WGI now making copyright claims on 2008 regionals

[DCIHasBeen]

Actually you just need to send an email making the claim. The onus is on the counter-claimer to repudiate the claim.

Interestingly enough it seems they've stopped (or paused) their violation-flagging activity. A simple search for other 2008 videos still reveals many (most?) from '08 still are up.

I wonder why?

Yes, the DMCA form can be submitted by email, but the form contains a statement that you are asserting, under penalty of perjury, that you are the copyright owner or representative thereof.

[CoastGuard]

WOW. What a strong motivation to try to strong-arm potential subscribers to REPLAY. And it's not FACT yet. You have no idea how many Finals-week-only subscribers they'll pick up.

FACT: WGI didnt ask the video posters (in our case THEIR CUSTOMER) to remove the video first.

FACT: WGI continues to permit non-REPLAY regional videos to remain.

Just where's all this RUMOUR you're talking about?

Did you video your performance at a WGI Regional?

[justgin]

At the Nashville regional, we were sold a video of prelims, but given a video pass for finals (or the other way around). I'm truly clueless.....is it not okay to post the video that we were allowed to take? I've posted videos for my kids to see....we use it as a way to work on things during the week when the kids are hours away and unable to get together to rehearse. They get a link to the video and a to-do list for individual corrections so we can knock out some of the little stuff before they return the next weekend.

I've never posted one that WGI produced, so I'm confused if it is still a problem. If posting publicly is a problem no matter who makes it, can I assume that it's okay to post them so that only my selected "friends" on YouTube can see them? Not trying to be difficult, just trying to clarify what is and isn't okay.

[corpsband]

That wasn't my point. You're complaining that there are still videos other than 2008 that are up and running, yet apparently WGI hasn't taken them down yet. That was what my explanation re: complaints was directed to. Also, what if if initially, the copyright-owner approached the person who posted the video, but was ignored or even rebuffed? Or, what if they are posting anonymously and so the copyright-owner has no way of tracking them down to legally enforce the copyright? Then the next course of action would be to approach the organization overseeing the color guard activity (especially if said organization has set policies regarding copyrighted materials).

As I said, for 2008, I'm assuming that WGI has been told in no uncertain terms that legally, they must prevent copyrighted material from being distributed contrary to copyright law. Hence the harder line they've had to take this year. The same thing has been happening with DCI, to the point that now even parking lot audio/videotapes are off-limits.

Please don't mis-characterize my post. I am not "complaining" about other 2008 videos being up. Please quote the message where I do so. My reference to 2008 was only to point out that REPLAY contain only '08 content and that only '08 content was violation-flagged.

DVD content posted online poses a much more serious risk to WGI than video from regionals yet it still persists. Both of these items suppor my contention that dollars not legal-risk are the driving force behind the recent takedowns.

I don't think WGI is outside their rights legally to request the regionals be removed. As I and another poster indicated, it was their methodology which is objectionable.

I also think they're doing these takedowns strictly because of REPLAY. My complaint here is that their effectively giving lip-service to their own policy about videos taken by units at regionals. They say "its ok to post your video online on your own website" with the full knowledge that (due to the size, bandwidth and technology barriers) most websites can't do that unless they host the video on a youtube-like site. Instead the message is "buy a replay subscription if you want to see your own video".

As for contacting the poster through youtube, WGI has contacted and requested video removal through youtube messaging in the past. You can't post anonymously on youtube -- you need a least a working email address. If the request is ignored then the violation-takedown would appropriate.

[corpsband]

Did you video your performance at a WGI Regional?

Yes. They gave us a VIDEO PASS !!

Edited March 11, 2008 by corpsband

[corpsband]

Also, it is against WGI policy to video a unit at a WGI event.

Really? Why do they issue VIDEO PASSES to units?

[justgin]

Please don't mis-characterize my post. I am not "complaining" about other 2008 videos being up. Please quote the message where I do so. My reference to 2008 was only to point out that REPLAY contain only '08 content and that only '08 content was violation-flagged.

DVD content posted online poses a much more serious risk to WGI than video from regionals yet it still persists. Both of these items suppor my contention that dollars not legal-risk are the driving force behind the recent takedowns.

I don't think WGI is outside their rights legally to request the regionals be removed. As I and another poster indicated, it was their methodology which is objectionable.

