DATELINE PiB - Enjoy some back-and-forths between myself and YouTube because if they're going to make it this much a pain in the ass just to restore my account, then I'll save the effort for something that's worth it.
ROUND 1-A: YouTube.
YouTube | Broadcast Yourself™
This is to notify you that we have removed or disabled access to the following material as a result of a third-party notification by Take 2 Games claiming that this material is infringing:
GTAIV - "Hostile Negotiation", the Michael Mann Edition: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PsdUwdlmOmc
Please Note: Repeat incidents of copyright infringement will result in the deletion of your account and all videos uploaded to that account. In order to prevent this from happening, please delete any videos to which you do not own the rights, and refrain from uploading additional videos that infringe on the copyrights of others. For more information about YouTube's copyright policy, please read the Copyright Tips guide.
If you elect to send us a counter notice, please go to our Help Center to access the instructions.
Be aware that there may be adverse legal consequences in your country if you make a false or bad faith allegation of copyright infringement by using this process.
ROUND 1-B: Counterclaim
I am David Cochrane, the proprietor of the YouTube account "PlayItBogart" and wish to counter a claim made by Take 2 Games.
The following are details of a clip removed by you pursuant to 17 U.S.C. Section 512. I have a good faith belief that this material was removed or disabled in error as a result of mistake or misidentification of the material. I declare that this is true and accurate under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America.
GTAIV - "Hostile Negotiation", the Michael Mann Edition
I believe this clip was covered under the points of Section 107 of 17 U.S.C.
1. The clip is not for profit because I am not a member of any advertising partnership program and no profit is generated.
2. The clip is factual and does not misrepresent the media in question, and informed many of its viewers to the nature of the game, who had no prior knowledge of it. It is creative as it meshes together two concepts to illustrate the similarities it bears to a popular filmmaker.
3. The footage taken represents a single percentage of the source media and by no means constitutes a significant fraction of the media as a whole. Furthermore, it is at a reduced picture quality and is further abbreviated from the original content.
4. Citing the copyrighted material in the clip in no way adversely affected the ability of the copyright holder to derive income from sale or rental of the relevant media (Quite the opposite in fact, I'm told several people actually purchased the source media after viewing the clip). No moral rights are infringed as the clip contains no parody or defamatory comments about the material cited.
5. The clip is transformative as it is cut and edited to demonstrate the similarities to that of Hollywood film.
Having complied with the requirements of Section 512(g)(3), I remind you that you must now replace the blocked or removed material and cease disabling access to it within fourteen business days of your receipt of this notice. With the clip restored, this leaves my account with the previous two strikes, and should be reinstated. Please notify me when this has been done.
I appreciate your prompt attention to this matter. If you have any questions about this notice, please do
not hesitate to contact me.
(Address and telly # removed)
I also sent them a scan of my John Hopkins. No, not THAT one, although after this NEXT email...
ROUND 2-A: GENERIC RESPONSE
Dear David, We haven't been able to process your request with the information you have provided us. If you're trying to file an objection to a copyright takedown, please review our copyright hints at http://youtube.com/t/dmca_policy. Please be aware that any counternotice we receive will be forwarded to the party who issued the takedown notice; hence, your identity will be revealed. Also, before deciding to send a counternotice please be sure you understand that you can be held liable in court for a false counternotice.
Blah blah blah.
ROUND 2-B: You said WHAT about my mother?
Well maybe I'd be able to file more information if you people were to give me more information to work with, like, for example, the communique between the copyright holder (Which I was convinced was called "Take Two Interactive" and not "Take 2 Games") and YouTube, because all I have to work with is "HAY YOU'RE INFRINGING ON OUR COPYRIGHT".
Seriously, you're expecting me to defend myself by putting a blindfold over my head and forcing me to recite every aspect of another country's inane copyright code, while for all I know the person who contacted you is a company janitor with an email address who searched your site and fired off a complaint for every hit of "GTAIV" he found.
Which is compounded because there's a user running around by the name of "piayltbogart" and "1337er1337berserker" who's claiming that he's behind my termination. No, I don't have his statements because they're offensive and the first name is capitalized in such a manner that it sounds like it's the real me. I'm sure you can dig the statements out of your server yourselves, especially if you're capable of terminating any other account (i.e. one) that I made with this email address.
I'm not going to move heaven and hell to convince you people to give me my account back. I'll take my ball and go to another court. Maybe Revver? They comb through all your content BEFOREHAND so this kind of crap doesn't happen, and not just that, they let you share the ad revenue! Isn't that awesome? On YouTube, you'd have to be a plagiarizing asshole who appeals to the lowest common denominator to get into YOUR ad revenue sharing program.
If you don't know how your own laws work, who are you to expect me to?
A lot of people are very pissed off with you right now, and I don't mean just me.
Yours in destroying the fabric of the internet,
P.S.: Here's a bright idea. Instead of disabling accounts, why don't you just disable their uploading privileges so that they can access important past messages like one from Richard Cheese giving them approval over a clip using their content? Or is this so advanced a concept that it clearly just have been jacked from another media sharing site?