What should I do if a WSO advocates what I think is Infringement?

58 replies
Ok,
I purchased a WSO last week - one of 3 in a niche I'm researching. The first was knock down great. The next one so so but didn't teach me much I didn't already know. The last one blew me away - not due to its greatness, but because it advocates using copyright infringement and stealing- basically music, album covers, images and videos. I couldn't believe what I was reading.

I ask a questions in the wso and instead of an answer in the forum got a PM, which basically reiterated how getting the music is legal - since one is recording just the sound from your sound card/speakers and not downloading a file its legal....

WHAT?

I tried communicating with the seller to see if I was maybe misunderstanding - but I honestly don't think so. Granted I'm not a lawyer, but this still sounds like theft/infringement rather than any sort of fair use.

I then opened a support ticket and got a response of basically thanks for pointing this out - but nothing else in the last few days. And this wso is still going strong.

What should I do - just turn my back and say caveat emptor? doens't seem right to me.

What else can I do - I either need some mentoring on how this is legal - or who else to escalate to to check into this.

Should I just post my warnings/concerns in the WSO since I've already engaged the owner and the support desk? Should I just turn my back and let it slide?

If I'm wrong cool- I'll learn a lesson. If not I just can't in good conscious let this continue.

suggestions are greatly appreciated
#advocates #stealing #wso
  • Profile picture of the author Kim Standerline
    Criky I just engaged in a thread where I'm not sure I gave the right advice re a wso so check for what others say as well!

    If you have queries about the legitimacy of the product etc then as a buyer I'm sure you have every right to query it in the thread, especially as you haven't had any feedback from their support.

    It might save someone else spending their money on something that in the long term could be useless to them

    Kim

    Originally Posted by jacktackett View Post

    Ok,
    I purchased a WSO last week - one of 3 in a niche I'm researching. The first was knock down great. The next one so so but didn't teach me much I didn't already know. The last one blew me away - not due to its greatness, but because it advocates using copyright infringement and stealing- basically music, album covers, images and videos. I couldn't believe what I was reading.

    I ask a questions in the wso and instead of an answer in the forum got a PM, which basically reiterated how getting the music is legal - since one is recording just the sound from your sound card/speakers and not downloading a file its legal....

    WHAT?

    I tried communicating with the seller to see if I was maybe misunderstanding - but I honestly don't think so. Granted I'm not a lawyer, but this still sounds like theft/infringement rather than any sort of fair use.

    I then opened a support ticket and got a response of basically thanks for pointing this out - but nothing else in the last few days. And this wso is still going strong.

    What should I do - just turn my back and say caveat emptor? doens't seem right to me.

    What else can I do - I either need some mentoring on how this is legal - or who else to escalate to to check into this.

    Should I just post my warnings/concerns in the WSO since I've already engaged the owner and the support desk? Should I just turn my back and let it slide?

    If I'm wrong cool- I'll learn a lesson. If not I just can't in good conscious let this continue.

    suggestions are greatly appreciated
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1584290].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
      If you have queries about the legitimacy of the product etc then as a buyer I'm sure you have every right to query it in the thread, especially as you haven't had any feedback from their support.
      Ding! Ding! Ding!

      Lay-deez and gennelmens, we has a winnuh!

      Post your question in the thread. You bought it, you have every right to ask, and to caution people about the potential problems in using it.

      If the seller is advocating using the content thus recorded in some commercial way, you want to report the WSO, also.

      I suspect the seller is confused. It is perfectly legal, for example, to record stuff you hear on the radio for your own listening, while illegal to download the MP3s of those same songs. It is not legal to use those radio recordings for commercial (or some other) purposes.


      Paul
      Signature
      .
      Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1584329].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Terry Crim
        Originally Posted by Paul Myers View Post

        It is not legal to use those radio recordings for commercial (or some other) purposes.

        Paul
        I am not a lawyer and anything posted by me in this post is not to be considered legal advice at all so do your own due diligence and find out for sure from a qualified attorney before taking any action on what I post below.

        I wanted to chime in and make note that using copyright or trademark content, products, information, music, video or whatever for your own purpose to share with the world either paid or free can get you in legal problems.

        You see a lot of student film, youtube video's that people make using copyrighted music in their creations. People have been sued for doing this.
        Even if they won in court the cost to get to that ruling would overwhelm most people very quickly and way before the ruling which could take YEARS to get to.

        People and businesses that legitimately use music, video or other content that is owned by some other entity such as music studio's PAID a fee to be able to use the content in their own creation.

        I know a few warriors in the past have paid licenses for music content so they could use in their own thing. Maybe one would care to comment on this?

        Basically from what I understand regarding this issue with using copyrighted materials, you have to pay a license fee to be able to use it to share with other people either for free or commercially.

        Radio stations use something which I forget the name of that allows them to sample X number of seconds of content without paying but that is often over abused by people that share over the internet. If you embed other peoples content in your own creations whether you charge for it or not, my understanding from a laymen's point of view is that you have to pay a license fee for that privilege.

