Providing Evidences, the Journalist's Way Evidences are not just mere information. These are exact records of events as they happen, captured and archived through any medium such as paper, tape, film or video. They are not based on hearsay but on the accounts of your senses (hearing, sight, feel, taste). These are vital point in your fight where people should see or feel themselves or put their feet into your shoes to understand. To prove your point and save you from losing your integrity, credibility and morals, you should persuade them to believe. So make your evidence complete, factual and convincing. In Journalism, you should answer all the "W" and "H" (What, "When", "Where", "Why" and "How"). Then if you've done that without malice and personal reasons, then you would never go wrong with your evidences. ISSUES ONLINE Investigative Group of Journalists

A COMMENTARY:
Is this the end of "COPYRIGHT'S FAIR USE?"


This comment has been sent by one of our subscriber and avid supporter, which was also posted on his YouTube Channel:

"I'm sorry, but I had to remove some

significant videos which some labels has claimed third party content ownership, even if my videos all conforms with COPYRIGHT'S FAIR USE (for educational/ tutorial and news purposes).

Universal Music Group and Warner Music are

devils of the recording Industry who's just after their profits and doesn't care about people's common interest. They neglect most of our rights to share our knowledge and broadcast what's on our mind, as well as kill most of our advocacies! I had to boycott them...Or, consider the end of our COPYRIGHT'S FAIR USE."

"YouTube video I.D. system is subject to abuse by Copyright Holders like Universal Music which in

most cases, doesn't recognize "FAIR USE" of the Copyright Law (Copyright Act of 1976, 17 U.S.C. § 107), whether for educational or critic purposes. Consider Lenz versus Universal case filed by Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF).

How effective this video I.D. is? It depends upon how Copyright Owners use them. In my opinion, this

system still subject to abuses whether in the event of take down notices, content blocking or audio muting.

If Music Labels want people to buy their artists' CDs then let people be aware of their music. Now that's

being fair. If people won't like them, then they won't buy your product. But how will they know if
you'll not show your products? That's Marketing.

mannydeguzmanartist
"mannydeguzmanjartist" channel

Here's a sample of an educational video which Universal Music has claimed for their music content.

This video has been blocked to several countries due to a third party Copyright claim (recently audio swapped to be made available worldwide).

ADOBE PHOTOSHOP CS TUTORIAL

If you're a regular YouTube user, you might be well aware of the term "Copyright Claims and Infringement".

If you post videos regularly, then it is quite alarming to find out that most of your videos will be subjected to third party content if you use music or video clips which you doesn't own. This is true not only for music and videos, but also applies to all Intellectual Properties such as images and print articles.

But, there is a provision to use a Copyrighted content such as in scholarly work (educational or demonstration),

in a news report, judicial proceedings, etc. These are all encompassed in what is known as "COPYRIGHTS FAIR USE"

WHAT IS COPYRIGHT and COPYRIGHT'S FAIR USE?

Before we let out our frustrations, it is just right to examine what were covered by our rights in contrast with

what is provided in the Copyright law. ignorance of law is not always the case and must not be an excuse.


(Reference: Stanford Legal Office or the Office of Technology )

Copyright Law and Fair Use This guide addresses issues concerning the use of copyrighted material in an academic setting. Guidelines for protecting works created by faculty and students are available from the library. A separate Web site about copyright and fair use provides extensive additional information, including surveys of primary materials, links to other Internet sites, and an overview of copyright law. Specific advice may be provided by the campus Office of Technology Licensing or the Stanford Legal Office. What is a copyright?

A copyright is the set of exclusive legal rights authors have over their works for a limited period of time. These

rights include copying the works (including parts of the works), making derivative works, distributing the works, and performing the works (this means showing a movie or playing an audio recording, as well as performing a dramatic work). Currently, the author's rights begin when a work is created. A work does not have to bear a copyright notice or be registered to be copyrighted.

Why do we have copyright?

The Constitution of the United States says that its purpose is to promote science and the useful arts. The

government believed that those who create an original expression in any medium need protection for their work so they can receive appropriate compensation for their intellectual effort.
What is a work in the public domain?

