"There are some levels of profanity that should not be seen on camera" 😅 I appreciate the support, Louis. I've been an intellectual property attorney for 10yrs now, and have dealt with similar situations for my clients. This was the first time I received a strike on my own channel in response to a video I did. I think people forget that lawyers are generally over-caffeinated and angry... soooo safe to say, I'm always ready for a fight ⚖️☕ I may have to react to your video 🙏
"Fair use applies to the video subject to Splice's strike, and the DMCA takedown notice was improper. We wanted to reach out and provide Splice an opportunity to voluntarily retract its strike against the Top Music Attorney channel before we proceeded with further legal action. Please retract this claim by end of business tomorrow, July 12, 2024."
Terms of Service Update: "Common Sense" is not allowed when using our products. If you use "Common Sense" or refer to "Fair Use" you agree to forfeit whichever organ(s) we can get to as quickly as we can.
Sent to copyright@: I read that your terms have been modified: > Terms of Service Update: "Common Sense" is not allowed when using our products. If you use "Common Sense" or refer to "Fair Use" you agree to forfeit whichever organ(s) we can get to as quickly as we can. Is this correct?
If she doesn't, then she's giving up a TON of easy free content that would drive a lot of growth for her channel. Not to mention, I'd never hire a lawyer who's afraid to fight a blatantly frivolous case.
I’ve been going to battle with Splice for years over their bullshit subscription service where they keep your credits if you cancel your subscription. Have a huge Reddit post about it as well. Hate those fuckers.
They just copyright striked a lawyer whose expertise is in that very field. What a bunch of morons lol. This decade reality keeps one upping fictional comedy.
Whoever made this stupid-ass decision owes his entire industry reparations against future profits. I didn't know a service like this existed, it sounds super convenient, and now I will never-ever touch anything like it.
Mediatek tried to pull some similar shit on me and fellow Android developers years back. We called them out on CHARGING for GPL source code, and we posted the emails where they explicitly stated they charged for GPL code. Every email from them had one of those fake ass NDA terms in the footer. NDA's that we never agreed to. They tried to come after us claiming we violated the NDA. We told Meditek to step up or shut up. The source code was 'leaked' to us shortly after.
Basic NDA rule: If I'm not being compensated and I haven't signed agreeing I agree to it, I am telling it to whoever I want. A classic is binding your severance money to a NDA. I already earned that money, unless you're adding a nice bonus over it I am suing for wage theft.
It's legal to charge for software made with GPL source code though, as long as the source code is available to everyone who buys the software. But it also allows anyone who buys the software to share their copy or modify it and share their copy. EDIT: Ah, it was about the source itself, not the software. My mistake
@@LocusNevernight Mediatek makes a lot of cheap Android tablets - the quality is okayish, but nothing worth going all "we need to protect our IP" over. Most of Android is under GPL 2 or 3. Please note that you can only force them to hand over the sources if you also have the binaries - i.e. you own one of those tablets. Good news: some of them are cheap enough to buy just to f*k with them.
The biggest red flag of the DMCA was it passed the house and senate with *unanimous* votes. Not even the so-called "Patriot Act" passed in response to 9/11 gathered unanimous support.
How about a "Three strikes and you are out" policy where a false DMCA claim will a) incur a fine proportional to the net worth of the company. b) have a fixed part of that fine go to the defendant as a compensation for falsely blackening the name of the defendant. c) Filling 3 false DMCA claims will make you unable to file any DMCA claims for half a year. ( " 3 strikes and you are out". If after that half year has expired, you file another false DMCA, this ban from being able to claim will be doubled.
@@LarixusSnydes well, that's assuming we're starting at a point where YT actually knows who's making a DMCA claim. In my case, a person created a new g-mail account (several actually), used the name of a celebrity, and then made 4 strikes on my channel. Not at the same time, mind you. I was able to get 3 of them thrown out, but the last one got my video taken down. I was lucky in that I was able to have my counter DMCA strike accepted by YT (they reject a lot of them). So, my video got reinstated after 10 days and the copyright strike was removed, but it did damage my channel quite a bit. My growth slowed down, and almost went to 0 during that time and for a month after. Anyway, like I said, the whole system is broken. YT just doesn't really care.
@@LarixusSnydesI’d start with protections from spurious claims with requiring a copyright ID. If you want to use the DMCA, like patents, you must file your copyright with the (insert country) copyright system and file the ID with any DMCA request. This must be a traceable ID and will point to the material in question.
The thing is, companies don't have to be right to win in court. If they have a bigger legal team and more money than you do, they can litigate until you're bankrupt and can't afford to fight anymore and you are forced to give up. It's a war of attrition and companies do it all the time.
@@mattice9083 Corporations can still out litigate you. She's one lawyer and I can guarantee you she doesn't have the resources a corporation does. Just because you're not paying for your defense doesn't mean you have the time and money otherwise to go up against a billion-dollar company with an entire legal team and unlimited funds to keep you locked up in court until you die. It's not as cut and dried as it seems. As I said before, corporations do this all the time. Like I don't care if you have an open and shut case against like Disney or Nintendo, they will bury you in court until you give up.
The fact that it's COMMON knowledge that MOST people do not read electronic notices (and perhaps not paper notices) that are not short and simple enough to be commonly understood and accepted, these excessive long, detailed, and/or excessive attempted legal agreements are null and void in all USA Courts of Law, in my opinion.
Funny thing... such tos/contracts are non-binding in the legal sense in Europe just by default. And even if a company trys this crap, it either gets fined by Brussels directly, or a smaller court will absolutely rule in the customers favour. Every time I see videos like these, I am baffeled how absolutely criminal consumers rights in the US really are.
@@Randleray And we mocked the regulations. We were ENCOURAGED to mock them. Exemplifying why we need HEAVY, enforced marketing regulations. It would be A start.
and with a good lawyer, many courts could be convinced to agree. Especially in instances where customers are presented a link to a constantly changing agreement or asked to review some absurdly long document at a store with a line of customers behind them.