        Music you hear in car commercials for example, those companies paid a fee to be able to use that music in their commercial. Why you would think you could use copyrighted music, by same artist or not, without paying a license fee I don't know.

        my 2 cents on the topic of using copyrighted content for your own use.

        If you just sit at home, listen to the music for your own personal enjoyment, depending on how you got that music. I doubt anything will be said unless you publically announce you ripped off such and such from some file share and like listening to this "free" music you got.

        If you take same music and put in a camtasia video and post it in youtube, that is different thing and I am sure if and when the music studio's come across or are alerted to your video they may slap you with lawsuit based on the amounts quoted previously in this thread. So watch out what you do and how you do it.

        - T
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1585575].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author George Wright
    Since you bought it you have the right to post about it in the WSO thread.

    Having said that you still have to be careful for many different reasons.

    Stealing is such a harsh word, use terms such as "Possible copyright infringement," "Crosses the line of Plagiarism," and "Scumbag Scammer," OK forget the last one.

    George Wright
    Signature
    "The first chapter sells the book; the last chapter sells the next book." Mickey Spillane
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1584300].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Jill Carpenter
      Here's a question - is the word "underground" being confused with black hat?

      Because to me, those are two different terms.


      I was asked to review something similar to that method "basically music, album covers, images and videos"

      And I would not give the creator a positive review.

      I had this issue myself a week ago or so as well. I would have liked the person promoting the WSO to have been upfront about the tactics being presented rather than people having to worm it out of them.

      There are a lot of noobs that won't realize some of these methods can get your accounts banned, etc - and they are blindly trusting what they are being told.

      I realize it is up to everyone to do their own research before buying anything, but I really wish there was some external review process to refer to before buying anything.
      Signature

      "May I have ten thousand marbles, please?"

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1584351].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author BIG Mike
    Banned
    [DELETED]
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1584305].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author craigc1980
      Originally Posted by BIG Mike View Post

      Jack,

      I think you should voice your concerns in the WSO thread - carefully and objectively. FYI, it doesn't matter where you record music from, i.e.; the radio, speakers or whatever - it's still a copyright infringment if you're using it to make money off it.
      I agree with Big Mike, it is still infringement either way. You should report it to the moderator.

      Here been a question always on my mind.

      This is back to Big Mikes answer.

      If its ok to record music off serious radio or just a regular radio player onto cd, then why is it still infringement if you record music through a recording device you can buy the software for at walmart.

      I understand downloading it but isnt it the same concept if you record with software through your computer speakers than it is to record it on a radio.

      Food For Thought

      Craig
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1584357].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
        Craig,
        I understand downloading it but isnt it the same concept if you record with software through your computer speakers than it is to record it on a radio.
        Maybe. I'm not sure of the law on it, but I suspect the biggest question would also be the simplest: Did the broadcasting source pay for, or otherwise properly acquire, permission to broadcast the music?

        The part I'm really unclear on is the issue of use of a public resource (licensed broadcast frequencies) versus closed private systems in the transmission. There are probably other considerations, but I'd bet those are the big ones.

        Downloading the MP3 file without paying for it is an unambiguous violation.


        Paul
        Signature
        .
        Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1584380].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author trevor75
    Well, the best advice I could give you is go with your heart or gut feeling. We all have a sense of what is right, and what is wrong in this world. If your getting a funny feeling about this, then trust yourself and walk away, and never deal with that person again. Believe me you don't want the Federal Government on your case for Infringment..with penatlies of $250,000 and 5 years of prison time, I'd certainly have no problem just leaving it alone.
    Signature

    FREE Report Reveals 5 Secrets To Earn Truckloads Of Affiliate Marketing Cash In Less Than A Week!

    How To Do The Marketing

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1584326].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author seasoned
    One person gave info about how to steal from sites. Others here complained, and I think they stopped it. Another gave me a copy of his product for review, and I think I talked him out of it. It was SPAMMING, and would have ruined a NICE site.

    But Big Mike is right, be careful.

    Steve
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1584332].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author DogScout
    1st, I'd refund.
    2nd if it bothers you, you can forward a copy of the info avocated to the US Patent & Trademark office for review. United States Patent and Trademark Office or the US Copyright office Copyrights .

    Or you could just drop it and move on.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1584369].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author jacktackett
    Thanks to all - I've gone ahead and made a comment.

    but now, Hypothetically, lets say I have a TV tuner on my computer. I'm I'm watching pop-up video and I'm listening to Rush's Tom Sawyer. I like the song so I fire up audacity and record what's being streamed to my computer. I have not downloaded a video file, or taken a screen capture, or an mp3 of the song. But I recorded the audio and video that I was seeing.

    Personal use? I can agree with that so far.

    But then I take my video and I watermark my recording at

    http://www.blahmysite.com/non-rush-r...-video-related

    affiliate link and upload that puppy to my website. Have I just committed infringement?

    Granted, IANAL, but using someone else s' work to promote my commercial interest, without getting permission, to my knowledge constitutes infringement.

    I don't see how I'm legally able to record something off musak and then use it either without paying some sort of royalty.

