When is it legal to stream music on Youtube and when is it illegal to stream music on Youtube?
This question's not meaningful without reference to the country in which the thing takes place. There are complex webs of laws surrounding copyright and contract law that influence things well beyond what is detailed in any EULA. Basically, if you want to know, ask a lawyer - and even then you might not get a straight answer.
Whole films and episodes on Youtube. What do you make of this?
-shrug- It's essentially uncontrollable with things as they are at the moment, and the technology that would make it controllable would make almost everything else one might do on a computer the same. There are serious questions as to whether the general public is going to have access to general purpose computing moving further into the 21st century.
I think it's more or less inevitable as well. At least given the rather draconian approach that film makers have to their distribution channels and the high cost in effort, discomfort, and money they want to extract from people for the right to gamble on the film not being terrible... Of course people are going to take the free option with an infinitely more pleasurable viewing experience than pay £8.50 or whatever cinemas are charging these days for the privilege of the 'experience.'
So playthroughs are legal. But video game companies can forcibly have them removed. Huh...
Google's customer service is laughable. Always has been, they're not in that industry - they're a tech company. Though any company in a similar position would have little incentive to support the interests of Lets Players, and considering the scope of DMCA requests I'm not sure it's even possible to respond in a timely manner to them and still judge fairly.
Talking about your private life on a youtube video while spewing dirt on people you know. If this isn't illegal, it should be. Is it illegal? Because it happens a lot and there appear to be no legal consequences...
... I'm generally not in favour of restricting free speech simply on the grounds that it's somewhat mean. There needs to be significant harm demonstrated, no currently applicable law (some things would fall under harassment or invasion of privacy or the like, I suspect,) and nothing else that can be done, before I'd favour giving people potentially another weapon to shut each other up on a wide range of topics with.
If someone has a criminal record, is the information in the public domain making it okay for people to bring this stuff up in Youtube videos? I have a problem with that.
Depends on the country. In the UK, you need to put in a DBS check to have someone's records checked, which they have to sign off on. Though, I suppose, once the information's out there it's out there - and some people have extremely long memories. This is one of the reasons I'm generally in favour of not disclosing someone's identity if they're convicted of something.
[Hypothetical scenario] Person A has a feud with Person B. Person A digs up all the dirt they can find on person B (pretty much every bad thing person B has ever done in their life) and broadcasts it on Youtube, Facebook etc. All of the claims are true. However the image of Person B is entirely negative and not reflective of said person. Is this illegal?
I don't think so. Again though it depends on the country.
Whenever people have bullied others on Youtube, is "freedom of speech" a good enough defence.
Morally? Legally? Practically?
Freedom of speech isn't a defence. Not talking in a legal sense here. Freedom of speech is an excuse, a reason not to hang someone because if you start hanging people for bullying then how do you define bullying? Some politician can do terrible things and when anyone comments claim they're bullying him.
Freedom doesn't mean everyone all gets along. It means people are going to do things day after day that ****** you the heck off, and you've got to put up with it. That's the cost. The reward is that you do things that ****** people off day after day as well, and they have to put up with it.
At least, that's how it's meant to work.
If it were just a choice between a world without these people and a world with them, then I'd be inclined to pick the former over the latter. But it's not, it's a choice as to worlds with people who look even vaguely like them to someone's eyes at some point in time.
DMCA claims. When is a DMCA takedown not justified?
I dunno. I'm not a lawyer. Something you created yourself that isn't a derivative work. Something under the fair use provision. They seem like they'd be fairly safe in the justification sense.
Someone expresses their views on a controversial topic. Those views are bigoted. Is this legal?
Depends on the country. Heck, in some countries displaying what we might broadly term 'liberal' values would be the dangerous thing.
A video shows someone showing off their sword skills. The sword dance is cut short by the performer accidently chopping their leg off. The performer demands the video to be taken down, which it is. However the deleted video is mirrored on other accounts. Is this legal?
Depends on the country. Depends who made it. Though in practical terms there's probably not a lot of point doing anything about it.
Retour en haut