@@kopazwashere I thought about that, it could be the easiest solution. The choice would be for the user: Where's the remote? Versus, Do I really want to need an app, and have my _ceiling fan_ connected to my Wi-Fi? Ain't personal choice great?
@@kopazwashere The autofocus on a phone camera uses an IR source to calculate distance. I'm sure you can write an app which makes it spit out a binary to control a device like any other standard remote control.
@@davidgoodnow269 ...ceiling fans mounted on ceilings that are too high to regularly, conveniently reach the pull chains should always be wired into a wall switch specifically designed for ceiling fans. Going to the effort to install and wire up a ceiling fan but not do the install properly is silly.
Because DMCA forces them to either comply with the takedown request or become liable for copyright infringement if it's actually happening. Of course RUclips and every other company is going to limit their liability by complying with the request. The problem isn't RUclips, the problem is the DMCA itself. (The only time I've ever seen RUclips deny a takedown request is when it's some random twerp who RUclips can see wouldn't be able to sue and thus isn't actually a threat)
@@mjc0961 This is partly correct, but google(youtube) shares responsibility in these matters. They are supposed to have a human look into these claims to determine if they have merit or not, which they are obviously not doing.
Because there’s 0 risk in letting a DMCA notice go forward against a small creator and a very large risk if they deny one that’s valid. Combined with the fact that they have to pay any people who review them, they have every incentive to just block the video the instant a DMCA notice comes through, regardless of whether it’s valid.
Just like when LEGO attempted to takeout my small RUclips channel 15 years ago. The Lawyers were Day Pitney LLP based in New York. I had multiple DMCA's against reviews I did on LEGO products yet never detailed the infringing material. None of my videos used any material from LEGO in ad's or animations. The letters I was sent from the legals were extraordinary. Detailing what LEGO deemed appropriate to be said and seen online related to their product. Obviously i was not in the CLUB. Big companies have always been trying to snuff out the little players and I learned this years ago. Anyway lesson I learned was to stop looking at LEGO products. I went on to becoming a massive RUclips toy reviewer. I will never forget how the LEGO legals acted against me.
@@sweetiespoon5150 The "Cloud" Fan,.. Doesn't even Exist. And it's CLEARLY stated in the terms of (your data is mine, not yours) service. Really, Look It Up. But that would be a violation of the terms of service too, so 😳 😏 🖖
Hilarious that this popped up on my feed within 10 minutes of me complaining on Discord about how UMG is able to disable embedding an UNLISTED and monetization set to NO video on RUclips in Discord, because reasons. All for 44s of a song from a Movie, again, in an UNLISTED video that I personally picked NO for monetization. The Music Industry is a complete joke.
Terms of service in an online world should not be seen as legally binding, They chop and change them on the fly which means they have broken the terms of service from the companies side, Companies now days think that TOS is an actual contract when in reality it is not.
Not only did they abuse copyright to strike a legitimate user but they they did so against an Attorney who can and will defend themselves with a counter notice and will if she is smart counter sue over the false DMCA for damages and win in a slam dunk. Did this company run this by their legal team before doing this because if they had competent lawyers they would be shitting bricks right now over the liability this opens up
RUclips simply doesn't accept counter-notices for certain privileged claimants with whom they have agreed to have a priority/altered claim process.. . You can of course file one, and even sue the original filer, but youtube won't restore a video because of it.
I wouldn't be surprised if they had an algorithm that searches videos just looking for their logo and then flags it. So it has no idea whether it's fair use or not .
@@WorBlux I wonder how long it takes before RUclips gets sued for, and then prosecuted for consistantly not adhering to the DMCA process. They have to, or they will lose their right to claim they are just a service provider and not actually responsible for whatever gets posted on their platform. Shit gets really expensive really quick if you are suddenly found liable for every copyright violation on RUclips. I wouldn't be surprised if we are talking many millions of dollars per day. Once government(s) find out that RUclips is gaming the system for the "privileged claimants" they will get sued hard. It wouldn't be the first time the European Union fines billions on Alphabet and many claimants will refer to the court case where RUclips lost in their claims, which will lead to RUclips losing those cases as well.
At least copyright adjacent attorney. Being capable of reviewing such terms in first place... It is one thing to go after some family-lawyer, but really pick your targets...
I blame RUclips for allowing this, just pure censorship. And also I'm very grateful for you Mr Louis Rossman for making videos like this and always being so honest and standing up for others, it's truly very inspiring!
Everybody uses the phrase free speech incorrectly. Free speech only applies to the government officially banning what you want to say, nothing to do with private companies or individuals. That's why RUclips can strike you in the first place. All you can do is fight them directly, this would be thrown out of court if it's only a free speech argument.
absurdity of very long copyright protection should end. it should be same duration as patents. it's never the musicians that benefit from uber long copyright protection and always music lovers get the f.
Yes, although in this case I don't think it's the length of copyright that's the problem. They are just abusing the copyright protection process. And for patently fraudulant claims like this, the punishment should be the removal of all copyright protections from their IP. Honest mistakes are understandable, if it's a grey area of the law then fine let a judge decide. But outright abuse of the system should be severely punished. Although I note there's a strong tendency for the people with the deepest pockets to win cases (or at least get a more favorable outcome) and that needs to stop too.
SLAPP suits are why I think the US Court System should adopt the "English rule" in civil court cases, and abandon our "American rule". The American rule is you pay your own legal fee's, the English rule is the loser pays for both. This makes the party who is acting in bad faith is more likely to settle out of court, not attempt SLAPP suits, etc. I feel like this is a form of SLAPP action even if it's not an actual civil lawsuit. If someone issues a bad faith DMCA strike you should be able to compel them to pay legal fee's if you win a lawsuit for defamation or the like.
that would devastate anyone going against a large company, you'd risk losing absurd amounts of money against a company that attempts to steamroll you in legal fees after their lawyers use loopholes to crush your complaint. there are cases where you can ask for lawyer fees if the case is absolutely ridiculous.
