing wrong.


It ain't about how hard you can hit, it's about how hard you can get hit: how much you can take and keep moving forward. That's how winning is done!
N0_Camping4U user not visiting Queenzone.com

Champion: 97 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 14 Jun 11, 09:31 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

It's a shame, really... I hope he has a back-up.  I agree with the official stuff being deleted, but the whole channel sounds kind of absurd. There is/was quite a lot of interesting little stuff on his channel, some stuff I didn't even have, and stuff that a Queen fan would want to listen to, but might not know where to obtain it all. What he did - official stuff aside - was really generous in my eyes, he was planting the Queen seed to lesser Queen fans.

bobo the chimp user not visiting Queenzone.com
bobo the chimp
Deity: 12700 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 14 Jun 11, 10:21 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

A lot of copyright law is bullshit - or at the very least, the implementation is.  The measures that are taken to protect rights are usually counterproductive, short-sighted, and a massive pain in the arse to the WRONG people - the ones that really aren't doing anything wrong.  If you approach this as a moral discussion, then yep - copyright lawyers should, en masse, be lined up and shot because they're good for nothing and they're costing more money than 'piracy' ever will.  

Spend five minutes looking at the fine print and you'll quickly realise that this shit isn't being done in the interests of the artists - copyright protection and anti-piracy is just an obscene, self-sustaining side effect of what the music industry has become; a sideshow to a sideshow.  I feel like I'm being patronising by even saying this, though, because anyone with a brain stem could figure it out themselves.  *sigh*

However, even if you approach this from a purely moral standpoint, Dave R Fuller was still in the wrong.  He was not just offering rarities that we can't buy on shelves, in some noble sacrifice of his spare time - he had things on his channel that can be easily bought.  There were things on his channel that I for one have paid good money to listen to.  Anyone viewing his videos could do the same.  If you have internet, then you have the money to pay for music.  He was, in very simple terms, asking to get his arse kicked.

Regardless of how you feel on the subject, no one has any right to complain.  If you liked his videos, you could have downloaded them.  Sucks to be you for not looking up keepvid.com


"Your not funny, your not a good musician, theres a difference between being funny and being an idiot, you obviously being the latter" - Dave R Fuller
MadTheSwine73 user not visiting Queenzone.com
God Save The Queen
MadTheSwine73
Royalty: 1013 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 14 Jun 11, 10:56 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

Zebonka12 wrote: A lot of copyright law is bullshit - or at the very least, the implementation is.  The measures that are taken to protect rights are usually counterproductive, short-sighted, and a massive pain in the arse to the WRONG people - the ones that really aren't doing anything wrong.  If you approach this as a moral discussion, then yep - copyright lawyers should, en masse, be lined up and shot because they're good for nothing and they're costing more money than 'piracy' ever will.  

Spend five minutes looking at the fine print and you'll quickly realise that this shit isn't being done in the interests of the artists - copyright protection and anti-piracy is just an obscene, self-sustaining side effect of what the music industry has become; a sideshow to a sideshow.  I feel like I'm being patronising by even saying this, though, because anyone with a brain stem could figure it out themselves.  *sigh*

However, even if you approach this from a purely moral standpoint, Dave R Fuller was still in the wrong.  He was not just offering rarities that we can't buy on shelves, in some noble sacrifice of his spare time - he had things on his channel that can be easily bought.  There were things on his channel that I for one have paid good money to listen to.  Anyone viewing his videos could do the same.  If you have internet, then you have the money to pay for music.  He was, in very simple terms, asking to get his arse kicked.

Regardless of how you feel on the subject, no one has any right to complain.  If you liked his videos, you could have downloaded them.  Sucks to be you for not looking up keepvid.com

lol

I downloaded all the videos I wanted from him already (since his account was previously banned), but all I'm saying is that it sucks his account is gone. I know that he was still in the wrong, but so is everyone who uploads stuff onto YouTube or any site (whose material they upload isn't theirs of course). The only reason his account was terminated was because he's the most popular for this type of stuff (bootlegs, guest appearances, etc..)


Any way the wind blows...
Thistleboy1980 user not visiting Queenzone.com
You wanna ring the bell?
Thistleboy1980
Deity: 3053 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 14 Jun 11, 12:24 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

In what way does it "suck" that his account is gone?  Does it affect you physically, mentally, emotionally or even financially?  You already say you have the stuff of interest, so what's the gripe?  His account was terminated because he was the most popular?  Bollocks!  His account was terminated because it was wrong. And what's this crap some are saying about less fortunate fans?  FFS, nobody is meant to have the unreleased stuff, whether you like QP for it or not.  Yeah, it might be exciting to have it or to have heard it, but what's the need to do so?  It doesn't make or break our day to day functioning. So somebody has something you've not heard - oooh, time to slit the wrists.  FFS.


It ain't about how hard you can hit, it's about how hard you can get hit: how much you can take and keep moving forward. That's how winning is done!
Russian Headlong user not visiting Queenzone.com

Bohemian: 496 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 14 Jun 11, 16:26 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

he did a great job bringing gems that many of us hadnt heard. pity but thats copyright i guess.


"Give it to me one more time!"
Daniel Nester user not visiting Queenzone.com
Daniel Nester
Bohemian: 735 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 14 Jun 11, 16:58 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

I agree with Zebonka. IMHO, so much of what Fuller put up--the not officially available stuff--can be put up for fair use--checklist is here: http://copyright.columbia.edu/copyright/files/2009/10/fairusechecklist.pdf

1. Fuller isn't making money off of this. He isn't claiming authorship. Now. YouTube is making money off of him, so that's in the negative category.

2. As someone who writes about Queen and will continue to do so, Fuller's videos are invaluable for my research, as it is for a lot of other writers/researchers. You can't get them anywhere else.  

3.  The clips are all "portions" of a complete work (i.e., the mythical "boxed sets" everyone is still waiting for), and would only serve to promote the real deal when they are officially released.

There's also no licensing mechanism for these unofficial clips.  They land out in the ether, and Fuller's YouTube account is the one, central place where they are posted. If anything, Queen fans should band together and keep uploading the demos, rarities, and oddities he posts up in a decentralized fashion to prevent this valuable archive from being taken down again.

And when the clips do get re-uploaded, I'm recording them to be safe!


God Save My Queen and God Save My Queen II | Soft Skull Press | http://www.danielnester.com
bobo the chimp user not visiting Queenzone.com
bobo the chimp
Deity: 12700 posts
add to buddy list send PM

Posted: 14 Jun 11, 18:55 Edit this post Reply to this post Reply with Quote

"YouTube is making money off of him, so that's in the negative category"

To me, that represents the single biggest problem with their current mode of operation, and it's also the thing that is least likely to change!  They will tell you with a straight face about copyright infringement, which by extension is meant to be harming someone's rightful income - but in the same breath they will happily claim revenue on material that does not belong to them.  The most popular bloggers on Youtube make a shitload of money for the little work they put it, and a lot of that stuff is 'infringing'.

As I said folks - if you like something, download it right away.

"Queen fans should band together and keep uploading the demos, rarities, and oddities he posts up in a decentralized fashion"

I quite agree.  I thought about starting a mirror channel of Fuller's stuff, but I didn't have the time to go through however many videos he had.  If he starts again, it's something for people to think about.


"Your not funny, your not a good musician, theres a difference between being funny and being an idiot, you obviously being the latter" - Dave R Fuller