[QUOTE=Stopper;52402200]I seem to be missing something here. A company did not pay the work an artist did for the game and yet the game was released (and presumably sold). Why is the artist in the wrong for wanting their money? TB says that as a contractor all rights to the finished product are waived, which is true, but surely if the work is not paid, then that is a completely void statement.[/QUOTE]
That's not how contract law and copyright law works. In this case the company still owns the rights to the music and for the contractor to get their money they need to work with the company. If that doesn't work they can take them to court which [i]then[/i] can decide the rights to the music (although, still unlikely to change, they'll just get a large amount of money from the devs).
[editline]26th June 2017[/editline]
[QUOTE=Jimesu_Evil;52402403]Is she just trying to say that so she can claim "conflict of interest" to keep him from being involved against her or something?[/QUOTE]
I think she's just insane.
Jim took down his own video because he left an email on his video which was meant for people who suffered the takedown abuse, but people thought it was Alex's so they sent death threats to it, despite Jim leaving it in bold under the email not to do that. Can't say I'm surprised.
[video=youtube;1qHIfb8vphM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1qHIfb8vphM[/video]
[editline]Penis[/editline]
Reupload:
[video=youtube;tHWlK21sdHs]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tHWlK21sdHs[/video]
[QUOTE=LZTYBRN;52402372]
[editline]26th June 2017[/editline]
She made a thread on the Starr Mazer discussions board
[url]http://steamcommunity.com/app/462100/discussions/0/1368380934255690489/[/url][/QUOTE]
Wow. Even the title of the thread alone is too much. "Why is Starr Maizer: DSP still offline?"
Its like taking a shit on the floor, someone notices it and you just run up to them and say "That's my fault. Why hasn't it been cleaned up?"
Can't even make it through the first 100 posts GG
[QUOTE=Stopper;52402200]I seem to be missing something here. A company did not pay the work an artist did for the game and yet the game was released (and presumably sold). Why is the artist in the wrong for wanting their money? TB says that as a contractor all rights to the finished product are waived, which is true, but surely if the work is not paid, then that is a completely void statement.[/QUOTE]
According to the Devs, she WAS paid for the work she did before she left due to medical concerns, afterwards she's just gone down the insanity hole.
[url]https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/imagosfilms/starr-mazer/comments?cursor=16156359#comment-16156358[/url]
[QUOTE=JXZ;52402232]what i want to know is, with the youtube copyright system being so broken, what prevents some dung beetle from putting three copyright strikes at once against every single big youtuber and shutting them all down?
Literally the only evidence that any protection like this exists is that it hasn't already happened.[/QUOTE]
What I've read is that a copyright STRIKE is not the same as a copyright CLAIM.
A copyright claim happens first. That's when a copyright owner says "your video contains my copyrighted content" and this is a big thing Youtube gets criticized for, because these copyright claims are usually sent automatically, and IMMEDIATELY the copyright holder can decide if they want nothing to happen to the video, if they want monetization disabled, if they want to preserve monetization but have the ad money sent to themselves, if they want the video blocked in certain regions, or if they want the video taken down altogether.
A copyright strike happens when the video uploader disputes the claim. IN THEORY, this would be when somebody working for Youtube looks at the video and evaluates whether the use of copyrighted material falls under fair use, or whether it's actual copyright infringement. What happens more often is that somebody will check whether the copyrighted material is indeed being used (regardless of whether it's in a context protected by Fair Use) and if it is, the channel gets a copyright strike.
This is why most channels, especially small ones, won't even bother trying to dispute a copyright claim. Not because they know they're in the wrong to use the copyrighted material, but because they know the system is rigged against them. They just accept whatever punishment is doled out to them and do their best to move on.
It's also why some people censor or distort footage of movies or TV shows when they make videos talking about these things. Because if they can just trick the automated claim system, their video is allowed to scrape by intact.
Been reading through things, she says her ssn was leaked but is this even true?
[video]http://twitter.com/Totalbiscuit/status/879208708047294464[/video]
from [url]http://steamcommunity.com/app/462100/discussions/0/1368380934257446499/[/url]. A mod actually locked this by now so its closed.