While that's a good idea in theory, many people who have strong cases for getting a false DMCA strike can still get shafted. Our legal system takes advantage of people, so they would lost in court and be forced to pay the assholes who false struck them with DMCA
I thought Murican law also does this, but iirc it's up to the judge to decide if loser pays both or their side. making it default would be nice. Bonus point if the plaintiff is forced to pay all legal fees for other party (civil suits only), so people lose a lot of incentive on suing someone to begin with and they arbitrate first.
You are correct. This qualifies as fair use, and there is plenty of case history to back this up. They are counting on her not being able to afford the court process. They are jerks.
Why? Why do we keep allowing all this BS in life that constantly wants to screw us and drain our souls for $? If this society was a movie, you'd never rewatch it and probably wish you'd get your money and time back.
This problem only exists because the US judicial system is designed to be unfair. Did you know, that in most (European) countries you automatically have to pay the costs from other side if you lose? No chance to intimate one with a lawsuit here. But the fact that if you win in the US and still uave to pay your attorney fees is absurd and unfair
Next you are telling me it doesn't need a camera to adjust its speed to the amount of people present! Or a microphone to adjust to the level of physical excitation in the room. (/irony)
What’s worse is that she actually spoke with their in house counsel privately and in good faith BEFORE they cowardly blind sided her with the strike. On the call, she said that Splice conceded that some of the language in the agreement could be interpreted differently to how they intended.
something they tell you to read is hardly going to be proprietary secret and i would love to see them make a defense in court about copyright ownership over a terms of service document being read in a video critiquing the document.
14:41 - "It's worth it to get your argument out there. It's worth it to demonstrate your side."* *Do not do this after a presidential assassination attempt if your name is Destiny
Yes, it's been done and it's actually pretty common. Mostly though, a lawyer will hire a specialist lawyer for representation, or turn it over to a partner in practice specifically to keep the billing straight. But once you get paid, you have to pay pay taxes on that as earnings. It's not a write-off, at all, ever, unless you lose and are unable to collect from the client. That's why bankruptcy lawyers always get their money first, and if you can't afford to pay for it, you can't declare bankruptcy!
Legal documents such as Terms of Service and Privacy Policy aren't copyrightable, which makes the copyright strike moot. I think they're striking on the basis of showing the website then? Which would count as fair use... Would they file the lawsuit in Texas to avoid Anti SLAPP laws?
Because most anything that requires some level of skill or dedication, those that do would rather not waste their time becoming legalistic bureaucrats trying to control others through paper weapons. There's a reason why the worst dictatorships of the 20th Century were by people who were "Party Secretary" or "Deputy Minister" and wormed their way up their clubhouse's ladder, but had little to no honest occupation or ability outside of that. Those that can, do; those who can't fail upwards in an attempt to compensate.
Terms of Service are meant to be read before committing, being able to share that legal document that should be on display for all to see is implied.... It's like the ToS on a private car park is supposed to be displayed at the entrance and in other places... IT's supposed to be public facing... The whole idea that it's proprietary, would mean you need a user licence to even access it, which means you'd need to read the public facing ToS before hand, but it IS the ToS... and now we can start going in an endless circle of what you need first... It find it like a contract you're not allowed to read until you sign on the dotted line, ridiculous!
Probably be Yes / NO conversations and interactions; whilst UK, US goes woke, weak, PC world, litigation crazy - harming business itself and people's harmony; our competitors like India, China laughing all the way to the bank - or Chinese Yuan
A cloud ceiling fan? Why? Under what circumstances would someone want their ceiling fan to require an internet connection to work? I bet the design is also so gaudy that in 5 years, it will look like what it is today - garbage.
They know what they are doing. There is no ignorance, there is no miscommunication, there is only malice. Intentional malice. Their lawyers know it, their C-level officers know it. It is 100% deliberate.
Many say she should be charging them and giving Splice Land or whatever they f%%^^%^% called an invoice of her labour & time = $$$$ for talented legal eagle
The most criminal thing about splice is how they force you to be subscribed to use credits you spent money on. You got 1200 credits but no sub? Too bad. Can't use it.
WOW! awesome and I appreciate your conviction in these bulling tactics companies try to force on anyone. Legal action should be taken or an official apology given like you say to the improperly accused person has to endure.
Great Alan Partridge episode -on different sort of La* yBoys (Uploaded by others - YT CC) - small sample from ruclips.net/video/-Fh6EUQ41JU/видео.html&ab_channel=BBCStudios & yes I do have / met some very nice friendly La*ybo*s, e..g., dancing and good times @ Magaluf on Sea
I find it almost hilarious when someone will do something illegal to a lawyer, attorney, or other legal professional only for it to bite them in the arse.
agree - many say it's backfiring into Splicey's land's face and quite right as well (bad kudos) compared to another great video by OP and by the talented female legal eagle - ; good kudos & content, I'm shortly subbing to her great channel as well - some good and useful videos
I've had several Splice accounts for years. Years. I am very concerned about this and hope that Splice takes the strike back very soon. I am also now eager to see what she had to say about Splice as it does seem like very important info I need to be aware of. Will be subscribing to her now also because of this. Thank you for covering it.
Just cancelled my splice account of 4 years. How can you start a business which has the customer in mind with a business like splice? Ive been djing over 20 years and have wiped splice off my mpc, all computers and stand alones
![[4K] Watch SpaceX Catch A Starship Rocket From Space!!! #IFT5](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/pIKI7y3DTXk/mqdefault.jpg)
"There are some levels of profanity that should not be seen on camera" 😅 I appreciate the support, Louis. I've been an intellectual property attorney for 10yrs now, and have dealt with similar situations for my clients. This was the first time I received a strike on my own channel in response to a video I did. I think people forget that lawyers are generally over-caffeinated and angry... soooo safe to say, I'm always ready for a fight ⚖️☕ I may have to react to your video 🙏
Yeah don't let that slide
⚖️☕🙏@@abrokenpal
Glad to see you comment!
