COPYRIGHT is Copy Wrong? Harry Chapin YouTube For Example

What the fuck is with idiots? They don't know what copyright means?

It means "This is MY SHIT, DO NOT COPY IT."

So here's a typical YouTube asshole illiterate who insists, "I have no copy right infringemnent intended."

That's right, Jason Colannino, you just felt like posting a copyrighted television show because YOU felt like it. You take somebody else's property and do what you please with it.

You can imagine what Jason Colannino would say if I broke into his home and took his stereo equipment over to my place. He'd read my note: "Hey, Guy I Don't Know, you weren't home, so I'm "sharing" your stereo equipment since you weren't using it. If you want it back, drive over to my place, show me proof that it's really you, and I'll return your stereo equipment, no harm done."

Jason Colannino would be screaming, "How DARE you take MY property..."

Or would he say, "That's ok, pal, I have no problem. It's not stealing, it's sharing. It's not infringemnent...or whatever that word is."

In a decent, sane world, Google would emphatically put up a notice any time an asshole like Jason uploads something: "You can NOT upload a TV show episode. You do NOT OWN IT. Claiming the copyright belongs to the original owner is BULLSHIT, because you are acting like YOU own the copyright. It's the original owner who decides whether to put it on YouTube, NOT YOU."

Common sense, anyone?

ANYONE should be able to flag Jason's video and YouTube (owned by GOOGLE) should then send the prick a note: "If you can't prove you're the copyright owner, or that it's public domain, we're taking this down. Another violation, and you're suspended."

No no no. Thanks to the weak, limp DMCA laws that GOOGLE makes sure to keep as is, big billionaire websites (GOOGLE, EBAY, AMAZON...) are immune from prosecution. They aren't required to police their sites or question anybody about anything. All they need do, is remove a violation within, oh, a week, two weeks, a month...IF they're caught by a copyright owner who then takes the time to file forms with them and give them name, address, phone number, and maybe a pint of blood.

Obviously, Harry Chapin's estate hasn't jumped through the hoops, or they figure VH-1 the producers should do it, and VH-1 figures the Chapin estate should, or a record label, or a music rights organization. I have it, you take it...

We all like FREE, and we all go to YouTube and use it like a library, or the Museum of Television or whatever. The difference is, the library and the museum have integrity. They also pay money to preserve all types of TV shows, music and films...including items far more obscure than Harry Chapin. If Chapin's people or VH-1 want to look the other way, fine...they might figure the YouTube theft (which is what it is) is good publicity for Harry, or not important because the show won't get high ratings if it airs again. But the decision should be theirs, not Jason Colannino's.

Now, the Jason Colannino ninnies of the world really think that a stupid caveat like, "I do NOT own the RIGHTS to THIS VIDEO" makes posting to YouTube ok. Copyright is weakened to the point of being almost invisible, and that's not a good thing. But as long as The Great God Google gives people free entertainment, copyright owners be damned. And copyright owners are the nigger of the world, made to spend half their time filing forms to get their rights back for a few days before another abuse whips them on the back.

PS, GOOGLE allows for "monetization" of YouTube videos. This means that Jason Colannino could be making hundreds of dollars that actually belong to Harry Chapin's estate, and could go to Harry's "World Hunger" charity.