    Otherwise, thanks for everyone's input - it is greatly appreciated.

    best,
    --Jack
    Signature
    Let's get Tim the kidney he needs!HELP Tim
    Mega Monster WSO for KimW http://ow.ly/4JdHm


    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1584440].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author whateverpedia
      Originally Posted by jacktackett View Post

      I'm listening to Rush's Tom Sawyer. I like the song so I fire up audacity and record what's being streamed to my computer.
      You mean you didn't buy "Moving Pictures" (the album TS is on)?!?!?!

      CLUNK (sound of whateverpedia falling to the ground in shock).

      I thought all serious music fans already had that album.

      CLUNK (falls to the ground again).
      Signature
      Arguing with an idiot is like playing chess with a pigeon.
      It'll just knock over all the pieces, poop on the board, and strut about like it's won anyway.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1585735].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author jacktackett
        Whateverpedia,

        thanks for the concern ;-) but to put you at ease I do indeed have the album. Its on what's called an LP - some of you younger whipper snappers might not know what these are outside of a dance studio, but ages ago most music came on these things. 33.333 rpms, smaller platters called 45's - not the gun but the rpm - and for longer playing times on LPs.

        LOL - I had a similar experience with my youngest niece this holiday season when asking what CD's Santa should bring - it took her a few moments to realize what they were before answering she'd rather have Santa bring her an itunes gift card to get some mp3s.

        it managed to find its way onto a cassette, a CD, and eventually into my phone over the years. Fortunately even I knew better than to try and put it onto an 8-Track.

        peace.
        --Jack


        Originally Posted by whateverpedia View Post

        You mean you didn't buy "Moving Pictures" (the album TS is on)?!?!?!

        CLUNK (sound of whateverpedia falling to the ground in shock).

        I thought all serious music fans already had that album.

        CLUNK (falls to the ground again).
        Signature
        Let's get Tim the kidney he needs!HELP Tim
        Mega Monster WSO for KimW http://ow.ly/4JdHm


        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1586086].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author CDarklock
          Originally Posted by jacktackett View Post

          Fortunately even I knew better than to try and put it onto an 8-Track.
          I think I still have all the necessary equipment to do that, if I just dug it all out and set it up.
          Signature
          "The Golden Town is the Golden Town no longer. They have sold their pillars for brass and their temples for money, they have made coins out of their golden doors. It is become a dark town full of trouble, there is no ease in its streets, beauty has left it and the old songs are gone." - Lord Dunsany, The Messengers
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1586178].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author TimGross
            First, as always I'll state that I'm not a lawyer, but I have been a professional musician for 25 years and some of my closest friends make 100% of their income from song writing and other creative endeavors, and I consider myself pretty well versed on applicable copyright law.

            -The difference between recording music for your personal listening pleasure versus recording it to profit from is night and day.

            While I do like the quote, "never attribute to evil what can be attributed to ignorance", on the most generous level, excusing someone trying to profit from someone else's copyrighted music/creative work is a tough sell because it's so obviously improper, but...

            For someone who is selling a product encouraging others to break very serious copyright laws without telling buyers that what they're being taught is illegal truly is inexcusable, and "ignorance" doesn't begin to cut it. If you're unclear on that, ask Jammie Thomas.

            If you want to break copyright law (or any law for that matter) yourself, you have the ability to choose to do that. I'm not trying to debate what people think laws should be, I'm talking about what they are. But to sell information that misleads others into breaking laws themselves, well, a higher standard needs to be applied.

            Final disclaimer: I don't even know what WSO is being referred to in this thread; I haven't seen it, and know nothing about it, so nothing I'm saying is meant to be directed at a specific person. I'm only responding to the descriptions others have posted in this thread.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1586256].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Kim Standerline
              I remember the Jammie Thomas case, I've always been confused as to why one person was prosecuted in this rather than Kazza themselves who allowed the downloads n sharing etc.

              I can remember my daughter's boyfriend (of the time), installing Kazza on my computer a number of years ago so he could download some pirated software (I think it was dreamweaver). Before he did that I didn't even know this type of thing existed.

              I was livid because he honestly thought it was ok to just help himself, plus he put a virus on my computer. It took me ages to uninstall every trace of the damn program.

              Kim

              Originally Posted by TimGross View Post

              First, as always I'll state that I'm not a lawyer, but I have been a professional musician for 25 years and some of my closest friends make 100% of their income from song writing and other creative endeavors, and I consider myself pretty well versed on applicable copyright law.

              -The difference between recording music for your personal listening pleasure versus recording it to profit from is night and day.

              While I do like the quote, "never attribute to evil what can be attributed to ignorance", on the most generous level, excusing someone trying to profit from someone else's copyrighted music/creative work is a tough sell because it's so obviously improper, but...

              For someone who is selling a product encouraging others to break very serious copyright laws without telling buyers that what they're being taught is illegal truly is inexcusable, and "ignorance" doesn't begin to cut it. If you're unclear on that, ask Jammie Thomas.

              If you want to break copyright law (or any law for that matter) yourself, you have the ability to choose to do that. I'm not trying to debate what people think laws should be, I'm talking about what they are. But to sell information that misleads others into breaking laws themselves, well, a higher standard needs to be applied.

