Banned

  • Thread starter Thread starter brb
  • Start date Start date
B

brb

Guest
:bandit: Just thought I would make all Gills fans aware on this site, that I have received a warning and threatened account closure from Youtube (for any continued infringements), this is in regards to a complaint from the Football League.

Therefore I will know longer be able to upload any more personal (mobile phone) video match clips for sharing a few seconds of any games I attend.

Please feel free to discuss or post your views...
 
I am not sure the football league's arguement would hold much water legally, you own the interlectural propety rights with your footage so should be able to do what you want with it... that said I am not a legal eagle though so I could be wrong
 
BSG said:
I am not sure the football league's arguement would hold much water legally, you own the interlectural propety rights with your footage so should be able to do what you want with it... that said I am not a legal eagle though so I could be wrong
Click to expand...

BSG - Sadly I've checked with some one that is a legal eagle, purchasing a football ticket means you are agreeing to abide by the terms within it, is my understanding.

I am also led to believe that the Football League have restrictions on visual and audio recordings within a football ground. I hasten to add I don't blame Youtube. I guess that they obviously don't want the cost of legal action against them, which is what I have also received a warning in regards to, if I attempt to counter claim this infringement, basically in short I cannot afford to be done or fight it.
 
The league sell the right to film and broadcast matches, they have to protect against illegal filming that could affect their price.

That said brb I will write to you in prison. <laugh><laugh>
 
Guys, I had already thought of the IP ban, which there are obviously ways round.

I think the part I do not really understand is how the Football League found the video in the first place. I assume they must have a method of trawling sites such as Youtube and I don't mean a human looking through. Also why this video and not previous one's?

This time I used an IPhone instead of my normal mobile camera, does it look for a particular image code. I doubt it?

So apart from the change in mobile device, what else was different? Did I show the league goal before the League show? Maybe and yes I can understand them being upset over that.

Or maybe quite simply someone grassed me up. However, the complaint did come directly from the Football League, would anyone really go to the trouble of informing them of a 23 second poor quality personal video?

I think what concerns me more about this, if you follow the guidance, I have seen the wording 'visual' used, so if you take a camera snap shot and post that, does the same rules apply, I assume so. We are a football community, that for free share our experiences, however, the people that run football imo want to market everything under their terms, regardless of the cost football fans already outlay. I don't particularly care about using Youtube and publishing it to a world audience but it is the easiest tool to use.
 
brb said:
Guys, I had already thought of the IP ban, which there are obviously ways round.

I think the part I do not really understand is how the Football League found the video in the first place. I assume they must have a method of trawling sites such as Youtube and I don't mean a human looking through. Also why this video and not previous one's?

This time I used an IPhone instead of my normal mobile camera, does it look for a particular image code. I doubt it?

So apart from the change in mobile device, what else was different? Did I show the league goal before the League show? Maybe and yes I can understand them being upset over that.

Or maybe quite simply someone grassed me up. However, the complaint did come directly from the Football League, would anyone really go to the trouble of informing them of a 23 second poor quality personal video?

I think what concerns me more about this, if you follow the guidance, I have seen the wording 'visual' used, so if you take a camera snap shot and post that, does the same rules apply, I assume so. We are a football community, that for free shares our experiences, however, the people that run football imo want to market everything under their terms, regardless of the cost football fans already outlay. I don't particularly care about using Youtube and publishing it to a world audience but it is the easiest tool to use.
Click to expand...

Someone would have to be a sad ****er to report someone for that, would not think anyone would be that sad to go to the effort of reporting for that, it is not really a crime as it is a very short piece of media, But saying that I have had people report me on Youtube in the past and also on facebook for a wall post, there is sad people,
The only thing I can think is that they have looked at ones linked to clubs and gone on recent uploads or something like that.
But I come back to the bit you go on about, who would report you, Maybe it was a sad opposition fan who is pissed off cause it shows his team getting ****ed over.
Sorry for the language, just showing how sad I think it is that you got banned.
 
Just looked under the key word Gillingham and then went on upload date and there is a few bournemouth fans who have posted clips.
Also I see there is a few sad people who have posted clips on their Football manager 2012 games, Sad sad sad, Not even I would do that. show off or what lol, I want the game for days like today when I am bored. I have just got MW3 but cant be bothered to play it as don't want to get bored fully of the ps3 by playing every day, not played fifa for days either, or my other new game Battlefield 3, Getting NFS The run soon anyway, pre order.
 
instead of putting up 23 seconds of Gillingham why not put up 23 seconds of Laural and Hardy its just as comical and after 50 yrs the copyright dies <ok>
 
There are really two issues - the legal one and the personal one.

On the legal one I think we're all agreed you're bang to rights, and there's absolutely no point in poking an angry bear with a stick.

On the other hand, as you infer, we, the supporters, are a community, and sometimes it's just enjoyable to share an experience, and it would be nice to able to post short, low quality (I'm taking about resolution here, not the ability of the photographer) clips on the community websites. Unfortunately as soon you start to try to draw a legal line between what might be permissible to be shared and what's not the whole thing would become unworkable, so the solution is just to ban 'publication' of everything.

Not sure about still photos though. There are plenty of those on plenty of sites. Do they all have permission? Answers on a postcard to...
 
The thing I find most frustrating with this issue is that with the total over exposure of the premier league and the difficulty finding highlights of anything outside of it, it very frustrating that they should focus on the the fans that are trying to provide a little extra to other fans. Maybe if highlights of games were more readily available for league (other than the 30 secs on the football league show 1 night a week) then there wouldn't be any need for fans to post things.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back