4SHARED SERVICE ABUSE NOTICE -ANYONE ELSE GET THEM??

[Detailed Infinity]

I've just ried my account on 4Shared and had no messages etc althought here are commercial titles on there. See below

[exprog]

Task queue failed at step 0: Error #2048

I use Google Chrome, and find this message only appears if Adblock is operational. I just pause Adblock and it works ok. Remember to unpause after.

Chris

[GuitarPhil]

I've just received one of these take down notices from 4shared today and public access to my account has been suspended.

The file in question is a recording I made of the Duane Eddy tune '40 Miles of Bad Road'. It's been uploaded there for three years!

I played along to the backing track from the UB Hank Volume 4 CD. I had previously obtained written clearance from Mustang Music (who publish the UB Hank Series) that

The copyright situation is the cds can only be used for personal use and not as part of a cd sold for gain. This means that if you are not selling the recording we have no problem with you playing along with them and posting on Youtube.

I have the option of sending 4shared a 'counter notification' to try to get the disabling of my account lifted but their email includes this scary paragraph

You should also note that if you make any material misrepresentation in your counter notification that the material or activity was removed or disabled by mistake or misidentification, you will be liable for all damages, including costs and attorneys' fees, incurred by 4Shared or any copyright owner or copyright owner's authorized licensee as the result of our relying upon such misrepresentation in replacing the removed material or ceasing to disable access to it.

I'd really like to challenge this notification as it's clearly (to me, but I'm not a lawyer) a mistake but I don't want to be stuck with a huge legal bill

I'd be interested to see what the forum members here think.

Phil.

[MeBHank]

Ian, do you remember this thread?

http://shadowmusic.bdme.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=9207

At the time I made some phone calls and I typed up my findings in message 17. The issue at the time was YouTube videos. Exactly the same applies to any sort of online sharing, though, and it seems you've been the unlucky one this time. It's all down to red tape and it's irritating, but legally there's not a lot we can do. If the holder of the composer's copyright raises an issue we can dispute it, but it seems that if the law was enforced fully we would have no control and would have to cease uploading and sharing any tunes which are still subject to composer's copyright.

However, there may be a loophole. I may be wrong, but I believe these companies are almost certainly using "bot" type programmes that search the Internet for keywords. It's very unlikely that they have employees fishing through millions of online shared files, watching and listening to each one. I even doubt any human makes sure that all flagged files do indeed include the audio material to which their company owns the copyright. The key for us to avoid these problems (possibly ever again) would be to avoid including the titles of the tunes we upload in the file names and video titles. That way the bots cannot find them.

HTH...

J

[GuitarPhil]

Hi Justin, thanks for taking the time to reply. I posted here as Ian had received a similar notice this time last year. I have followed your link to the copyright thread and will cross-link back to this thread.

So, maybe I should call the tune "An instrumental story of a long journey over a poorly surfaced turnpike"

Phil.

[Gary Allen]

I dont think they badger the ones that pay for the premium account, though a quick search will get you one for free.................

[Stratpicker]

I think Justin is right about bot searches. I tried in vain to upload Hanks version of Sound of Silence and it was always rejected.
So I put it up as S o S and no bother, so far.
Same with Hanks While my guitar gently weeps. No dice there but it went on OK as Gently Weeps
Weird science!
Cheers
Ian

[MeBHank]

The Sound of Silence is a strange tune, in terms of rights. Remember, it was not included on "Marvin Mastertrax" (the BT CD of "Marvin at the Movies"). I may have misremembered this as it happened so long ago, but I think I was told at the time that its omission was because Paul Simon had refused to allow its release on the CD. Of course, Paul Simon is a funny bugger. I don't think I'd enjoy working with him.

Now that the Internet is the basis of how the world works, I think we're going to always have to find ways around things because there will always be the odd one or two people being picky about the material they own. It frustrates me: it's not as if these multi-millionaires can't afford it. If I'd recorded an original track or a new arrangement of an existing tune and somebody copied my work I'd be over the moon.

A massive bunch of bloody spoilsports, aren't they?

J

[Twang46]

Sir Cliff is one of the prime movers in getting copyright extended in this country & it seems that the problems people are having uploading named tunes is directly related to the money that people like Cliff among many others (& the lawyers) imagine they are being deprived of.

Has anybody ever been prosecuted & found guilty & subsequently penalised for posting a named artist's song/tune on utube/fourshared etc... ?

Piracy is a huge problem, not just in the music industry but threatening people who are keeping the music alive seems a very counter productive way of going about addressing this problem

Dick.

[Stratpicker]

I wonder how much money they think they are missing out on by us amateurs posting "covers" on YT or 4S etc?
Do they forget that we put them where they are in the first place?
Probably.
cheers
Ian