              Final disclaimer: I don't even know what WSO is being referred to in this thread; I haven't seen it, and know nothing about it, so nothing I'm saying is meant to be directed at a specific person. I'm only responding to the descriptions others have posted in this thread.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1592631].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author jacktackett
            Quote:
            Originally Posted by jacktackett
            Fortunately even I knew better than to try and put it onto an 8-Track.



            Originally Posted by CDarklock View Post

            I think I still have all the necessary equipment to do that, if I just dug it all out and set it up.
            I don't know whether to be impressed or scared


            Brian, I wanted to say thanks for looking into this and validating my thoughts. Wish I had been more emphatic last week when I got the WSO. Hopefully folks will do their due diligence before buying this and other WSOs.

            best,
            --Jack
            Signature
            Let's get Tim the kidney he needs!HELP Tim
            Mega Monster WSO for KimW http://ow.ly/4JdHm


            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1591713].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author VegasGreg
    There have been many WSOs lately that basically tell people to lie/cheat/steal in some sort of way. Whether it is copying someone else's work, using images from Google images or worse.

    First and foremost I would definitely make the comment and warnings on the WSO thread. Hopefully that will warn potenial buyers not to use those practices. Unfortunately most noobs don't read the entire thread and just buy.

    I also try to contact the WSO seller to confirm their actions, which typically yields a response of, "I have never been caught or questioned before" or "It works for me".

    I think some people don't realize that some of these are bad/illegal/unethical and some just figure they can hide or avoid the law because they live in a different country and it is harder to be prosecuted.
    Signature

    Greg Schueler - Wordpress Fanatic... Living The Offline Marketing Dream...

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1584470].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author rosetrees
      Originally Posted by VegasGreg View Post

      There have been many WSOs lately that basically tell people to lie/cheat/steal in some sort of way. Whether it is copying someone else's work, using images from Google images or worse.
      And yet wso's have to be approved before they go live. Is the approval processing failing, perhaps?

      Not a criticism, but a question. I wonder if newbies especially, feel that the WF WSO area is somewhere they can go for legitimate and reliable advise. Is that credibility being undermined?
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1584575].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author KarlWarren
        Originally Posted by rosetrees View Post

        And yet wso's have to be approved before they go live. Is the approval processing failing, perhaps?
        The product itself is not reviewed, the approval process relates to the copy - I believe.

        Kindest regards,
        Karl.
        Signature
        eCoverNinja - Sales Page Graphics & Layout Specialist
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1584592].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Kim Standerline
        I don't see how whoever approves wso's can possibly know anything is unethical/illegal etc unless it jumps out and grabs them by the ass. They only see the sales page just like the rest of us

        Cheers
        Kim

        Originally Posted by rosetrees View Post

        And yet wso's have to be approved before they go live. Is the approval processing failing, perhaps?

        Not a criticism, but a question. I wonder if newbies especially, feel that the WF WSO area is somewhere they can go for legitimate and reliable advise. Is that credibility being undermined?
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1584599].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Antony103
          The words:

          Greyhat
          Sneaky


          I have seen many marketers use these words to discribe borderline un/ethical methods....
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1584640].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
          Kim,
          I don't see how whoever approves wso's can possibly know anything is unethical/illegal etc unless it jumps out and grabs them by the ass. They only see the sales page just like the rest of us
          Sometimes it takes the ability to think like an evil bastich to see this stuff. There's a very limited supply of such people who are also qualified to be moderators, especially for the WSO section.

          Honestly, it's a small part of what goes on in that part of the forum. Even that would be cut to almost nothing if people would just stop buying offers that make income promises. That's not going to happen any time soon, though, unless making such promises results in the offers being refused. They are simply the hottest selling WSOs at any given time. By a large margin.

          They're also inherently dishonest. And Fed-bait, but that's a whole other issue.


          Paul
          Signature
          .
          Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1584662].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Mr BOLD
    jack, from what you have posted I guess its the CPA wso you are talking about.

    "since one is recording just the sound from your sound card/speakers and not downloading a file its legal...."

    the wso content file had this exact line it and I was scratching my head to see if I was missing something thats obvious for others, because this wso had absolutely positive reviews.

    I have the same questions as you do with regards to the legality of this method.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1584527].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Dan C. Rinnert
    Originally Posted by jacktackett View Post

    I ask a questions in the wso and instead of an answer in the forum got a PM, which basically reiterated how getting the music is legal - since one is recording just the sound from your sound card/speakers and not downloading a file its legal....
    That sounds like sneaking in your video camera to a movie theater and recording the movie, which is copyright infringement. It doesn't matter how you copy it. It's like saying taking content from a magazine is okay as long as you photocopied it first, and copied from the photocopy and not the original.

    For personal use, there are things you may be able to get away with. But, for any type of commercial use, no.
    Signature

    Dan's content is irregularly read by handfuls of people. Join the elite few by reading his blog: dcrBlogs.com, following him on Twitter: dcrTweets.com or reading his fiction: dcrWrites.com but NOT by Clicking Here!