[QUOTE][quote=Alex Mauer;1368380934260518355][quote=Annabella Renée]I'm sorry you feel that you have been wronged, I have found that you are Transgender just like I am. You appear to be having a downward spiral where you are making the biggest fool of yourself but As TB has pointed out [url]https://twitter.com/Totalbiscuit/status/879208708047294464[/url] I am worried about your saftey and mental health right now.
We have the highest rate of suicide in the LGBT. We have been known to destroy our lives by destroying the one thing we have going for us so we can justify the reasoning of killing ourselves.
I beg you, please go get medical attention, reach out to a friend, do something. You have so much to live for, you are in the industry that most of us can only dream of.
Again, Please seek help. You can PM me, you can reach out to TB or Jim Sterling, you can even post on here but please don't hurt yourself.
Anna <3 [/quote]
I reached out to TB and that mother fucker didn't give two shits about me so fuck you Annabella. I am getting death threats and now Leonard French is representing Imagos. I was trying to hire Leonard and he decided to politically choose a client to further his own cause. The world is a shit place where you can work insanely hard for your dream and someone can steal it from you. Then when you call them out on it they still win anyway. So fuck you Annabella. [/quote]
[quote=Alex Mauer;1368380934260709721]What makes anyone think I wanted sympathy or good will? I just expect for former clients to not disclose copies of paperwork containing my contact info, redacted SSN, and signature. For all I know, you creepy fucking scumbags might photoshop my signature from the document into other things to sign me up for shit like credit cards or god knows what the fuck. Go ahead. I dare you to fucking do that, and see how long Don Thacker remains out of jail.
Oh and if you could all stop threatening my life that would be good. For all I know, someone is going to be standing outside of my house waiting for me and actually do one of the things they're saying like "hoping I die an excruciatingly painful death" etc. I may as well go buy a gun for protection. Let's see your doxxing fucking faces meet me out side of my house with that shit now. I guess that's part of the job description for Youtuber now? Death threats and meeting people outside their doxxed fucking houses? [/quote]
[quote=Alex Mauer;1368380934260732439][quote=Darkugm;1368380934260719349]threats with a gun now. [/quote]
You're threatening me with a gun now? I can't even interpret that non-sentence to mean anything, kind of like the neanderthal "contract" everyone keeps talking about. It refers to Starr Mazer as a FILM and it lists the company as Imagos Softworks despite the header saying Imagos Films with a really hideous logo design. I've commented on Don Thacker's logo design choices before, and he totally ignored me. So, I basically just stopped commenting on all of his logos even though they are TOTALLY HIDEOUS. THE TRUTH IS OUT! [/quote]
[/QUOTE]
A post that summerizes it very well from the earlier posted "[URL="http://steamcommunity.com/app/462100/discussions/0/1368380934255690489/?ctp=12#c1368380934258208076"]Why is Starr Mazer: DSP still offline?[/URL]" thread
[QUOTE][quote=Viktorae;1368380934258208076]after diving around in the comments... I found this nugget:
[url]http://imgur.com/gallery/smTxK[/url]
So... this is kind interesting.
One: if this is true, then Alex is STILL in the wrong for filing all the youtube DMCA's, as the videos fell under fair use. So Alex has still commited perjury.
Two: If this is true, in that they failed to pay the previously agreed upon amount (which given how Alex's story changes so frequently, I highly doubt), a breech in one portion of the contract does not void the entire contract.
If anything, it may have rendered it [i]voidable[/i], however, Alex STILL would need to go through court to get that settled. In other words, until she goes through official channels (read: Court) she does not own the copyright. So... no. she is still legally not in the right.
three: If this is false, then Alex is lying through her teeth. Imagos has already stated that they have payed her the fee, and then some, in good faith that she would produce the work agreed upon in their contract when she was able, citing a requirement for medical attention.
these statements are in direct conflict with oneanother, and should be handled privately, or, failing that, a court room. not youtube.
Conclusion:
Regardless of what copyright Alex holds, if any, she is not in the legal right to file DMCA take-down notices.