Funny thing is I saw your earlier video about this yesterday, and my first thought was "why didn't Louis Rossman make a video about this?"
Hey ! It's the actual TopMusicAttorney ! You are in good shape now - As another commenter said, the Wrath of Rossmann has been activated!
Did they really just filed a false DMCA against a LAWYER?
I need popcorn, cose shit is going to hit hard.
I'm going to hazard a guess that Splice is hoping that TopMusicAttorney can't defend herself in court.
Either that, or it's a PR thing.
@@Code7Unltd O she can and I believe she will, shes gone after the likes of TunCore for clients.
@@Code7Unltd "or it's a PR thing."
No, it's desperation to save face toward shareholders. The public never mattered until it hit their bottom line.
Happened to Nick Rikeita a while back and he won; but now he has bigger and more serious problems.
"Fair use applies to the video subject to Splice's strike, and the DMCA takedown notice was improper. We wanted to reach out and provide Splice an opportunity to voluntarily retract its strike against the Top Music Attorney channel before we proceeded with further legal action. Please retract this claim by end of business tomorrow, July 12, 2024."
"How dare you expose our TOS! Everyone knows that no one reads those! OUR PRIVACY!!"
How are they clutching their pearls when we ended up with the necklace? 😭
"We have a reasonable expectation of privacy due to the fact no one reads the TOS"
Seriously though...what a red flag.
Real
Exactly, law is for corporate, not people
If you didn't want people to read your terms of service, maybe you shouldn't have forced people to agree to them.
But roofing people is corporate pastime hobby!!
Terms of Service Update:
"Common Sense" is not allowed when using our products. If you use "Common Sense" or refer to "Fair Use" you agree to forfeit whichever organ(s) we can get to as quickly as we can.
Sent to copyright@: I read that your terms have been modified:
> Terms of Service Update: "Common Sense" is not allowed when using our products. If you use "Common Sense" or refer to "Fair Use" you agree to forfeit whichever organ(s) we can get to as quickly as we can.
Is this correct?
Musical Organs, right? annakin&padme.jpeg
@MatthewElvey how dare you read my clearly hidden and proprietary TOS update. I will sue you into the ground
@@LocusNevernight that can't stop me, as I HAVE NOTHING
Maybe their TOS has redefined what common sense means. After all some TOS redefined ownership.
This is like the in-game Helldivers contract, where it states that it's treason to read the contract.
↑→↓↓↓
@@WhiteWeaver-hk2nt I deserved that...
How did you found that out ?
How would you know this without reading the contract? I need to make a call to my Democracy Officer…
DEMOCRACY OFFICER
Never stop being angry Louis. We need you
Never stop being awesome. The anger can be harnessed and hopefully not contribute to blood pressure...
@@hattielankford4775 Anger is a higher emotion than apathy. So it is good.
@@bonbonpony 🤔 Isn't apathy a lack of emotion?
@@bonbonpony And, no. We harness anger to make good things, not the other way round.
@@bonbonpony Are you okay? I'll chat with you if you want. If you're patient. I happen to be here now.
This sounds like an abuse of the DMCA system and I hope she takes them to court.
She
If she doesn't, then she's giving up a TON of easy free content that would drive a lot of growth for her channel. Not to mention, I'd never hire a lawyer who's afraid to fight a blatantly frivolous case.
@@meeponinthbit3466 The way people abuse DMCA too, she'd have every content creator cheering for her and rooting her on.
I’ve been going to battle with Splice for years over their bullshit subscription service where they keep your credits if you cancel your subscription. Have a huge Reddit post about it as well. Hate those fuckers.
That's why these companies sell 'credits', and not dollar balances. Go in with eyes open.
I ended up grabbing a bunch of stuff to use my credits before I canceled last year
whaaaaaaaaaaat hahaha this is another topic for this man, straight scam
hope he sees this, ppl should comment so it goes up
Feel your pain bro. Same happened to me years back. Some “mistakes” you only make once
You know you fucked up when you've incurred the "Wrath of Rossmann".
the lou ross bully arc is peak
PROPS!
Rossman 2024? 😊
@@Kale-Man😂😂😂
They just copyright striked a lawyer whose expertise is in that very field. What a bunch of morons lol.
This decade reality keeps one upping fictional comedy.
If she was smart she would use a VPN so her account routes through the EU and she can sue there.
The world ended in 2012 and we're experiencing the post-credits blooper reel.
@@Wampa842 You've summed it up perfectly
Imagine being a company whose purpose is purportedly to help people with copywriting and having such a fundamental misunderstanding of copyright
Whoever made this stupid-ass decision owes his entire industry reparations against future profits. I didn't know a service like this existed, it sounds super convenient, and now I will never-ever touch anything like it.
Right?!
Mediatek tried to pull some similar shit on me and fellow Android developers years back. We called them out on CHARGING for GPL source code, and we posted the emails where they explicitly stated they charged for GPL code. Every email from them had one of those fake ass NDA terms in the footer. NDA's that we never agreed to. They tried to come after us claiming we violated the NDA. We told Meditek to step up or shut up.
The source code was 'leaked' to us shortly after.
Hey friend ^^ source code for what, if you don't mind me asking. I'll attempt to see if they're still trying this BS.
Basic NDA rule: If I'm not being compensated and I haven't signed agreeing I agree to it, I am telling it to whoever I want.
A classic is binding your severance money to a NDA. I already earned that money, unless you're adding a nice bonus over it I am suing for wage theft.
It's legal to charge for software made with GPL source code though, as long as the source code is available to everyone who buys the software. But it also allows anyone who buys the software to share their copy or modify it and share their copy.
