Freesound Forums
"SoundEffectsFactory" youtube channel
Started February 1st, 2013 · 426 replies · Latest reply by Timbre 9 years, 3 months ago
Timbre wrote:
Update : apparently SoundEffectFactory has now deleted the tags "public" & "domain" from all his YouTube videos , even the ones which he alleges are "public domain".
Did this happen within just a few hours of you reporting it?
Must mean that SEF either types very quickly or has some means to do mass updates to the metadata on his files.
All of this is very interesting, because when asked to rectify missing attribution issues he complained that it was very difficult to go through all of the videos and make sure everything was correct - because there were too many of them.
Or am I missing something here?
AlienXXX wrote:
Did this happen within just a few hours of you reporting it?
Must mean that SEF either types very quickly or has some means to do mass updates to the metadata on his files.
Looks like tags can be deleted en-mass , ( although that means his allegedly public domain sounds no longer have public domain tags ).
AlienXXX wrote:
All of this is very interesting, because when asked to rectify missing attribution issues he complained that it was very difficult to go through all of the videos and make sure everything was correct - because there were too many of them.
However the descriptions have to changed individually : as I write this he is currently getting RSI* deleting his "extra tags" from the descriptions, as they are forbidden by YouTube.
e.g. Currently this SEF video Dramatic Bass "Dun Dun Dun" does not have "block of keywords in the desciption field" , but on this video from two weeks ago it does have the "extra tags", as SEF calls them.
[ * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repetitive_Strain_Injury :¬]
Lets take this as a positive sign that he does listen and is able to change.
I think it also reinforces the value and usefulness of this thread - If there was ever any doubt.
Please lets keep the discussion clean, as it has been recently.
AlienXXX wrote:
Lets take this as a positive sign that he does listen and is able to change.
He's only changing the tags and the descriptions because they contravene the terms-of-service of his YouTube paymaster , he's not going to change for the benefit of the sound creators, he doesn't give a monkey's about them and their rights.
I have no idea how to take the court thing forward.
Also, why? My content has been removed, which was the whole point.
Also, YouTube never "slapped me". I'm just not taking a chance with Timbre spamming reports with his many aliases.
You confirm, then, than you removed the tags of fear of YouTube enforcing his policy? Or was it in good will, as you acknowledge CC BY is not the same as Public Domain?
SoundEffectsFactory wrote:bulbastre wrote:
I have no idea how to take the court thing forward.
Also, why? My content has been removed, which was the whole point.Exactly, I know you won't do anything so please just get off your high horse. Good luck spending thousands upon thousands of dollars trying to find an attorney to represent you in court over a sound effect you put up for free on the internet.
Actually, no.
I did put a free sound in the Internet. Free as in free beer.
Not free as in Free Willy. The sound needs proper credit to be redistributed and used.
After all these pages I doubt that you can't grasp the concept of this.
Also, the video you claimed will be restored within the next week or so I estimate.
Good, that means my one minute effort turned into a couple of weeks of the desired effect. I just found a better hobby than reading webcomics.
bulbastre wrote:
You confirm, then, than you removed the tags of fear of YouTube enforcing his policy? Or was it in good will, as you acknowledge CC BY is not the same as Public Domain?
Like I said, he has probably already filed many reports (From what I can tell, he has nothing else better to do with his dull pathetic life) and is most likely messaging other YouTubers / Freesound users to do the same. So why would I take a chance?
Thanks, that's the confirmation I needed.
The tags were "public" and "domain" not "public domain" so they wouldn't even alter search results in regards to the CC-BY sounds that are uploaded.
If they wouldn't alter search results, why were they there in the first place?
I mean seriously, why were they there in CC-BY videos? That's like uploading a video of mentos and coke and tagging Halls, Milk.
SoundEffectsFactory wrote:pot calling kettle black ... Google-search hasn't caught up with your recent changes :
Timbre spamming ...
Googling "SoundEffectsFactory" "Extratags:" on "www.youtube.com"
gets hundreds of hits, now that's what spam looks like.
SoundEffectsFactory wrote:
... Timbre ... his many aliases.
If you believe I have "many aliases" then you're suffering from paranoia.
I have one YouTube account. Where is your evidence I have "many aliases" ?.
[ Friends ( a concept you are unfamiliar with ) are not "aliases" ].
Starting to see some cracks in the porcelain. I have to admit, I'm impressed at how arrogant SEF has came across with the comment
"(From what I can tell, he has nothing else better to do with his dull pathetic life)."
I think it is worse for someone to spend their time piggy backing the work of dedicated enthusiasts, who in the first place, where not looking for cash, but to contribute to a community (and beyond) and share in the wealth of properly respected material and their guidelines.