    Dan also writes content for hire, but you can't afford him anyway.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1584540].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author jacktackett
    First thanks for all the answers.

    I've made my statements so hopefully others will do their due diligence.

    To be honest I do think the advice is infringing - but my gut tells me the author simply doesn't realize it. The gist seems to be he's seen others do this and since he's not gotten into trouble as well then it must be ok.

    In fairness he suggested other ways to do the method without using what 'I considered' questionable material. Of course I have no intention of using any of his methods. I made that mistake very early on years ago and in ignorance got my Google account suspended - won't happen again.

    alas, I broke one of my own rules this time - that's:

    never attribute to evil what can be attributed to ignorance

    crazy but i'm use to my kids saying its ok to do something since all their friends do it - kinda weird to see a grown man use that excuse.

    best,
    --Jack
    Signature
    Let's get Tim the kidney he needs!HELP Tim
    Mega Monster WSO for KimW http://ow.ly/4JdHm


    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1584812].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author CDarklock
    Originally Posted by jacktackett View Post

    The last one blew me away - not due to its greatness, but because it advocates using copyright infringement and stealing- basically music, album covers, images and videos. I couldn't believe what I was reading.
    I believe I reviewed that WSO and declined to post a testimonial. I certainly reviewed one much like the system you're describing.

    And, once again: we're rapidly beginning to deal more and more with a culture that simply doesn't care about copyright infringement or intellectual property in general. The person who advocates this kind of blatant copyright infringement with music and album covers certainly doesn't think twice about giving his friend a copy of your ebook, or putting your bonus videos on his own web site.
    Signature
    "The Golden Town is the Golden Town no longer. They have sold their pillars for brass and their temples for money, they have made coins out of their golden doors. It is become a dark town full of trouble, there is no ease in its streets, beauty has left it and the old songs are gone." - Lord Dunsany, The Messengers
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1584885].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author adamv
    Originally Posted by jacktackett View Post

    it advocates using copyright infringement and stealing- basically music, album covers, images and videos.

    - since one is recording just the sound from your sound card/speakers and not downloading a file its legal....

    WHAT?
    There's not much you can do other than post a review in the sellers wso thread.

    The (flawed) logic this seller is using is like those guys who bring a video camera into a movie theater to record pirated copies. But even those guys know that it's wrong.
    Signature

    Get a professional voice over for your next audio or video project at an affordable price -- I will record 150 words of text for just $5.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1584897].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Slin
    Post about it in the thread, get a refund, and complain big time.

    Some people don't realize this, but there is a big difference between black hat and illegal.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1584920].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Bev Clement
    Jack, good to see you posting your concerns here. It was interesting to read the thread and see the people who were giving it the thumbs up, and also that it had been a "wso of the day."

    It seems there are a lot of questionable wso's coming out these days, and some people are working on how to get around the system just to prove they can.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1584928].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Michael Oksa
    I AM NOT A LAWYER

    A bit of a tangent: Whether you profit or not from others' copyrighted work is irrelevant. What matters is if you have permission.

    For example, if I had a non-profit charity site to help needy kids, and used images of Mickey Mouse and the song "It's A Small World", I could still get into plenty of trouble.

    I AM NOT A LAWYER

    Almost every "argument" I've seen for using copyrighted works comes down to justification. Sometimes it's overt, other times it's more subtle, but nine times out of ten it's justification.

    All the best,
    Michael
    Signature

    "Ich bin en fuego!"
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1584971].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author kindsvater
      If there is a legal problem with a WSO you should post your concerns on the WSO thread

      - or -

      as other Warriors have done over the years, you can PM me and have me review the WSO material and your concern.

      If there is a legal problem I'll post it on the WSO thread and take the heat. You have no idea how many threats I've received from pointing out legal problems with WSOs.

      There are some sellers really pissed at me for pointing out legal problems that have nuked their WSOs - sometimes multiple WSOs. On the other hand, some of those formerly mad Warriors have changed their ways and are now providing honest and valuable contributions to the forum.

      .
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1585047].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author ExRat
        Hi Paul,

        No, you cannot think like "an evil ******* Paul."
        That feat takes years of practice.
        Signature


        Roger Davis

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1585104].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author jacktackett
        Thanks Brian,
        I had actually started a PM to you but wanted to try to solve things with the seller first. I will send the pm. I would really like to know if I'm correct in that this is infringement as I suspect, or if there really is something about IP law I'm missing here.
        again thanks!
        --Jack

        Originally Posted by kindsvater View Post

        If there is a legal problem with a WSO you should post your concerns on the WSO thread

        - or -

        as other Warriors have done over the years, you can PM me and have me review the WSO material and your concern.

        If there is a legal problem I'll post it on the WSO thread and take the heat. You have no idea how many threats I've received from pointing out legal problems with WSOs.

        There are some sellers really pissed at me for pointing out legal problems that have nuked their WSOs - sometimes multiple WSOs. On the other hand, some of those formerly mad Warriors have changed their ways and are now providing honest and valuable contributions to the forum.