EDIT: Ah, it was about the source itself, not the software. My mistake
@@ITR The amount they can charge is limited to the cost of making the copy (GPLv2 paragraph 3b; or GPLv3 p. 6b).
@@LocusNevernight Mediatek makes a lot of cheap Android tablets - the quality is okayish, but nothing worth going all "we need to protect our IP" over. Most of Android is under GPL 2 or 3. Please note that you can only force them to hand over the sources if you also have the binaries - i.e. you own one of those tablets. Good news: some of them are cheap enough to buy just to f*k with them.
The whole DMCA system is extremely flawed. We need to rework everything.
The biggest red flag of the DMCA was it passed the house and senate with *unanimous* votes. Not even the so-called "Patriot Act" passed in response to 9/11 gathered unanimous support.
How about a "Three strikes and you are out" policy where a false DMCA claim will a) incur a fine proportional to the net worth of the company.
b) have a fixed part of that fine go to the defendant as a compensation for falsely blackening the name of the defendant.
c) Filling 3 false DMCA claims will make you unable to file any DMCA claims for half a year. ( " 3 strikes and you are out". If after that half year has expired, you file another false DMCA, this ban from being able to claim will be doubled.
@@LarixusSnydes well, that's assuming we're starting at a point where YT actually knows who's making a DMCA claim.
In my case, a person created a new g-mail account (several actually), used the name of a celebrity, and then made 4 strikes on my channel. Not at the same time, mind you. I was able to get 3 of them thrown out, but the last one got my video taken down. I was lucky in that I was able to have my counter DMCA strike accepted by YT (they reject a lot of them). So, my video got reinstated after 10 days and the copyright strike was removed, but it did damage my channel quite a bit. My growth slowed down, and almost went to 0 during that time and for a month after.
Anyway, like I said, the whole system is broken. YT just doesn't really care.
@@LarixusSnydesI’d start with protections from spurious claims with requiring a copyright ID.
If you want to use the DMCA, like patents, you must file your copyright with the (insert country) copyright system and file the ID with any DMCA request. This must be a traceable ID and will point to the material in question.
Repeal and replace the entire law with something else.
Isn't filing a false DMCA a crime?
Did they just do this to an attorney? One who works for that particular industry?
What a genious move
The thing is, companies don't have to be right to win in court. If they have a bigger legal team and more money than you do, they can litigate until you're bankrupt and can't afford to fight anymore and you are forced to give up. It's a war of attrition and companies do it all the time.
@@Draknfyre I guess if she's a lawyer then at least she covers her own lawyer fees lol
@@mattice9083 Corporations can still out litigate you. She's one lawyer and I can guarantee you she doesn't have the resources a corporation does. Just because you're not paying for your defense doesn't mean you have the time and money otherwise to go up against a billion-dollar company with an entire legal team and unlimited funds to keep you locked up in court until you die. It's not as cut and dried as it seems. As I said before, corporations do this all the time. Like I don't care if you have an open and shut case against like Disney or Nintendo, they will bury you in court until you give up.
I've done session work as a drummer before, the music industry is *FULL* of scumbags. This does not surprise me.
Yup, musician son was told, cash up front is the only way you will make it in the industry.
The fact that it's COMMON knowledge that MOST people do not read electronic notices (and perhaps not paper notices) that are not short and simple enough to be commonly understood and accepted, these excessive long, detailed, and/or excessive attempted legal agreements are null and void in all USA Courts of Law, in my opinion.
Funny thing... such tos/contracts are non-binding in the legal sense in Europe just by default. And even if a company trys this crap, it either gets fined by Brussels directly, or a smaller court will absolutely rule in the customers favour.
Every time I see videos like these, I am baffeled how absolutely criminal consumers rights in the US really are.
@@Randleray And we mocked the regulations. We were ENCOURAGED to mock them. Exemplifying why we need HEAVY, enforced marketing regulations. It would be A start.
Keep in mind that some don't read stuff like the GNU license more than once, either. Then again, you've read any GNU public license after reading one.
@@Code7Unltd That might be part of the issue!
and with a good lawyer, many courts could be convinced to agree. Especially in instances where customers are presented a link to a constantly changing agreement or asked to review some absurdly long document at a store with a line of customers behind them.
You should never need to have the money to obliterate a company like that in court. If we do, the courts are absolutely broken
The courts are absolutely broken
@@jacobsmith8377 Well, it worked out in this case apparently. (without the involvement of any court tho)
The courts quite literally have always been broken. Since 1175
I got bad news for you, bro...
A ceiling fan that needs an app and the internet is so wrong.
Yeah.
I could see that on a really high ceiling, though.
@@davidgoodnow269 why not make it IR based, there are phones that has IR blasters. no garbage apps req'd
@@kopazwashere I thought about that, it could be the easiest solution. The choice would be for the user: Where's the remote? Versus, Do I really want to need an app, and have my _ceiling fan_ connected to my Wi-Fi?
Ain't personal choice great?
@@kopazwashere The autofocus on a phone camera uses an IR source to calculate distance. I'm sure you can write an app which makes it spit out a binary to control a device like any other standard remote control.
@@davidgoodnow269 ...ceiling fans mounted on ceilings that are too high to regularly, conveniently reach the pull chains should always be wired into a wall switch specifically designed for ceiling fans. Going to the effort to install and wire up a ceiling fan but not do the install properly is silly.
“When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say.”
Just wait until these companies know what the Streisand effect and The Louis Rossman is.
why does youtube even allow this? No sane person would ever think that Terms of Service would be covered by DMCA
Because DMCA forces them to either comply with the takedown request or become liable for copyright infringement if it's actually happening. Of course RUclips and every other company is going to limit their liability by complying with the request. The problem isn't RUclips, the problem is the DMCA itself.