I'm actually picturing SEF as one of the Grasshoppers from Bug's Life now.
(not that I am calling him one, I'm sure you understand (and just to clarify)).
My video went up again, and since SEF did not solve the crediting problem, I filled a copyright claim again. If it's a matter of time that's the video is down again I guess we can be repeating this process at eternum.
bulbastre wrote:
My video went up again, and since SEF did not solve the crediting problem, I filled a copyright claim again. If it's a matter of time that's the video is down again I guess we can be repeating this process at eternum.
Yes it does seem to be this way....I actually cannot even remember now how many times i have sent claims about one of my sounds....i think it's 5 or six...each time the sound is taken down only to return a week or so later.This has been repeatedly going on for over a year now...i ask for an explanation but never got one yet....
In a bid to playfully (yet meaningfully) vent some of my frustration at the misguided praise and thanks SEF is getting, I got a little pro active.
Commenting on as many videos as I could with my time, simply using the attribution information he adds at the bottom of his video descriptions, I was copying then pasting and editing as appropriate -
"Original Creator and source for this sound -
freesound.org/people//
Support the Creators, not the middle man."
There was one positive response, which made it feel worth while, acknowledging Freesound as the original watering hole so to speak, and not to drink from the shoddily piped outlet a few miles further down.
I was also pleased to receive a PM later that night with regards to my "Spamming" comments, he told me he blocked me from his channel, to which I thanked him for saving me some time and effort as I had made space in my diary to truth-en up his videos (he hasnt blocked me, but sshhh dont tell him I can still comment).
I replied, commending him for his entrepreneurial spirit, but suggested it be put to better use.
I then invited him to come to my house for a BBQ one time during the summer as it would be nice to catch up and shoot the breeze with a brew.
bulbastre wrote:
Perhaps we should start collecting money from all the affected freesounders and do a proper sueing, with a court and lawyers involved.
I think you’re on to something there, it’s just not right for someone to get away with this.
Maybe we could start our own Youtube channel and do exactly what he is doing, except do it the right way. That way, all things lead back to FreeSound and it’s controlled by the actual creators!
FoolBoyMedia wrote:
... he told me he blocked me from his channel ... (he hasnt blocked me, but sshhh dont tell him I can still comment) ...
If he has blocked you, you can still see your YouTube comments on his videos when you are logged-in to YouTube, but no-one else can see them , ( try viewing your comment when logged-out ).
If you'd seen my YouTube video on SEF you would have seen the block coming ... http://youtu.be/6SfFD6C9Xbw?t=52s [ don't laugh it's my first ever YouTube creation ].
What about the 'innocent' people who risk having their affairs disrupted by SEF's activities? Like the guy who made this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6u30fB2XZrA
An apparently smart guy who wants to do the right thing and credits SEF for the sound effects (presumably the titles swooshes at the start) which he does. He clearly thought that SEF was the creator and wanted to give correct attribution. So if the files are non CC0 then he risks having his vid taken down.
I think that SEF is culpable for copyright breaches in these cases. In lots of cases he asks people to give credit eg in the discussion under this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YIMImLE9Vpc
"If you downloaded using the link I have gave in the description of all my whoosh packs you recieve all the whoosh's I have in my library. Yes in your video/project please credit me by putting a link to my channel in your video. Please refer to my terms of use for more information."
Here he asks for 'credit' which most people would interpret as being credited as the creator of the sounds. I understand this as a breach of federal copyright law. By claiming these credits, SEF is fraudulently claiming rights of attribution that lawfully belong to others.
Sorry, but this really incenses me.
SoundEffectsFactory wrote:
... So please, continue to amuse me with your lack of education regarding copyright law ...
Buzz is right : images from 1990's Toy-Story movies will be covered by copyright for the next century.
Ironically in a post where you claim to understand copyright you have just infringed Walt Disney/Pixar's copyright by reproducing that image without permission. [Doh!]
SoundEffectsFactory wrote:
... some of you just want to come here and cry on the thread and claim "copyright infringement" ...
SEF is quite right, don't complain in this thread, make a complaint to YouTube about any copyright-infringement or any "misleading text" on any YouTube channels. See my guide on reporting copyright-infringement here ... http://www.freesound.org/forum/legal-help-and-attribution-questions/34244/
BTW Anyone can report "misleading text" on a YouTube page, to YouTube.
You can link to specific YouTube comments by clicking on the [sometimes approximate] date next to them ...
http://imageshack.com/a/img580/3882/pxe.gif
SoundEffectsFactory wrote:
As I have stated many times before, anyone who would not like their sounds promoted on the channel can send me a message and I will delete the videos associated in a timely fashion. It's quite simple.
