Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Youtube Music The Courts

YouTube Ordered To Remove "Illegal" Copyright Blocking Notices 427

An anonymous reader writes in with new developments in a two-year-old spat between YouTube and GEMA (a German music royalty collection foundation). After the courts ordered YouTube to implement tools to block videos that contained music GEMA licenses, it seems that telling users why content was blocked isn't making GEMA happy. From the article: "GEMA applied for an injunction to force YouTube to change the messages, claiming that they misrepresent the situation and damage GEMA’s reputation. YouTube alone is responsible for blocking the videos, claiming otherwise is simply false, GEMA argued. ... Yesterday the District Court of Munich agreed with the music group and issued an injunction to force YouTube to comply, stating that the notices 'denigrate' GEMA with a 'totally distorted representation of the legal dispute between the parties.' Changing the message to state that videos are not available due to a lack of a licensing agreement between YouTube and GEMA would be more appropriate, the Court said." The messages currently reads, "Unfortunately, this video is not available in Germany because it may contain music for which GEMA has not granted the respective music rights." Seems pretty neutral. Non-compliance with the order could result in fines of €250,000 per infraction.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

YouTube Ordered To Remove "Illegal" Copyright Blocking Notices

Comments Filter:
  • Re:Bullshit (Score:4, Interesting)

    by risom ( 1400035 ) on Wednesday February 26, 2014 @10:51AM (#46345475) Homepage
    No one said they have to licence it for free. The debate between Google and Gema revolves around technicalities of payment. Most other royality collectors agreed to get an undisclosed percentage of advertisement earnings for the licences, but GEMA insists on a flat fee, regardless of amount of viewers etc. of a particular track. AFAIK GEMA is the only royality collector worldwide insisting on that.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 26, 2014 @11:17AM (#46345811)

    GEMA's stance is #@!&. Once you're a member you aren't even allowed to make your own material freely available. Your IP isn't your own any more, it will belong to GEMA and you will be charged with copyright infringement although you're the creator.

    GEMA is all about money for GEMA, nothing else.

  • by drinkypoo ( 153816 ) <martin.espinoza@gmail.com> on Wednesday February 26, 2014 @12:11PM (#46346533) Homepage Journal

    Then why did you bring up the US as an example? The US has only conditional "free" speech.

    On paper, the USA has some of the freest speech in the world. We have the legal (constitutional!) right to record the police, for example, though I get at least one news item a week about someone being arrested for doing just that eventually they are exonerated.

    We have lots of jackboots here, but the law is still favorable in this particular area.

    Notably, Britain doesn't extend free speech protection to visitors. You can no longer be done for seditious speech as a citizen (unless you're actually planning something) but a visitor can. First among equals? You fuckers read Animal Farm wrong.

"The number of Unix installations has grown to 10, with more expected." -- The Unix Programmer's Manual, 2nd Edition, June, 1972