(The only time I've ever seen RUclips deny a takedown request is when it's some random twerp who RUclips can see wouldn't be able to sue and thus isn't actually a threat)
@@mjc0961 This is partly correct, but google(youtube) shares responsibility in these matters. They are supposed to have a human look into these claims to determine if they have merit or not, which they are obviously not doing.
Right, it's not a human. The AI just says okay and that's all.
Becuase american law forces them to and they cant play favourites and fight for only certain people.
Because there’s 0 risk in letting a DMCA notice go forward against a small creator and a very large risk if they deny one that’s valid. Combined with the fact that they have to pay any people who review them, they have every incentive to just block the video the instant a DMCA notice comes through, regardless of whether it’s valid.
Two things: First: Louis pulling an Office Space on his ceiling fan is a beautiful sight.
Second: Great painting of the landscape in the background.
We need a Louis “Damn it feels good to be a gangsta” video of this destruction.
I think that is a mirror, sitting on the floor instead of being mounted to a wall.
@@davidgoodnow269the mirror is for the cats to admire themselves and their daily mischief!
That is a nice painting! What's the subscription fee for it? And how much of my personal information needs to be sold in order to acquire it?
why tf did i think you were talking about the window view 💀
Just like when LEGO attempted to takeout my small RUclips channel 15 years ago. The Lawyers were Day Pitney LLP based in New York. I had multiple DMCA's against reviews I did on LEGO products yet never detailed the infringing material. None of my videos used any material from LEGO in ad's or animations. The letters I was sent from the legals were extraordinary. Detailing what LEGO deemed appropriate to be said and seen online related to their product. Obviously i was not in the CLUB. Big companies have always been trying to snuff out the little players and I learned this years ago. Anyway lesson I learned was to stop looking at LEGO products. I went on to becoming a massive RUclips toy reviewer. I will never forget how the LEGO legals acted against me.
Is that the same picture from under the light switch?
Yes. Ceiling fan maintenance will not take that out of the shot
@@rossmanngroup
DON'T TAKE OUT YOUR FRUSTRATIONS OUT ON A CEILING 'FAN" !!!
It might even be a Subscriber 😂
... keep your Cool 😏 🖖
@@rossmanngroupinstructions unclear. ppbus stuck in ceiling fan.
@@My-Pal-Hal But... the cloud fan hasn't been keeping him cool.
@@sweetiespoon5150
The "Cloud" Fan,..
Doesn't even Exist.
And it's CLEARLY stated in the terms of (your data is mine, not yours) service.
Really, Look It Up.
But that would be a violation of the terms of service too, so 😳 😏 🖖
Hilarious that this popped up on my feed within 10 minutes of me complaining on Discord about how UMG is able to disable embedding an UNLISTED and monetization set to NO video on RUclips in Discord, because reasons. All for 44s of a song from a Movie, again, in an UNLISTED video that I personally picked NO for monetization. The Music Industry is a complete joke.
Terms of service in an online world should not be seen as legally binding,
They chop and change them on the fly which means they have broken the terms of service from the companies side, Companies now days think that TOS is an actual contract when in reality it is not.
If I can not send updates to ToS to their noreply@ email, why should they be able to do it to me?
@@_Ekarosthere argument is because there initial terms said only they can make changes
@@rynobehnke8289 Which in many countries of the world is an illegal and thus void term.
Not only did they abuse copyright to strike a legitimate user but they they did so against an Attorney who can and will defend themselves with a counter notice and will if she is smart counter sue over the false DMCA for damages and win in a slam dunk. Did this company run this by their legal team before doing this because if they had competent lawyers they would be shitting bricks right now over the liability this opens up
Yes, but there's usually still legal fees involved since most lawyers will get another lawyer to act on their behalf in situations like this.
RUclips simply doesn't accept counter-notices for certain privileged claimants with whom they have agreed to have a priority/altered claim process.. . You can of course file one, and even sue the original filer, but youtube won't restore a video because of it.
I wouldn't be surprised if they had an algorithm that searches videos just looking for their logo and then flags it. So it has no idea whether it's fair use or not .
@@WorBlux I wonder how long it takes before RUclips gets sued for, and then prosecuted for consistantly not adhering to the DMCA process. They have to, or they will lose their right to claim they are just a service provider and not actually responsible for whatever gets posted on their platform. Shit gets really expensive really quick if you are suddenly found liable for every copyright violation on RUclips. I wouldn't be surprised if we are talking many millions of dollars per day. Once government(s) find out that RUclips is gaming the system for the "privileged claimants" they will get sued hard. It wouldn't be the first time the European Union fines billions on Alphabet and many claimants will refer to the court case where RUclips lost in their claims, which will lead to RUclips losing those cases as well.
At least copyright adjacent attorney. Being capable of reviewing such terms in first place... It is one thing to go after some family-lawyer, but really pick your targets...
I blame RUclips for allowing this, just pure censorship. And also I'm very grateful for you Mr Louis Rossman for making videos like this and always being so honest and standing up for others, it's truly very inspiring!
Permission to criticize is fundamental to free speech. ❤
Everybody uses the phrase free speech incorrectly. Free speech only applies to the government officially banning what you want to say, nothing to do with private companies or individuals. That's why RUclips can strike you in the first place. All you can do is fight them directly, this would be thrown out of court if it's only a free speech argument.
absurdity of very long copyright protection should end. it should be same duration as patents. it's never the musicians that benefit from uber long copyright protection and always music lovers get the f.
Yes, although in this case I don't think it's the length of copyright that's the problem. They are just abusing the copyright protection process. And for patently fraudulant claims like this, the punishment should be the removal of all copyright protections from their IP. Honest mistakes are understandable, if it's a grey area of the law then fine let a judge decide. But outright abuse of the system should be severely punished. Although I note there's a strong tendency for the people with the deepest pockets to win cases (or at least get a more favorable outcome) and that needs to stop too.