Not as "simple" as yourself : we've pointed out the YouTube terms-of-service to you before, but you don't seem to understand them ...
YouTube Terms of Service :http://www.youtube.com/t/terms7.4 You represent and warrant that you have (and will continue to have during your use of the Service) all necessary licenses, rights, consents, and permissions which are required to enable YouTube to use your Content for the purposes of the provision of the Service by YouTube, and otherwise to use your Content in the manner contemplated by the Service and these Terms.
If you don't comply with all the conditions of the attribution license then you don't have the "necessary licenses, rights, consents, and permissions" to reproduce the sounds.
The conditions , aka "restrictions", are ...
Creative Commons Attribution License, Restrictions, 4http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/legalcode
a. ... You must include a copy of, or the Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) for, this License with every copy of the Work You Distribute ...
b(i) ...the name of the Original Author (or pseudonym, if applicable) if supplied
b(ii) ... the title of the Work if supplied
b(iii) ... the URI, if any, that Licensor specifies to be associated with the Work
SoundEffectsFactory wrote:The whoosh sounds came from a Sound Pack I downloaded myself a few years ago, claimed to be public domain. So yes, I am aloud to request credit for uploading them (not creating them) to YouTube and providing a direct download.
I ignore the particularities of Public Domain, but, do you have the legal right to claim a credit for distributing them? I understand you can rightly ask a credit as a good gesture, but legally speaking, are you entitled to it?
Simple curiosity here.
The way my videos sit now, once I am finished removing the download links for freesound CC-BY sounds the way I use the sounds and attribute is seen as "perfectly legal" by the freesound admin, Bram.So please, continue to amuse me with your lack of education regarding copyright law.
Could you please expand on this?
Do I understand you're going to remove the MediaFire links to the CC-BY sounds?
Also, let's keep this in mind: Bram is near to NOBODY in this whole thing. Bram is the host of freesound.org, yes, but unless he's a specialized lawyer, there's no reason to believe he can choose what is legally compliant and what is not. He stated freesound doesn't offer any law related services, apart from attaching licenses Bram didn't create to sounds Bram didn't create.
He simply offered to ease the subject and speak privately to you on everyone's behalf, something we don't have to accept. I surely don't. He has never come back on the matter, and if what you say about him is true, I simply don't give him the right to represent me. The way you use my sound IS NOT legally compliant. As complicated as Copyright texts go, CC were created to be relatively simple, to grant end users more power. We analysed the case of my sound (and dozens of others) and there's no way you're legally compliant.
As I have stated many times before, anyone who would not like their sounds promoted on the channel can send me a message and I will delete the videos associated in a timely fashion. It's quite simple. But yet, some of you just want to come here and cry on the thread and claim "copyright infringement".
That's because users don't have to be running after people like you, one by one, to ask for their rights to be respected. I don't have to run after all the burglars of my city to kindly ask them not to break in my house while I'm away on holiday. I don't have to run after all the child molesters to ask them not to molest my cousin.
But if that's the way you're going to think about respecting the law, then yes, I'd like you to remove my sound from your channel. Actually, I want you to review all your sounds and remove any of mine from your channel, your MediaFire, and any other place where you have them.
JimiMod wrote:
... I haven't access to the Mediafire inventory holdings ...
If anyone is interested in inspecting the SoundEffectsFactory, aka SoundEffectsCapital ,
"Mediafire inventory" for copyright-infringement see ... http://bitly.com/u/o_5aprdql2ei
and see here for the SoundEffectsFactory rar "packs", Volumes #1 to #6 on Mediafire (about 100-200Mb each) ...
http://www.freesound.org/forum/legal-help-and-attribution-questions/34819/73935
e.g. Pack Volume #2 has a readme which says...
SoundEffectsFactory wrote:
"If your copyright is being violated in any way please contact me on YouTube and I will happily without hessitation delete the video(s) and/or remove the specified sound(s) from this sound pack."
Two specimen-charges from pack Vol #2 of attribution-licensed tracks reproduced without attribution ...
"dramatic bass dun dun dun SoundEffectsFactory.mp3" is
http://www.freesound.org/people/Simon_Lacelle/sounds/45654/
which has an attribution license
"female orgasm SoundEffectsFactory.mp3" is
http://www.freesound.org/people/epanody/sounds/86683/
which has an attribution license
[ The name "SoundEffectsFactory" appears in the "artist name" field of the metadata of these two mp3 files , but their creators names do not appear in the metadata ].
A guide on how to complain to MediaFire is here ...
http://www.freesound.org/forum/legal-help-and-attribution-questions/34819