        .
        Signature
        Let's get Tim the kidney he needs!HELP Tim
        Mega Monster WSO for KimW http://ow.ly/4JdHm


        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1585112].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Dennis Gaskill
          Originally Posted by jacktackett View Post

          Hypothetically, lets say I have a TV tuner on my computer. I'm I'm watching pop-up video and I'm listening to Rush's Tom Sawyer. I like the song so I fire up audacity and record what's being streamed to my computer. I have not downloaded a video file, or taken a screen capture, or an mp3 of the song. But I recorded the audio and video that I was seeing.

          Personal use? I can agree with that so far.

          But then I take my video and I watermark my recording at

          http://www.blahmysite.com/non-rush-r...-video-related

          affiliate link and upload that puppy to my website. Have I just committed infringement?
          You have indeed. You can't legally use someone else's intellectual property in any way other than intended unless you have their permission.

          Originally Posted by jacktackett View Post

          First thanks for all the answers.
          never attribute to evil what can be attributed to ignorance
          That's a great quote! I'm going to steal it from you.

          Originally Posted by Michael Oksa View Post

          Almost every "argument" I've seen for using copyrighted works comes down to justification. Sometimes it's overt, other times it's more subtle, but nine times out of ten it's justification.
          Michael hit the nail on the head. It's justification, pure and simple.
          Signature

          Just when you think you've got it all figured out, someone changes the rules.

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1585347].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Gee S
        Originally Posted by kindsvater View Post


        as other Warriors have done over the years, you can PM me and have me review the WSO material and your concern.

        .
        Kindsvater,

        I'm not sure the OP would be allowed to do that, it all depends on the rights he has to the WSO he purchased, so he may not be able to share it.

        Also if you did this, you would be breaking rule #1 of WSO's, which goes along the lines of "you can't comment on the WSO unless you have purchased it"...or something like that.

        You'd be better of purchasing the WSO yourself if you want to review it.

        But I'm sure you already know that.

        Gee
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1585171].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author kindsvater
          Gee:

          If the OP wants a lawyer to look over something he has every right to do that. There is absolutely nothing the WSO seller can do to prevent that. Better brush up on your legal training.

          Since you're not aware, I spent hundreds of dollars last year on WSOs - not because I was interested in them - but solely to review legal compliance issues. Not everything gets discussed in public as is happening with this thread.

          I, and others, have made plenty of posts about WSOs without needing to buy them. If you want to become a mod go for it. Sometimes, though, it is plain as day, or plain from other circumstances you may not be privy to, that there is a problem.

          You'd better check those rules again, and ask yourself where the forum permits illegal activities to be sold. It doesn't. More than one Warrior has been sued or threatened with a lawsuit from WSOs, so this can be very important.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1585340].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Gee S
            Originally Posted by kindsvater View Post

            Gee:

            If the OP wants a lawyer to look over something he has every right to do that. There is absolutely nothing the WSO seller can do to prevent that. Better brush up on your legal training.
            Yes of course he can have a lawyer have a look at it. My posts didn't mention anything about that. I was looking at the rules from a members point of view, not a lawyers.

            Since you're not aware, I spent hundreds of dollars last year on WSOs - not because I was interested in them - but solely to review legal compliance issues. Not everything gets discussed in public as is happening with this thread.
            Again, not sure where you think I said you didn't buy WSO's for review. I was replying to your post where you were saying that the OP should give you a copy of the review or maybe I misunderstood your comment. Now for someone to see that post as it was on its own, it could be seen against the rules.

            I, and others, have made plenty of posts about WSOs without needing to buy them. If you want to become a mod go for it. Sometimes, though, it is plain as day, or plain from other circumstances you may not be privy to, that there is a problem.
            No I think the mods do a fantastic job as it is. I don't think I could better tbh, and again, it was a simple case of looking at for you with a simple reminder of the rules. No harm intended.

            You'd better check those rules again, and ask yourself where the forum permits illegal activities to be sold. It doesn't. More than one Warrior has been sued or threatened with a lawsuit from WSOs, so this can be very important.
            Of course it is very important. In no way did I say it wasn't important. But again looking at the way you posted it was perceived as breaking rule 1.

            Well I'll put this to bed now so not take the thread in a different direction.

            Gee
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1585409].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Kim Standerline
          I think you'll find that Brian is probably one of the very few people allowed to do so (and the best qualified)

          Kim

          Originally Posted by Gee Sanghera View Post

          Kindsvater,

          I'm not sure the OP would be allowed to do that, it all depends on the rights he has to the WSO he purchased, so he may not be able to share it.

          Also if you did this, you would be breaking rule #1 of WSO's, which goes along the lines of "you can't comment on the WSO unless you have purchased it"...or something like that.

          You'd be better of purchasing the WSO yourself if you want to review it.

          But I'm sure you already know that.

          Gee
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1585342].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author BIG Mike
          Banned
          [DELETED]
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1585356].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author thmark
            I doubt the author of this WSO will have much room to complain if you pass it over to a legal moderator. Especially if he is advocating what you believe he is.