Regardless of the status of the contract, she does not CURRENTLY hold the rights to the music.
and here's the real clencher: Unless she provides documentation stating that the contract agreement was ended prior to her work on DSP (Something she has yet to do), as far as the contract is concerned, she STILL does not own the rights to her music. 'cause funny thing: it's [u][i][b]STARR MAZER[/b][/i][/u] DSP.
It is considered related work, and can be quite easily considered part of Starr Mazer.
Lesson:
Always, ALWAYS, read the fine print, and if you want a new contract, DO NOT START WORK UNTIL YOU HAVE ONE.
And Alex, this is to you.
What Imagos is sharing is a contract. it is not private documentation. it a set of paperwork that is being released to select individuals to fight the false DMCA notices that YOU have filed, as well as journalists (Like SidAlpha) interested in covering the story. Leonard French likely grabbed it from SidAlpha, as he would ALSO like to make sure he's interpreting it correctly.
It is not, by any means, a private document, and as it is indisputeably Imagos's property (it's THEIR contract after all) they have the legal authority to share it to those that they deam necessary.
Once more: they are sharing it to fight the false copyright claims that YOU filed against youtubers. they are not attempting to dox you. they are trying to fix the shitshow YOU caused.
and while we're on the subject: No. youtubers don't need to talk to Imagos to get these strikes lifted, as YOU are directly responsible for filing the claims.
[quote=SoFast;1368380934258188699]
Yes and no, based on your interview and previous responses in this thread, Alex seems to be taking an unclear stance on whether or not the document is in fact real.
She doesn't really address any fair use concerns or questions about the lawyer situation based on past comments.
I'm not being critical of you, and I really do appreciate you are putting in work, but it doesn't exactly address my questions.
For instance, a previous quote:
"How could it be that any of those people have a document that is being referred to as "the contract that I signed"?" [/quote]
she answered that question in a roundabout way, stating that this contract was for Starr Mazer, and not for DSP (which is... wrong.) [/quote]
[/QUOTE]
Wow, this is gold. Yet another reason to hate youtube as it is now. Any whackjob with a personal vendetta can shut down anyone with little effort.
[QUOTE=DEMONSKUL;52406333]Wow, this is gold. Yet another reason to hate youtube as it is now. Any whackjob with a personal vendetta can shut down anyone with little effort.[/QUOTE]
Most sites are like this was it facebook, twitter or instagram for example.
Jesus Christ, she's genuinely insane.
[QUOTE=Loofiloo;52405804]What I've read is that a copyright STRIKE is not the same as a copyright CLAIM.
A copyright claim happens first. That's when a copyright owner says "your video contains my copyrighted content" and this is a big thing Youtube gets criticized for, because these copyright claims are usually sent automatically, and IMMEDIATELY the copyright holder can decide if they want nothing to happen to the video, if they want monetization disabled, if they want to preserve monetization but have the ad money sent to themselves, if they want the video blocked in certain regions, or if they want the video taken down altogether.
A copyright strike happens when the video uploader disputes the claim. IN THEORY, this would be when somebody working for Youtube looks at the video and evaluates whether the use of copyrighted material falls under fair use, or whether it's actual copyright infringement. What happens more often is that somebody will check whether the copyrighted material is indeed being used (regardless of whether it's in a context protected by Fair Use) and if it is, the channel gets a copyright strike.
This is why most channels, especially small ones, won't even bother trying to dispute a copyright claim. Not because they know they're in the wrong to use the copyrighted material, but because they know the system is rigged against them. They just accept whatever punishment is doled out to them and do their best to move on.
It's also why some people censor or distort footage of movies or TV shows when they make videos talking about these things. Because if they can just trick the automated claim system, their video is allowed to scrape by intact.[/QUOTE]
Actually, when you file a copyright claim, it becomes a strike automatically if you do it right, and the automated system detects that the content of the video matches the content you're claiming is stolen from you. I assume there's a way to make it so your copyright claim just redirects the monetization but I've never figured out how that works. When I've filed copyright claims before for people who have stolen my content what has happened is their video has gotten taken down and they get a strike on their account, and usually if they're a big partnered channel their partner will contact me and negotiate for me to revoke the claim after they delete the video (which removes the strike).
Copyright strikes are bad news. Two copyright strikes can cripple a channel and three will have the channel completely deleted (although it still stays in Youtube's servers for a while in case the strikes are invalid).