A work in the public domain can be copied freely by anyone. Such works include those of the U.S. Government

and works for which the copyright has expired. Generally, for works created after 1978, the copyright lasts for 70 years beyond the life of the author. Works created before but not published before 1978 have special rules. For works created and first published between 1950 and 1978 the copyright lasts for 95 years. For works created and first published before 1950, the copyright lasts for 28 years but could have been renewed for another 67 years. When planning a project, start by identifying works in the public domain which can be re-purposed in the new work. Request permissions for materials not in the public domain early in the project. If there are images or sounds for which permission to copy cannot be obtained, it is easier to redesign the project at the beginning rather waiting until the project nears completion.

What is fair use?

Fair use provisions of the copyright law allow for limited copying or distribution of published works without the

author's permission in some cases. Examples of fair use of copyrighted materials include quotation of excerpts in a review or critique, or copying of a small part of a work by a teacher or student to illustrate a lesson.

How can I tell if my copying is allowed by fair use provisions of the Law?

There are no explicit, predefined, legal specifications of how much and when one can copy, but there are guidelines for fair use. Each case of copying must be evaluated according to four factors:

1. The purpose and nature of the use. If the copy is used for teaching at a non-profit institution, distributed without charge, and made by a teacher or students acting individually, then the copy is more likely to be considered as fair use. In addition, an interpretation of fair use is more likely if the copy was made spontaneously, for temporary use, not as part of an "anthology" and not as an institutional requirement or suggestion.
2. The nature of the copyrighted work. For example, an article from a newspaper would be considered differently than a workbook made for instruction. With multimedia material there are different standards and permissions for different media: a digitized photo from a National Geographic, a video clip from Jaws, and an audio selection from Peter Gabriel's CD would be treated differently--the selections are not treated as a equivalent chunks of digital data.
3. The nature and substantiality of the material used. In general, when other criteria are met, the copying of extracts that are "not substantial in length" when compared to the whole of which they are part may be considered fair use.
4. The effect of use on the potential market for or value of the work. In general, a work that supplants the normal market is considered an infringement, but a work does not have to have an effect on the market to be an infringement.

How can a work reference the copyright owner of digital photographs, video, or sounds?

Include the copyright symbol and the name of the copyright owner directly on/under/around the digital material. It

is virtually impossible to ensure that digital information located at any distance from the image/video would be seen by a user if the copyright notice is not directly attached to the material.

If the material is only used once for a class or a project, does the copyright owner need to be acknowledged?

Images, graphics and video should be credited to their owners/sources just as written material. Also, if you

should change your mind and want to use material for commercial purposes, then it is important that you would know where and when you found the material and who is the copyright owner.

Can I download information to my computer?

Digital resources are licensed for the non-profit educational use of Stanford University. Use of these resources is

governed by copyright law and individual license agreements. Systematic downloading, distributing, or retaining substantial portions of information is prohibited.

Code of Best Practices in Fair Use for Online Video

It is important for video makers, online service providers, and content providers to understand the legal rights of

makers of new culture, as policies and practices evolve. Only then will efforts to fight copyright “piracy” in the online environment be able to make necessary space for lawful, value-added uses.

Mashups, remixes, subs, and online parodies are new and refreshing online phenomena, but they partake of an

ancient tradition: the recycling of old culture to make new. In spite of our romantic cliches about the anguished lone creator, the entire history of cultural production from Aeschylus through Shakespeare to Clueless has shown that all creators stand, as Isaac Newton (and so many others) put it, “on the shoulders of giants.”

In fact, the cultural value of copying is so well established that it is written into the social bargain at the heart of

copyright law. The bargain is this: we as a society give limited property rights to creators, to reward them for producing culture; at the same time, we give other creators the chance to use that same copyrighted material without permission or payment, in some circumstances. Without the second half of the bargain, we could all lose important new cultural work just because one person is arbitrary or greedy.

Copyright law has several features that permit quotations from copyrighted works without permission or

payment, under certain conditions. Fair use is the most important of these features. It has been an important part of copyright law for more than 150 years. Where it applies, fair use is a right, not a mere privilege. In fact, as the Supreme Court has pointed out, fair use keeps copyright from violating the First Amendment. As copyright protects more works for longer periods than ever before, it makes new creation harder. As a result, fair use is more important today than ever before. Read More

(REFERENCE: EFF Electronic Frontier Foundation)
_________________________________________________________________________________________

Lenz v. Universal

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) filed suit against Universal Music Publishing Group (UMPG), asking a f

But last month, YouTube informed Lenz that it had removed the video from its website after Universal claimed

"Copyright abuse can shut down online artists, political analysts, or -- as in this case -- ordinary families who

This lawsuit is part of EFF's ongoing work to protect online free speech in the face of bogus copyright claims.