            Reminds me of a quote I heard of an R rated movie producer complaining about people copying and sharing movies: "What's happened to morality in this country?"

            To me it is fitting justice that the movie and especially music industries which have attacked every sort of traditional moral standard as outdated and restrictive and for "squares" is being decimated by copying and sharing.

            As Hemingway stated when asked about how his 2nd wife felt about being dumped for his third, "Live by the sword, die by the sword."

            It's tempting for us to take shortcuts and grab a quick buck, but a free society depends on individuals taking responsibility.

            Good job for taking action to correct this. If the author has good intentions, he'll thank you in the long run. If not, good riddance.
            Signature

            Interested in Self Help, Alternative Health, and removing self limiting beliefs and actions?

            Energy Healing Workshop UK June 23 & 24 http://LivingEnergyWorkshop.com

            Free Marathon Energy Healing teleseminar series http://facebook.com/LivingEnergyDay

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1585468].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Heidi White
        Originally Posted by kindsvater View Post

        If there is a legal problem with a WSO you should post your concerns on the WSO thread

        - or -

        as other Warriors have done over the years, you can PM me and have me review the WSO material and your concern.

        If there is a legal problem I'll post it on the WSO thread and take the heat. You have no idea how many threats I've received from pointing out legal problems with WSOs.

        There are some sellers really pissed at me for pointing out legal problems that have nuked their WSOs - sometimes multiple WSOs. On the other hand, some of those formerly mad Warriors have changed their ways and are now providing honest and valuable contributions to the forum.

        .
        I believe it about the threats - I've had my heart racing a few times from vicious responses from the odd sociopath I managed to cross - I try not to F with people who can probably back-door my sites and do serious damage just because they're pissed enough.

        Being 100% Community Moderated means individual users put themselves at risk every time they moderate. Not exactly a model that encourages active moderation - thus enabling those who 'get away' with whatever, to continue to do what's paying off, including promoting illegal practices as part of their WSO offers, or making statements that are bald faced lies, or ________ (you fill in the blank bad behavior.)
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1585965].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author KarlWarren
          Originally Posted by MostlyHarmless View Post

          Being 100% Community Moderated means individual users put themselves at risk every time they moderate. Not exactly a model that encourages active moderation - thus enabling those who 'get away' with whatever they want to, including promoting illegal practices as part of their WSO offer or making statements that are bald faced lies.
          There are real moderators too, who are active on the forum, so don't worry.

          Also, when you report a thread - the person whose thread has been reported doesn't get to know it was you who did so. It's only when a user gives another user an infraction that they're made aware of it (Via PM last time I used it)
          Signature
          eCoverNinja - Sales Page Graphics & Layout Specialist
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1585984].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Heidi White
            "There are real moderators too, who are active on the forum, so don't worry."

            You say there are real moderators active on the forums, so that goes for the WSO forum as well?

            If that's the case, then by leaving that WSO active despite discussed comments involving potential illegal practices (in this case copyright infringement?) are they not in essence endorsing the practice, by turning a blind eye - even when it's brought to their face?
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1586010].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Elmer Hurlstone
              Yes, there are "real moderators" on the forum and they are active on the WSO forum.

              The mods on WF are fairly bright people and have an understanding of "due process".

              Jack raised a valid question regarding some techniques being taught in a specific WSO. Until it has been unequivocally determined the WSO in some way violates WF rules it would be unfair to the WSO seller to remove the WSO.

              As Jack mentioned, the product author provided several methods to accomplish the objectives of the product. The particular method causing concern could be easily disclaimed as "the wrong way", within the product, by the author.

              Doing so may reduce concern.

              In the interim Jack posting his concerns in the WSO thread is appropriate.

              WF does not, per se, endorse WSO's by selling advertising space in a section of the forum which is known by all to be a paid advertising venue.

              Originally Posted by MostlyHarmless View Post

              "There are real moderators too, who are active on the forum, so don't worry."

              You say there are real moderators active on the forums, so that goes for the WSO forum as well?

              If that's the case, then by leaving that WSO active despite discussed comments involving potential illegal practices (in this case copyright infringement?) are they not in essence endorsing the practice, by turning a blind eye - even when it's brought to their face?
              Elmer
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1586170].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author lisag
      Originally Posted by Michael Oksa View Post

      I AM NOT A LAWYER

      A bit of a tangent: Whether you profit or not from others' copyrighted work is irrelevant. What matters is if you have permission.

      For example, if I had a non-profit charity site to help needy kids, and used images of Mickey Mouse and the song "It's A Small World", I could still get into plenty of trouble.

      I AM NOT A LAWYER

      Almost every "argument" I've seen for using copyrighted works comes down to justification. Sometimes it's overt, other times it's more subtle, but nine times out of ten it's justification.