Getting stuff taken down with a claim isn't that easy to do trivially. I had someone rearrange the clips of one of my videos and when I filed a copyright claim it rejected it and asked me for more information (I don't remember what it asked me for, I just remember me feeling like it wasn't worth it). However Alex is doing this, she has the system figured out.
Also, I don't know whether to trust TB on this or Youtube, but I should mention, when you file a copyright claim, it makes you digitally sign something that says "I confirm under penalty of perjury that I am the rights owner of this content". I don't know if that's just to scare people and it isn't actually valid, or if TB has never filed a copyright claim and simply doesn't know about this.
[QUOTE=Helix Snake;52406491]Actually, when you file a copyright claim, it becomes a strike automatically if you do it right, and the automated system detects that the content of the video matches the content you're claiming is stolen from you. I assume there's a way to make it so your copyright claim just redirects the monetization but I've never figured out how that works. When I've filed copyright claims before for people who have stolen my content what has happened is their video has gotten taken down and they get a strike on their account, and usually if they're a big partnered channel their partner will contact me and negotiate for me to revoke the claim after they delete the video (which removes the strike).
Copyright strikes are bad news. Two copyright strikes can cripple a channel and three will have the channel completely deleted (although it still stays in Youtube's servers for a while in case the strikes are invalid).[/QUOTE]
I believe with Youtube's system you can claim a strike in such a way that it won't take down a video, it just demonetizes it. So say if I had a lets play video in Hitman: Blood money and I put a Rhiana song over it, it might get a copyright strike that just removes my ability to monetize it because of the song.
Nintendo has been doing this in the past with people using their games for lets-play styled content. They'll demonetize a person's videos that include Nintendo games simply for having Nintendo games. I think you can do this without initiating a copyright strike against the channel.
[QUOTE=Cyke Lon bee;52406499]I believe with Youtube's system you can claim a strike in such a way that it won't take down a video, it just demonetizes it. So say if I had a lets play video in Hitman: Blood money and I put a Rhiana song over it, it might get a copyright strike that just removes my ability to monetize it because of the song.
Nintendo has been doing this in the past with people using their games for lets-play styled content. They'll demonetize a person's videos that include Nintendo games simply for having Nintendo games. I think you can do this without initiating a copyright strike against the channel.[/QUOTE]
What Nintendo does is Content ID, which is a completely different system. But yeah, I believe it is possible to do a claim that just takes monetization, I just never figured out how to do that. I couldn't find the option for it.
[QUOTE=Combine 177;52406433]Most sites are like this was it facebook, twitter or instagram for example.[/QUOTE]
Facebook has the exact opposite problem. It's almost impossible to enforce copyright on there as it takes them a million years to shut down pages, let alone accounts, which is why stolen content is rampant across the website.
[QUOTE=Helix Snake;52406517]What Nintendo does is Content ID, which is a completely different system. But yeah, I believe it is possible to do a claim that just takes monetization, I just never figured out how to do that. I couldn't find the option for it.[/QUOTE]
Ah that makes sense. I was just going from my personal experience receiving claims, not placing them. I've had videos get the content ID claim due to containing clips of TV shows or movies, and none of them ever became strikes. In fact, some of them eventually were removed with no action on my part.
Looks like another update has happened:
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-xixllqAgdE[/media]
It is like going down the rabbit hole.
Don't you just love adult temper tantrums?
[media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qC_BXWx9s6Q[/media]
o boy this shit just never ends
How can someone get this disconnected from reality?
-snip because dumb-
[QUOTE=LuaChobo;52409661]really think about that
mental hospitals are seriously fucked up, regardless of an EPIC INTERNET DEATH THREAT this doesnt really constitute genuine psycho shit, shes just constantly freaking out and digging a deep hole[/QUOTE]
Oh, sorry about that. I do agree that she keeps digging a deep hole though.
The lawsuits are going to become ridiculous.
How much can she be sued for now?
Defamation, death threats, extortion, lost profits, some people will probs also put in emotional damage.
Has she always had a track record like this? It seems like she just blew up out of the blue while working on this game. It's freaky to think that people that are this unhinged are just walking around in society.