TOS is supposed to be public knowledge lole
Otherwise why would people SEEK your service?
Absolute clownery
Bro i'm surprised you haven't spoken up about *REALPAGE* 😅
He is known for his restraint??
I'm more of a BACKPAGE guy, myself
I feel like we'll get that video soon
SLAPP suits are why I think the US Court System should adopt the "English rule" in civil court cases, and abandon our "American rule". The American rule is you pay your own legal fee's, the English rule is the loser pays for both. This makes the party who is acting in bad faith is more likely to settle out of court, not attempt SLAPP suits, etc.
I feel like this is a form of SLAPP action even if it's not an actual civil lawsuit. If someone issues a bad faith DMCA strike you should be able to compel them to pay legal fee's if you win a lawsuit for defamation or the like.
that would devastate anyone going against a large company, you'd risk losing absurd amounts of money against a company that attempts to steamroll you in legal fees after their lawyers use loopholes to crush your complaint.
there are cases where you can ask for lawyer fees if the case is absolutely ridiculous.
It's called the American rule but there are states that have the loser pays legal fees.
Apparently the Australians follow the English rule. I'm eagerly waiting to the the results of the Billy Mitchell lawsuit against Karl Jobst.
While that's a good idea in theory, many people who have strong cases for getting a false DMCA strike can still get shafted. Our legal system takes advantage of people, so they would lost in court and be forced to pay the assholes who false struck them with DMCA
I thought Murican law also does this, but iirc it's up to the judge to decide if loser pays both or their side. making it default would be nice.
Bonus point if the plaintiff is forced to pay all legal fees for other party (civil suits only), so people lose a lot of incentive on suing someone to begin with and they arbitrate first.
Glad you're tackling this one. I've been following it since its inception. Truly mind boggling (even for an entertainment dispute).
"We can't afford a real lawsuit because it would cut into our cocaine budget"
I've been making music with Splice sample libraries for a while now, but now I think I'll cancel and save a little money.
I'll gladly make you samples for free
Just a hunch: read the TOS and check whether you lose the rights to the samples you already used. You might want to watch the original video.
Louis, thanks for the "credit card" tip. Scammers are the bane of the internet. Keep up the good work, but, lordy, keep an eye on your health!
You are correct. This qualifies as fair use, and there is plenty of case history to back this up. They are counting on her not being able to afford the court process. They are jerks.
Why? Why do we keep allowing all this BS in life that constantly wants to screw us and drain our souls for $? If this society was a movie, you'd never rewatch it and probably wish you'd get your money and time back.
Waging war on splice maybe one of the most based things I’ve seen on RUclips. “I dare you” 😂😂😂
you're a national treasure i hope you know that , a true man of the people . Thanks Louis !
Global treasure.
I get the sense that Louis really wants Splice to sue him.
they wont hahahaha
This problem only exists because the US judicial system is designed to be unfair.
Did you know, that in most (European) countries you automatically have to pay the costs from other side if you lose?
No chance to intimate one with a lawsuit here. But the fact that if you win in the US and still uave to pay your attorney fees is absurd and unfair
Google has so much respect after you told them to F**K off they kept your channel up 😁
It's getting pathetic. All ego; zero skin. How did these people make it through grade school in one piece?? I'm serious.
Perhaps a lawsuit could end this "anyone can strike whatever they want" trash that plagues RUclips.
Why would a ceiling fan need an app.
What you don't want to know if your fan is running at the optimal rpm? 😂😂😂
Can't collect Telemetry with a relay and a switch
Next you are telling me it doesn't need a camera to adjust its speed to the amount of people present! Or a microphone to adjust to the level of physical excitation in the room. (/irony)
What’s worse is that she actually spoke with their in house counsel privately and in good faith BEFORE they cowardly blind sided her with the strike. On the call, she said that Splice conceded that some of the language in the agreement could be interpreted differently to how they intended.
something they tell you to read is hardly going to be proprietary secret and i would love to see them make a defense in court about copyright ownership over a terms of service document being read in a video critiquing the document.
14:41 - "It's worth it to get your argument out there. It's worth it to demonstrate your side."*
*Do not do this after a presidential assassination attempt if your name is Destiny
can a lawyer that represents themselves in court still write up the billable hours and then write it off taxes as a business expense?
Yes
a lawyer is almost never dumb enough to represent themselves in court
It's been done, but because the opposition had to pay costs, it's not a deductible business expence -- done got paid!
Yes, it's been done and it's actually pretty common.
Mostly though, a lawyer will hire a specialist lawyer for representation, or turn it over to a partner in practice specifically to keep the billing straight.
But once you get paid, you have to pay pay taxes on that as earnings. It's not a write-off, at all, ever, unless you lose and are unable to collect from the client. That's why bankruptcy lawyers always get their money first, and if you can't afford to pay for it, you can't declare bankruptcy!
@@aeghohloechu5022The lawyer said she has a full office of lawyers who could represent her. 😂
Splice is gonna have 20 less dollars next month from yours truely. 😄
Just cancelled.
the ones who are proven to litigate fake defamation or slap suits, should have to pay the entire court costs. and punitive damages
Waiting for the " they struck my video as well" response. I have popcorn on standby.
Many say likely that Splice land (may say out of pettiness) may do this to OP excellent video on Splicers
The way he delivers "Google me, look at my resume" sends me, it's so good
Legal documents such as Terms of Service and Privacy Policy aren't copyrightable, which makes the copyright strike moot.
I think they're striking on the basis of showing the website then? Which would count as fair use...
Would they file the lawsuit in Texas to avoid Anti SLAPP laws?
Why, must the artistry industry be so corrupt when its used to express humanity's soul? 😭
Because most anything that requires some level of skill or dedication, those that do would rather not waste their time becoming legalistic bureaucrats trying to control others through paper weapons. There's a reason why the worst dictatorships of the 20th Century were by people who were "Party Secretary" or "Deputy Minister" and wormed their way up their clubhouse's ladder, but had little to no honest occupation or ability outside of that. Those that can, do; those who can't fail upwards in an attempt to compensate.