      All the best,
      Michael
      Funny you should mention non-profits :-)
      ASCAP
      Signature

      -- Lisa G

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1585425].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author WD Mino
    Copyright law states as soon as the property has been put into a form whether audio written recorded or otherwise it is the property of the author and all rights belong to them internationally this applies. I could pull up the actual legal documents to prove that but in essense copying ANYTHING without permission is against the law and IS punishable by international law I reported one last night that advocating stealing a certain type of info anything that infringes on the intellectual rights of the author could be a real and legal problem for anyone doing so. best thing to do -Don't do it
    -WD
    Signature

    "As a man thinks in his heart so is he-Proverbs 23:7"
    Coming Soon http://graphicsdon.com

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1585832].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Ash R
    Jack, I find what you said about "never attribute to evil what can be attributed to ignorance" incredibly touching, and I hope to remember it when dealing with children.
    However, I've become quite cynical these days after reading/hearing things that I consider shocking (not the particular WSO you're talking about, I'm not pointing fingers). I've come to the decision that, at the end of the day, you need to take a decision on what your principles are, and live by those. Often this boils down to trusting your gut instinct, doing unto others etc.
    In regards to the WSO I would recommend posting on the thread (without being overly harsh) so that potential buyers understand the issues there may be. Of course, some of them may not care.
    Signature
    Don't sweat the small stuff :)
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1585954].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author kemdev
    So all those 'music videos' up on YouTube are in direct copyright
    infringement? Why do YouTube and other authorities not do anything
    about this?
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1586012].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author VegasGreg
      Originally Posted by Jesse Kemmerer View Post

      So all those 'music videos' up on YouTube are in direct copyright
      infringement? Why do YouTube and other authorities not do anything
      about this?
      If you upload a Youtube video with a copyrighted piece of music on the video, they will delete it or strip the audio out of it. They do it all the time.

      If you add the audio through THEIR links during the upload process, they have pre-approval through the music label and the ads for that song pop up during the playback.
      Signature

      Greg Schueler - Wordpress Fanatic... Living The Offline Marketing Dream...

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1586537].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author kemdev
        Originally Posted by VegasGreg View Post

        If you upload a Youtube video with a copyrighted piece of music on the video, they will delete it or strip the audio out of it. They do it all the time.

        If you add the audio through THEIR links during the upload process, they have pre-approval through the music label and the ads for that song pop up during the playback.
        I just find it hard to believe that more isn't done about this. I mean,
        the people that I know use YouTube mostly to hear good, free music
        whenever they want. There are thousands upon thousands upon
        thousands of songs - all in direct copyright infringement - and by the
        upload dates from some (and huge view count), no one seems to
        really bother to do anything about it.

        Maybe that's the problem, then. If people know they can get away
        with it... what's stopping them?
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1593282].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Paul Myers
      Jesse,
      So all those 'music videos' up on YouTube are in direct copyright infringement? Why do YouTube and other authorities not do anything about this?
      Many of them are, yes. YouTube will remove them if it's pointed out to them that they contain copyrighted music.

      The problem of user-generated content sites. Too much to watch for.


      Paul
      Signature
      .
      Stop by Paul's Pub - my little hangout on Facebook.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1586574].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author ppbiz
    I think you are definitely right to raise it in the thread. Newbies buy these products and ASSUME that they are getting correct info on LEGAL ways to make money online. They look to these product creators as experts.

    If you know that someone is advocating illegal or even just grossly unethical practices I think it would be negligent not to raise the alarm.

    Rhiannon
    Signature

    No sig right now...

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1586718].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author jacktackett
    Jesse et al, if you're in any way interested in copyright law then I highly recommend you read Jonathan Bailey's excellent blog called PlagiarismToday. In the below link you'll find an update on the ViaCom vs Google/YouTube court case with covers some of your questions.

    3 Count: Tax This | PlagiarismToday

    --Jack
    Signature
    Let's get Tim the kidney he needs!HELP Tim
    Mega Monster WSO for KimW http://ow.ly/4JdHm


    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1594878].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Alan Petersen
      I put a copyrighted song in a video which was only meant for friends and family (no such thing once online) about my new puppy. I didn't think it would be a big deal since I was not trying to make money off of it. Well I was wrong!

      The video had less then 100 views and the copyright owner found it and YouTube stripped the audio from my video so now it's silent:


      And I got this notice:

      NOTICE
      This video contains an audio track that has not been authorized by WMG. The audio has been disabled. More about copyright

      So yes it is illegal to use music and anything that's copyrighted no matter what anyone says. Even if thousands are doing it. They'll get busted sooner or later.

      I haven't seen that WSO but from what Jack describes it's offering terrible and dangerous advice.


      I've learned my lesson. If that can happen in a little not for profit video meant just for fun imagine if your using it to try and make money. They'll probably come after you even harder than what they did to me.

      Now I don't use anything without rights to it. Including images. You can find anything you need pretty cheaply on places like istock. Lots of other places you can get music and videos that you can buy and use legally. No need to play with fire.
      Signature
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1595108].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author kemdev
    Sorry to erect a dead thread, but I have one more question.

    What if, say, a website of yours was being promoted by a
    video that has copyrighted work on it. Would authorities
    come after your website?

    I only ask because I was recently reading some content
    from a fairly popular marketer who advocated 'buying' YouTube
    accounts with high video view counts and monetizing them.
    Just wondering if this, too, would be considered illegal.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1598404].message }}

Trending Topics