I just read the shocking story of how college student Asia McGowen was gunned down by her stalker Anthony Powell who then killed himself. He had been stalking Asia on YouTube and Facebook, leaving her nasty and threatening comments. He had also made videos about her as well as other videos railing against black women, atheist and other topics. While he used YouTube and Facebook to stalk her, he actually knew Asia from a class at Henry Ford Community College in Dearborn, Michigan. Since he shot her at point blank range it was likely that she had no idea that Powell was her stalker (they were in a classroom together alone when he shot her).
According to YouTuber infamoustrag, Powell made a video saying that he had a shotgun and was going to use it to kill himself or the object of his affection, Asia. He reported it to Detroit police who were unable to watch the video.
A lot of the focus seems to be on her being on YouTube and Facebook (a lot of blaming the victim) completely disregarding that Powell actually knew McGowen in real life and was obsessed with her. He knew her from school not Facebook or YouTube. He most likely would have attempted to do this anyway without use of the internet. While YouTube and Facebook were the method Powell used to harrass McGowan, they could have saved her life if anyone had taken the threats seriously. Most times after incidents like this all the people come out of the woodwork to say “We never thought he’d do something like this,” but in this case it was all over the internet. The internet is not anonymous (even when you register for a site with bogus information they know where you are). Had they complained to YouTube and Facebook they may have been able to get information on the source of the threats to identify this guy before this happened. The police definitely could have gotten this information from Google or Facebook.
I think that we as internet citizens need to be more vigilant when we see threatening or other behavior that can hurt others. The video where the guys say what he’s going to do should have been on the news and police should have been at his door. Save the threatening material on your own computer and don’t trust that it will still be on YouTube, Facebook, MySpace or wherever later. Local police departments are mostly clueless when it comes to the internet so if we really feel that something is going to happen we might have to bug them to death (and hold their hands to understand) to get them involved in a case. There’s a lot that YouTube and Facebook can do as well but many don’t know that if they are contacted by law enforcement they can be compelled to give information about particular users. But I think the most can be done with users being vigilant about threats – take them seriously, report it to the authorities (not just to the service provider) and MAKE them respond.
Last week I heard in the news that Prince was cracking down on YouTube and eBay for not protecting his copyrights. What I am reading in the news is that he is removing grainy videos of his concert in the UK as well as pirated music and videos. There has been no mention of the lip-syncing videos or those where someone else is singing one of his songs.
I used his song in a video and it was taken down. The fact that my video was removed from YouTube still doesn’t sit well with me. Last week or so, I contacted YouTube to find out who to contact regarding my video. They gave me the name of Robert Allen at Universal Music Publishing Group and today I decided to contact him as I felt that there was some misunderstanding about the content of my video as I wasn’t sure about who actually looked at the video to get it removed. This is what I wrote:
From: Kenya Allmond
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2007 8:53:13 AM
To: robert.allen[email omitted]
Subject: Questions Regarding Video Removed from YouTube
Mr. Allen,
I was given your name by YouTube as a contact person regarding my video that was taken down being accused of copyright infringement. The video was of my boyfriend lip-syncing to Prince’s Kiss. We were driving along and the song came on the radio, he got really into the song so I took my camera out and recorded it. I thought he was really funny so I posted it to YouTube primarily for the purpose of sharing with friends and family. This was a home video.
While I understand that Prince’s song was in the video (it came on the radio) and was the point of the video since my boyfriend was lip-synching to it, I don’t understand why the video from removed. Under what circumstances is a home video considered to be infringing on copyrights? Am I as a consumer required to license the music in a lip-sync fan video? How much would such licensing cost?
Please provide guidance as I am confused that my video was removed and would like to know what course of action to take.
kenya allmond
kenyaoa[email omitted]
vm/f 202.478.0490
Below is the response I received.
From: Allen, Robert
Date: Tuesday, September 18, 2007 11:21:35 AM
To: kenyaoa[email omitted]
Subject: Re: Questions Regarding Video Removed from YouTube
Under U.S. Copyright law, the copyright owner of a musical composition has the right to permit or deny the synchronization of that musical composition in any audio-visual work. Many of the writers administered by Universal Music Publishing encourage the synchronization of their musical compositions in audio-visual works displayed on YouTube; however, others do not. We respect these decisions by our writers and act accordingly.
Best regards,
Robert Allen
I just love canned responses that don’t answer my questions. Prince is not mentioned by name even though I know that he wrote this song per my legally purchased CD at home. While I know that a copyright holder “has the right to permit or deny the synchronization of that musical composition in any audio-visual work” this email does not specify if it is even possible to even get permission as I asked in my email. His response also specifically mentions YouTube. So does that mean that I can put the video up on some other video sharing site? I won’t but I’m just asking.