I also think they're doing these takedowns strictly because of REPLAY. My complaint here is that their effectively giving lip-service to their own policy about videos taken by units at regionals. They say "its ok to post your video online on your own website" with the full knowledge that (due to the size, bandwidth and technology barriers) most websites can't do that unless they host the video on a youtube-like site. Instead the message is "buy a replay subscription if you want to see your own video".

As for contacting the poster through youtube, WGI has contacted and requested video removal through youtube messaging in the past. You can't post anonymously on youtube -- you need a least a working email address. If the request is ignored then the violation-takedown would appropriate.

After working on copyright clearance for our circuit, my guess would be that it's because of the TYPE of clearances WGI secures. We have to turn in copyright info for all units going to Power Regionals and World Championships, but not for regular regionals. If you are allowing distribution of videos that you know you haven't gotten copyright clearance for, then WGI could be held accountable, as well as the individual poster of the video.

There are a kazillion different ways you can get clearance, based on how many times something is performed, how many people will pay to see it, how many ways it can/will be recorded, etc. Each unit is allowed one archival copy for their own use without copyright problems, so that's why they care that only one video is made, either by WGI or by one person with a video pass from each unit. Again, just a guess, but I would think that the blanket copyright agreements made for RePlay probably include a clause about that only limited viewing will be allowed, including what those parameters are.

In reference to the old videos, once you BUY a video and watch that message about copyright infringement that you can't fast foward through, WGI is off the hook if you choose to post it. They sold you the video and made sure you saw the legal wording about how you can get in big trouble if you copy it or distribute it to anyone else. If you still choose to do that, then it's all on you.

Now, all that said, I do think it would be nice for someone to at least give you the option of taking a video down yourself before it is flagged.

[byline]

There are a kazillion different ways you can get clearance, based on how many times something is performed, how many people will pay to see it, how many ways it can/will be recorded, etc. Each unit is allowed one archival copy for their own use without copyright problems, so that's why they care that only one video is made, either by WGI or by one person with a video pass from each unit. Again, just a guess, but I would think that the blanket copyright agreements made for RePlay probably include a clause about that only limited viewing will be allowed, including what those parameters are.

In reference to the old videos, once you BUY a video and watch that message about copyright infringement that you can't fast foward through, WGI is off the hook if you choose to post it. They sold you the video and made sure you saw the legal wording about how you can get in big trouble if you copy it or distribute it to anyone else. If you still choose to do that, then it's all on you.

Thanks for this explanation, Ginger!

[quegrawks]

Not a full time job and not very hard to locate non-2008 stuff. Not catching a thing is more like it. I wasn't making it up -- everything on our account is colorguard and the WGI stuff is clearly labeled. If someone worked hard enough to find our 2008 regional appearance, right there along side it in the "other videos from this user" area they would have seen regionals from other years.

Pretty clearly that's NOT the case. If WGI didnt have a choice and they were actually worried about consequenes, they'd spend a few days surfing youtube and get almost all of them (because most guard videos have the WGI tag in them).

For us, it's all about HOW and WHAT. A simple request to remove the video would have been just as easy to make and much better way to treat their client/customer.

And why just 2008 regional videos? It's seems to pretty clearly be a decision made to drive more income to REPLAY. If not why are so many OTHER WGI videos still ok on youtube? Because they can't find them? Ridiculous in the extreme. This was a very selective act clearly designed to drive members in current WGI units to spend money to buy a REPLAY pass to see their own show. This is clearly a target audience as WGI offers unit directors free REPLAY passes in exchange for member email lists. to WGI for thinking that forcing people to REPLAY is good marketing. The net effect for us was just to find other streaming sites on which to host videos. (I didn't realize there were so many!).

I really don't understand why you seem to be attacking a person who has clearly stated that she doesn't really know the reason for it, and isn't affiliated with WGI, but is trying to find some rationale for the situation.

Bad form IMO.

[byline]

I really don't understand why you seem to be attacking a person who has clearly stated that she doesn't really know the reason for it, and isn't affiliated with WGI, but is trying to find some rationale for the situation.

Bad form IMO.

Thanks. It's true that I have absolutely no inside info, but I have also worked a fair bit with copyright, given my experience as a writer. So I'm trying to look at it from WGI's point of view, and I can see some plausible reasons for why they're having to enforce this policy. I can understand why it's not popular -- been there, done that myself -- but I can also understand that given the litigious society in which we live, they may not have a whole lotta choice in the matter.