Why did she call him transphobic? What????
[QUOTE=Katatonic717;52409736]Why did she call him transphobic? What????[/QUOTE]
It's a reliable way to silence most people. Additionally a lot of people will attack anyone called that on sight without proof.
It honestly seems she is trying every trick in the "book" to get an edge.
I wouldn't fuck with Turner broadcasting. Just like Viacom, their lawyers are relentless in crippling you if you piss them off enough
It's weird to see people coming after her.
She made a terrible decision to involve the youtube community, but if she was never payed for her work - EVEN IF THEY DON'T USE THE WORK - she deserves to be compensated for originally ever using it. If they replace it, it doesn't matter, she wrote music for the video game and deserves to be payed.
Small and large companies really take advantage of us composers. Largely underpaid, but largely necessary.
She's crazy, and has probably got finances that she needs to take care of, and she deserves her money.
[QUOTE=revan740;52410485]It's weird to see people coming after her.
She made a terrible decision to involve the youtube community, but if she was never payed for her work - EVEN IF THEY DON'T USE THE WORK - she deserves to be compensated for originally ever using it. If they replace it, it doesn't matter, she wrote music for the video game and deserves to be payed.
Small and large companies really take advantage of us composers. Largely underpaid, but largely necessary.
She's crazy, and has probably got finances that she needs to take care of, and she deserves her money.[/QUOTE]
Imagos has asserted that she left part way through the development due to medical leave and she was fairly compensated for the work she provided, and that if she were to complete the work she was contracted to do, that she would receive the remainder of her compensation. Which is entirely fair - you don't get paid for work you don't do. This is also only something that could be settled between Imagos and Alex, or in a court of law.
[QUOTE=biodude94566;52410510]Imagos has asserted that she left part way through the development due to medical leave and she was fairly compensated for the work she provided, and that if she were to complete the work she was contracted to do, that she would receive the remainder of her compensation. Which is entirely fair - you don't get paid for work you don't do. This is also only something that could be settled between Imagos and Alex, or in a court of law.[/QUOTE]
Thanks for the update. There are so many videos, I didn't have all the information.
Nevermind.
[QUOTE=Zang-Pog;52410530]So you're telling me you'd see nothing weird if first I'd have a fall off with somebody about money and then I'd come over, piss in your cereal and tell you if you have a problem with it, take it up with the person who fell off with me?
[I]Okay[/I][/QUOTE]
Your analogy falls short, but I'm wrong about her never being payed apparently.
I also never said what she did was right. In fact, I said she made a terrible decision. She's on the wrong side of the law.
Maybe I'm just [I]sympathetic for both parties.[/I]
[QUOTE=revan740;52410485]It's weird to see people coming after her.
She made a terrible decision to involve the youtube community, but if she was never payed for her work - EVEN IF THEY DON'T USE THE WORK - she deserves to be compensated for originally ever using it. If they replace it, it doesn't matter, she wrote music for the video game and deserves to be payed.
Small and large companies really take advantage of us composers. Largely underpaid, but largely necessary.
She's crazy, and has probably got finances that she needs to take care of, and she deserves her money.[/QUOTE]
It's a lot of 'he said, she said', so who knows what's really going on. It all depends on what agreements were made between Alex and Imagos. The issue isn't that. The issue is that she's fucking with people who have nothing to do with it, and then she tells them that it's Imagos fault, which is a load of bullshit.
[QUOTE=revan740;52410485]It's weird to see people coming after her.
She made a terrible decision to involve the youtube community, but if she was never payed for her work - EVEN IF THEY DON'T USE THE WORK - she deserves to be compensated for originally ever using it. If they replace it, it doesn't matter, she wrote music for the video game and deserves to be payed.
Small and large companies really take advantage of us composers. Largely underpaid, but largely necessary.
She's crazy, and has probably got finances that she needs to take care of, and she deserves her money.[/QUOTE]
I'm more than happy for her if she gets the money just so she loses it in court. She's attempted to ruin a lot of Youtube careers for selfish reasons with little regard for them. I feel no pity for someone who attacks the wrong people. She went too far with this entire shenanigan.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