...perhaps humankind's soul is less pretty than we like to pretend? 🤮
Terms of Service are meant to be read before committing, being able to share that legal document that should be on display for all to see is implied.... It's like the ToS on a private car park is supposed to be displayed at the entrance and in other places...
IT's supposed to be public facing...
The whole idea that it's proprietary, would mean you need a user licence to even access it, which means you'd need to read the public facing ToS before hand, but it IS the ToS... and now we can start going in an endless circle of what you need first... It find it like a contract you're not allowed to read until you sign on the dotted line, ridiculous!
I doubt they'll try to"find out". Bullies aren't interested in a fair fight. Abuse is all they understand. Abuse is warranted in return.
How toxic can we get before there is only litigation to interact between people beyond the mundane?
Probably be Yes / NO conversations and interactions; whilst UK, US goes woke, weak, PC world, litigation crazy - harming business itself and people's harmony; our competitors like India, China laughing all the way to the bank - or Chinese Yuan
There should be criminal charges for Fraud and Wirefraud.
I was jamming out to Orgy's cover of Blue Monday whilst watching this. Keep it up Louis, the fight goes on!
These people would make it so you can't read the TOS under the guise of being a security "risk" that's how you know these companies are scuffed up.
Couldn't have said it better myself. Screw splice and any other POS company.
Love it. That's bullying. You should be in the govt to create laws against such corporate fascism.
A cloud ceiling fan. 😂😂😂😂 Gtfoh lol. Is this really a thing? What in the fuck.
Censorship is the last refuge of a scoundrel.
A cloud ceiling fan? Why? Under what circumstances would someone want their ceiling fan to require an internet connection to work? I bet the design is also so gaudy that in 5 years, it will look like what it is today - garbage.
Im sure the app for it to work will stop working with new phones 5 years from now, if its still on app stores at all.
They know what they are doing. There is no ignorance, there is no miscommunication, there is only malice. Intentional malice. Their lawyers know it, their C-level officers know it. It is 100% deliberate.
Subscribed, I LIKE THIS DUDE ! Droppin mad facts and makin sense!
The music industry is in its death throws and is lashing out everywhere.
Louis, please invite her to your channel to discuss about the scam that is splice and similar services. Lov ya!
I love you Rossmann. Thank you for standing up for smaller creators.
It sounds like they had many exploitable holes in their document. They should be thanking her.
Many say she should be charging them and giving Splice Land or whatever they f%%^^%^% called an invoice of her labour & time = $$$$ for talented legal eagle
I very much enjoyed this update, thanks Louis.
For all the information we learn no one ever does a darn thing about it.
That means you can do something. We can. ❤️
If she sues them (as an attorney, it should be expected), it'll happen, even if it needs bankrolling by Rossman Beatmaking Group Inc.
There needs to be a penalty for filing false DMCA claims otherwise it will be continually misused.
She asked questions??!!
What a cow!!!
I was today years old when I found out some ceiling fans need an app to work.
Thanks for the reminder about the virtual credit card. I'm long overdue for one.
I feel like that's the credit card equivalent of judging Android customers when Apple does, and judging Apple customers when Android does.
Aren't credit cards supposed to be regulated such that we shouldn't need virtual cards?
"Fuck around and find out." Fuck... Dude... I love you! Keep it up! You kick ass!
The most criminal thing about splice is how they force you to be subscribed to use credits you spent money on. You got 1200 credits but no sub? Too bad. Can't use it.
WOW! awesome and I appreciate your conviction in these bulling tactics companies try to force on anyone. Legal action should be taken or an official apology given like you say to the improperly accused person has to endure.
...I see the lazyboi. I SEE THE LAZYBOI!!
Great Alan Partridge episode -on different sort of La* yBoys (Uploaded by others - YT CC) - small sample from ruclips.net/video/-Fh6EUQ41JU/видео.html&ab_channel=BBCStudios & yes I do have / met some very nice friendly La*ybo*s, e..g., dancing and good times @ Magaluf on Sea
Your logic is so solid they won't be able to crack it with a 20 pound sledge!!
"When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say."
- George RR Martin
Well, Tyrion at any rate. And he's right, but I'm not sure how much George himself actually agrees.
Love this!!! There's obviously a reason they don't want people understanding their terms.
Censoring criticism
Big mistake on the bourgeois side
This!!
Sir Louis, you're a hero. Definitely someone I look up to. The way you stand your ground and say NO is inspiring as fuck. Thank you man.
I find it almost hilarious when someone will do something illegal to a lawyer, attorney, or other legal professional only for it to bite them in the arse.
agree - many say it's backfiring into Splicey's land's face and quite right as well (bad kudos) compared to another great video by OP and by the talented female legal eagle - ; good kudos & content, I'm shortly subbing to her great channel as well - some good and useful videos
The world is trying to SENSOR each other.....Just floors me.
Oh boy, here we go again!
I've had several Splice accounts for years. Years.
I am very concerned about this and hope that Splice takes the strike back very soon. I am also now eager to see what she had to say about Splice as it does seem like very important info I need to be aware of. Will be subscribing to her now also because of this. Thank you for covering it.
Louis reads the terms of service and clicks decline.
Yeah if thereto click! ,& not forced abriation agreement.
Thanks so much for your brutal honesty, humor and work for all us repair guys. We applaud you. 👏
Just cancelled my splice account of 4 years. How can you start a business which has the customer in mind with a business like splice? Ive been djing over 20 years and have wiped splice off my mpc, all computers and stand alones
Another classic display of the Streisand effect. Do these companies never learn?
Streisand Effect exhibit #32,967.
Thanks for sharing - this keep on referring to this Eulogy and downloading Wiki Page
These videos are NEEDED, thanks Louis.