While monitoring services similar to Shazam do work, if the offending content is brief and does not start and end with the main body of the clip, my experience is that it will not see it. But then again, the offending content I still have on youtube predates automated scanning, so maby they only scan new stuff and ignore all old content. I don’t know with certainty.
All I’m saying is don’t let the bogie man scare you from doing your thing. The man always want’s you to believe he’s all knowing and all powerful despite this never being true. There’s a balance between taking reasonable actions to avoid litigation and legitimate fair use. But like I said, I also strongly appreciate that I’m not the one that has to deal with the current issue, so I’m not throwing down a gauntlet or anything, just making a case for fair use. Thanks, -dosman > On May 23, 2019, at 11:17 AM, Ken Fallon <[email protected]> wrote: > > Back in the twat days and before there was no way to ever get noticed, > because the process of copyright enforcement was not automated. It is > now. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shazam_(application) > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shazam_(application)>
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
_______________________________________________ Hpr mailing list [email protected] http://hackerpublicradio.org/mailman/listinfo/hpr_hackerpublicradio.org