At any rate, if Prince does not want fans lip-syncing his songs (or singing them) then I will have to respect that. But I will also have to accept that perhaps I shouldn’t listen to them anymore for fear that I or anyone around me might be tempted to sing them.
This is my personal opinion. I wonder how the rest of the internet especially those who have had videos removed are reacting. I think most people are upset with YouTube but this is not a YouTube issue. Imagine the implications of video recording a wedding, party or other gathering where music is played. An artist might think it is infringing on his/her copyright if posted to YouTube or the scores of other video sharing sites out there.
Founded in 1917, the National Music Publishers’ Association (NMPA) is a trade association representing more than 600 American music publishers. The NMPA’s mandate is to protect and advance the interests of music publishers and their songwriter partners in matters relating to the domestic and global protection of music copyrights.
I found some interesting press releases on their site:
Hmmm. It’s pretty clear here from looking at their site that the issue with my video and others is not my rights to “fair use” under the U.S. copyright law but whether YouTube has “fair use” rights. These copyright infringement issues are about collecting licensing fees from YouTube – not the individual YouTube subscriber.
Yesterday I received a lovely notice from YouTube indicating that one of my videos was removed due to copyright infringement. The notice also stated that repeat incidents of copyright infringement would result in deletion of my account and all the videos uploaded to said account.
What was the video? Did I record something from TV and post it? Did I rip a DVD and post it? It was none of these. It is a video of the boyfriend lipsyncing to Prince’s “Kiss”.
The email from YouTube said that they received a third-party notification from The Music Publisher claiming that the material was infringing. My problem with this is that they don’t tell me who notified them that my video was infringing their copyright. The Music Publisher? Not only this but they deleted it within a few hours of me making the video public. According to YouTube copyright holders can
sign up for our Content Verification Program which electronically notifies us, removing any room for error, and significantly increases the speed at which we are able to remove any infringing content.
So this is an anonymous, automated process. Even though I love technology, I really hate anonymous, automated processes especially when they take the place of a human. My question is whether anyone actually watched the video that I posted. My suspicions tell me that my video was flagged on the basis of a text search as my description contained “The BF really seems to like ‘Kiss’ by Prince.” My suspicions are bolstered by the fact that Robert Anton’s YouTube account was deleted because of a video where he sang a short portion of Prince’s “Kiss” acapella.
Another video deleting instance was last month when guitar instructor David Taub of NextLevelGuitar.com had over 100 of his video guitar lessons removed from YouTube because a music company accused him of copyright infringement for an instructional video on how to play a Rolling Stones song. Other video questionable take-downs have ranged from videos of friends at a restaurant to videos that had similar titles to TV shows. Again, it’s obviously an automated process.
YouTube has undoubtedly created this process to deal with the large number of copyright infringement claims that it has to process. This is probably the most efficient way to deal with these requests as not removing infringing material can be costly. I do understand that. YouTube/Google currently is embroiled in a lawsuit filed by Viacom over copyright infringement. I’m sure that other companies are waiting in the wings for their chance to collect from YouTube as well.
But this begs the question of “what is fair use?” If I’m at a party or wedding and a song comes on, should I turn my camera off? Am I infringing on a copyright? What about karaoke? If I film or otherwise record someone singing karaoke am I breaking the law? Is a lipsync video pirated? Are these copyright holders using this automated system to get around what would normally be considered fair use?
I am going to submit a counter notice because I am interested in seeing what will happen. In the meantime, I have posted a version of the video without sound to see if it will be deleted as well.
Of course this video has lost its point without the sound. I wonder if “The Music Publisher” considers mouthing the lyrics to a song copyright infringement.
I just read the shocking story of how college student Asia McGowen was gunned down by her stalker Anthony Powell who then killed himself. He had been stalking Asia on YouTube and Facebook, leaving her nasty and threatening comments. He had also made videos about her as well as other videos railing against black women, atheist and other topics. While he used YouTube and Facebook to stalk her, he actually knew Asia from a class at Henry Ford Community College in Dearborn, Michigan. Since he shot her at point blank range it was likely that she had no idea that Powell was her stalker (they were in a classroom together alone when he shot her).
What was the video? Did I record something from TV and post it? Did I rip a DVD and post it? It was none of these. It is a video of the boyfriend lipsyncing to Prince’s “Kiss”.