(REFERENCE: EFF Electronic Frontier Foundation)
_________________________________________________________________________________________

February 3rd, 2009

YouTube's January Fair Use Massacre
Commentary by Fred von Lohmann

This is what it's come to. Teenagers singing "Winter Wonderland" being censored off YouTube. Fair use

has always been at risk on YouTube, thanks to abusive DMCA takedown notices sent by copyright owners (sometimes carelessly, sometimes not). But in the past several weeks, two things have made things much worse for those who want to sing a song, post an a capella tribute, or set machinima to music. First, it appears that more and more copyright owners are using YouTube's automated copyright filtering system (known as the Content ID system), which tests all videos looking for a "match" with "fingerprints" provided by copyright owners.

Second, thanks to a recent spat between YouTube and Warner Music Group, YouTube's Content ID tool is

now being used to censor lots and lots of videos (previously, Warner just silently shared in the advertising revenue for the videos that included a "match" to its music).

EFF, along with many other public interest groups, have repeatedly expressed our concerns to both

copyright owners and YouTube about the dangers of automated filtering systems like the Content ID system. These systems are still primitive and unable to distinguish a tranformative remix from copyright infringement. So unless they leave lots of breathing room for remixed content, these filters end up sideswiping lots of fair uses. And that's exactly what has happened these past few weeks. And while today it's Warner Music, as more copyright owners start using the Content ID tool, it'll only get worse. Soon it may be off limits to remix anything with snippets of our shared mass media culture -- music, TV, movies, jingles, commercials. That would be a sad irony -- copyright being used to stifle an exciting new wellspring of creativity, rather than encourage it. It's clear from the Warner Music experience that YouTube's Content ID tool fails to separate the infringements from the arguable fair uses. And while YouTube offers users the option to dispute a removal (if it's an automated Content ID removal) or send a formal DMCA counter-notice (if it's an official DMCA takedown), many YouTube users, lacking legal help, are afraid to wave a red flag in front of Warner Music's lawyers. That's a toxic combination for amateur video creators on YouTube. So what can we do?

First, YouTube should fix the Content ID system. Now. The system should not remove videos unless

there is a match between the video and audio tracks of a submitted fingerprint. When we made this suggestion in October 2007, YouTube assured us that they were working on improving the tool. Well, it's been more than a year. If YouTube is serious about protecting its users, the time has come to implement this fix. (Some will point out that this implies that record labels and music publishers can never use the Content ID tool to remove videos solely based on what's in the audio track. That's right. I think that adding a soundtrack to your home skateboarding movie is a fair use. If copyright owners feel differently, they can send a formal DMCA takedown notice, and with any luck, we'll see each other in court.)

Second, YouTubers, EFF wants to help. If Warner Music Group took down your video, ask yourself if

your video is (1) noncommercial (i.e., no commercial advertisements or YouTube Partner videos) and (2) includes substantial original material contributed by you (i.e., no verbatim copies of Warner music videos). If so, and you'd like to counternotice but are afraid of getting sued, we'd like to hear from you. We can't promise to take every case, but neither will we stand by and watch semi-automated takedowns trample fair use.
Related Issues:DMCA,Free Speech,Intellectual Property,No Downtime for Free Speech Campaign Related Cases:Lenz v. Universal
______

Other factors to consider in Copyright in both Professional and Amateur Level:

Performing rights

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Performing rights are the right to perform music in public. It is part of copyright law and demands payment to the music’s composer/lyricist and publisher (with the royalties generally split 50/50 between the two) when a business uses music in a public performance. Examples of public performances are broadcast and cable television, radio, concerts, nightclubs, restaurants etc. When music is performed by a business they must obtain a license to use that music and compensate the author (composer and lyricist) and publisher.

In the United States, broadcasters can pay for their use of music in one of two ways: they can obtain permission/ license directly from the music’s copyright owner (usually the publisher), or they can obtain a license from ASCAP and BMI to use all of the music in their repertories. ASCAP and BMI along with the much smaller SESAC are the three performing rights societies in the U.S. and once they receive payment from the broadcasters they are responsible for compensating the music authors and publisher. Nearly every professional composer, songwriter, lyricist and publisher is a member of a performing rights society and the income received from them is a major source of their income.


