YouTube poop: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
==Copyright and Fair Use== |
==Copyright and Fair Use== |
||
Although YouTube Poops often utilize copyright protected works, use of these materials may fall under the doctrine of [[Fair Use]] as codified in section 107 of copyright law. The doctrine lists several different reasons including using the material to either criticize or comment. It also sets out four factors used to determine whether or not the use is fair |
Although YouTube Poops often utilize copyright protected works, use of these materials may fall under the doctrine of [[Fair Use]] as codified in section 107 of copyright law. The doctrine lists several different reasons including using the material to either criticize or comment. It also sets out four factors used to determine whether or not the use is fair. <ref name = fair> |
||
{{cite web |
{{cite web |
||
| title = Fair Use |
| title = Fair Use |
||
| Line 37: | Line 37: | ||
</ref> |
</ref> |
||
In a request submitted to the Library of Congress on December 1st, 2011, the [[Electronic Frontier Foundation]] petitioned for the continued right of individuals to circumvent the [[content scrambling system]] encoded on audiovisual works for the purpose of making of noncommercial videos. The paper included an argument regarding the pedagogical importance of remix videos as well as the need to acquire high quality content in order for creators to achieve the desired comment or criticism. Non-commercial videos were categorized into different genres, one of these being YouTube Poop. In it, Professor Michael Wesch defines YouTube Poop as ''"absurdist remixes that ape and mock the lowest technical and aesthetic standards of remix culture to comment on remix culture itself."'' <ref name = EFF> |
|||
On July 26th, 2010, [[James H. Billington]] of the Library of Congress released his statement in relation to section 1202 of copyright law. In it, he designated six classes of copyright protected media which would not be subject to the statutory prohibition against circumvention if the material was not being used to infringe.<ref name = exempt> |
|||
{{cite web |
|||
|title = Exemption to prohibition of circumvention |
|||
|url = http://www.copyright.gov/1201/2010/Librarian-of-Congress-1201-Statement.html |
|||
|author = James H Billington, Library of Congress}} |
|||
</ref> |
|||
In a request submitted to the Library of Congress on December 1st, 2011, the [[Electronic Frontier Foundation]] argues the case that remix videos constitute an important pedagogical practice. Professor Michael Wesch identifies YouTube Poop as one genre of short form video that does not infringe copyright.<ref name = EFF> |
|||
{{cite web |
{{cite web |
||
|title = In the matter of exemption to prohibition on circumvention of copyright protection systems for access control technologies |
|title = In the matter of exemption to prohibition on circumvention of copyright protection systems for access control technologies |
||
| Line 65: | Line 58: | ||
*[http://youchew.net/forum/index.php?app=ccs Youchew forum] |
*[http://youchew.net/forum/index.php?app=ccs Youchew forum] |
||
*[http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/YMMV/YoutubePoop YouTube Poop on tvtropes] |
*[http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/YMMV/YoutubePoop YouTube Poop on tvtropes] |
||
*[https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121025/15065220831/dmca-exemptions-announced-exemption-dvd-ripping-rejected.shtml Article on 2012 exemption ruling] |
|||
<!-- Just press the "Save page" button below without changing anything! Doing so will submit your article submission for review. Once you have saved this page you will find a new yellow 'Review waiting' box at the bottom of your submission page. If you have submitted your page previously, the old pink 'Submission dby |
<!-- Just press the "Save page" button below without changing anything! Doing so will submit your article submission for review. Once you have saved this page you will find a new yellow 'Review waiting' box at the bottom of your submission page. If you have submitted your page previously, the old pink 'Submission dby |
||
Revision as of 17:15, 13 November 2013
 | This article, YouTube poop, has recently been created via the Articles for creation process. Please check to see if the reviewer has accidentally left this template after accepting the draft and take appropriate action as necessary.
Reviewer tools: Inform author |
YouTube Poop (also ytp or poop) is a type of video mashup made by editing pre-existing media sources. Visual or auditory effects are often used to further alter the underlying work. Some of these videos convey a story, while others follow a non-linear narrative or contain no story line at all. In many cases, they will utilize a bizarre sequence of elements that can, depending on the viewer, entertain or disorientate.[1]
YouTube Poop is derivative work as defined in the United States Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. § 101 but it is also derivative in the sense that the work of one artist (or pooper) is frequently used as the underlying work for another video. Lawrence Lessig, Professor of Law at Harvard Law School referred to this behavior as an example of “call & response” in a lecture given at the Computer History Museum in 2008.[2]
Origin
In 2004, Matt Mulligan, under the name SuperYoshi, uploaded an edit of the Super Mario Bros Super Show to the website Sheezyart. It wasn't until November of 2006 that the video was uploaded to YouTube with the title I'D SAY HE'S HOT ON OUR TAIL. Matt, along with Andrew Hartford (Yaminomalex), and a small group of YouTube users began editing and uploading “weird random videos for the sake of confusing people," with the purpose of making a mockery of the website.[3]
Copyright and Fair Use
Although YouTube Poops often utilize copyright protected works, use of these materials may fall under the doctrine of Fair Use as codified in section 107 of copyright law. The doctrine lists several different reasons including using the material to either criticize or comment. It also sets out four factors used to determine whether or not the use is fair. [4]
In a request submitted to the Library of Congress on December 1st, 2011, the Electronic Frontier Foundation petitioned for the continued right of individuals to circumvent the content scrambling system encoded on audiovisual works for the purpose of making of noncommercial videos. The paper included an argument regarding the pedagogical importance of remix videos as well as the need to acquire high quality content in order for creators to achieve the desired comment or criticism. Non-commercial videos were categorized into different genres, one of these being YouTube Poop. In it, Professor Michael Wesch defines YouTube Poop as "absurdist remixes that ape and mock the lowest technical and aesthetic standards of remix culture to comment on remix culture itself." [5]
See also
References
- ^ "YouTube Poop: Memes and Community". Yale University, Law and Technology. November 3, 2012.
- ^
Lessig, Lawrence. "REMIX at Computer History Museum".
{{cite web}}: Check|authorlink=value (help); External link in|authorlink= - ^ Mazur, A.J. (January 20, 2011). "Q&A with YouChewPoop".
- ^ United States Copyright Office. "Fair Use".
- ^ Electronic Frontier Foundation. "In the matter of exemption to prohibition on circumvention of copyright protection systems for access control technologies" (PDF).
External links