Performers' rights

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As a performer, every individual has certain rights. These basic rights include the right to obtain some remuneration for ones work, and to obtain information about how you (including your appearance) and other talents (acting, singing or other) may have been used in the final product. Whilst one has individual performing rights, if you are asked by a producer or director to perform on their behalf, you (as a performer) should:

• ensure you have a contract which clearly describes what benefit you will derive (before you begin your performance)
• ensure that you're dealing with the correct party (watch for misrepresentations)
• keep the information channels open (be pro-active)

___________________________________________
HOT ISSUE: A Case of Malicous (Fraud) Email!

On May 30, 2009, we received an email sent by a certain MONICA LOVFANDER. The

message has this subject: DEAR EMAIL ACCOUNT OWNER. The message instructed us to send them valueable information, or our email account will be deleted. Here's the full context of the message:

Security alert: If you receive an email message with this subject and content, DO

NOT REPLY, REPORT IT AS SPAM, AND DELETE IT FROM YOUR INBOX!

Our Recent Expose:

Total Pop Star, is it legal?


TOTAL POP STAR, one of the largest online singing competition might be in hot
water if proven to be violating certain U.S. and Interstate Laws.

This surfaced after it was discovered that Total Pop Star has not been licensed, neither

registered at Broadcast Music Inc. (BMI), The American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers (ASCAP), and SESAC.

Read More



Other Issues:

A Quite Interesting Story of An Online Scam.

This is sent by one of our International correspondent: A woman who allegedly identified herself as Rayanah Alex from Somalia, Africa sent a friendly message. Our man replied and ask for more information regarding the sender. She replied back with an attachment of her photo. Few more exchange of messages and the real motive was revealed. Interesting? Read more...

A list of E-MAIL SPAM messages

These are lists of emails that you might be receiving. The messages could vary, usually disguised as lottery draw winnings or a collective funds or a bank account from a deceased owner. These are all frauds with the goal of collecting a large sum of money from you and other consumers. Check your email if you had any of these. Read more...

Top Story:

The Parallel History Project on Cooperative Security
Saturday, July 12, 2008

The Parallel History Project on Cooperative Security <http://www.php.isn.ethz.ch/index.cfm> (PHP, the former Parallel HistoryProject on NATO and the Warsaw Pact), provides new scholarly perspectives on contemporary international history by collecting, publishing, and interpreting formerly secret governmental documents. *

In response to the declassification of NATO records and the growing availability of documents from archives in Eastern and Central Europe, PHP as a cooperative undertaking of more than twenty partner institutes brings together leading Cold War historians, archivists, and government officials.The findings are presented to the specialist academic community atconferences and published both in print and on the PHP website.

Since its establishment in 1999, the project has collected thousands of pages of material on security-related issues of the Cold War, published alarge number of online documentaries and publications on central issues such as mutual threat perceptions and alliance management, and organized several major international conferences on war planning, intelligence, andintra-bloc tensions.

The thrust of PHP research interest is in the recent historical origins and development of current security issues and institutions on the basis of newly available documentary evidence.

The main issues of research interest in the coming years are:

- The European Security Model
- NATO Enlargement and Its Out-of-Area Problem
- Regional Security in Asia, Latin America, and Africa
- Threat Perceptions, Strategic Doctrines, Military Plans
- Peacekeeping and Nongovernmental Organizations as New Security Factors
during and after the Cold War


The PHP website has become a leading online clearing-house for scholars, policymakers, students, and the wider public. The worldwide use of the PHP website is steadily increasing. More than 2,000 subscribers receive the monthly "PHP News" as an electronic mailing.(source PHP)

Website http://www.php.isn.ethz.ch/index.cfm


ISSUES ONLINE is a non-governmental, non-stock non profit group of journalist with members and correspondents worldwide. Our work is purely voluntary with the main goal to expose and investigate all Electronic Frauds and Scams, including the crimes committed on the Internet for the general awareness of the public.

ISSUES ONLINE wikis are sites that may be of interests to the consumers and the General Public. We gather our data from the complaints we received through emails and threads. We do surveillance work ourselves going undercover in some cases to verify these claims before we do our own investigation.