Forums

  • avatar
    1882 sounds
    1711 posts


    Below another "Attribution Noncommercial" Freesound used by SoundEffectsFactory on YouTube without credit but with a request for a donation ...

    SoundEffectsFactory wrote:
    Walking On Pebble Beach Published on Jan 28, 2013

    Please consider donating to keep these sounds free!
    https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_donations&business;=C4WCF79HM3F...

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQEhr0Y15BM

    which appears identical to ...

    Walking on pebble beach.wav ... http://www.freesound.org/people/NLM/sounds/159501/
    "This work is licensed under the Attribution Noncommercial License."

    ( I'm getting RSI posting these offences by SoundEffectsFactory :¬)

  • avatar
    1310 sounds
    1386 posts


    @SoundEffectsFactory

    I think it is positive that you came here and 'showed your face' in this discussion. The mood was pretty aggressive and it would have been easy for you not to. Also you have kept calm. Points to you for that.

    However, you ARE in violation of copyright laws.
    All sounds on Freesound have a clear CC license - shown just below the download button and with a link to the full terms of the license where you can read the details of your rights and responsibilities under that license.

    Except for CC0 license, you HAVE to give attribution (unless it is physically impossible or impractical to do so) - which is clearly not the case.
    Whether the user has made a request on the sound description or not, the terms of the license will apply. UNLESS you have contacted the user and OBTAINED permission to do something different. - You should keep that communication as proof.

    The name of your youtube channel, the fact that you specifically ask people to give attribution to YOU if they use any of your sounds and the fact that you do not state your source(s) make people think YOU made the sounds. That is illegal and morally wrong.

    You have offered to add attribution to all the videos. Please do so.
    That will put you in compliance with the terms of the licenses and should be the end of the discussion.
    As you can see here, many people are passionate about this and are likely to take it further if you don't. That would be unfortunate and is totally unnecessary.

    hmmmm..... erm..... I forgot...
  • avatar
    371 sounds
    251 posts


    quote alienxxx
    "I think it is positive that you came here and 'showed your face' in this discussion. The mood was pretty aggressive and it would have been easy for you not to."

    I think the best way to work out these problems is from within the freesound community if possible....so yes to the above!

  • avatar
    40 sounds
    29 posts


    Hello again, Thanks Timbre for letting me know about the Walking on Pebble Beach, I will delete the video right away. I must not of noticed the non-commercial licence in the hustle and bustle of things getting ready to go out for the weekend. As for everyone else here, I have just returned to my home computer and I have already started correctly attributing all the videos on my channel which contain content from freesound. If there is anything else I need to do to satisfy the community please let me know.

    I will attribute videos as follows:
    "Sound name" by "Author name"
    URL to sound
    URL to licence terms.

  • avatar
    3044 sounds
    305 posts


    Dear SoundEffectsFactory,
    I think what you are doing sucks. I don't want any of my sounds to be associated with your nonsense.
    Of course I can't stop you if you decide to attribute, but so far you haven't, and I have no interest in working with you or anyone like you who claim other peoples' work as your own. We shouldn't have to tell you which ones to fix, you shouldn't have lied in the first place and on top of that you easily have a list to fix the problem. And you should tell your fans on YouTube and Facebook that you are taking their donations for stuff they can get for free.
    Suck it.

  • avatar
    40 sounds
    29 posts


    Corsica_S wrote:
    Dear SoundEffectsFactory,
    I think what you are doing sucks. I don't want any of my sounds to be associated with your nonsense.
    Of course I can't stop you if you decide to attribute, but so far you haven't, and I have no interest in working with you or anyone like you who claim other peoples' work as your own. We shouldn't have to tell you which ones to fix, you shouldn't have lied in the first place and on top of that you easily have a list to fix the problem. And you should tell your fans on YouTube and Facebook that you are taking their donations for stuff they can get for free.
    Suck it.

    I never asked anybody to tell me what sounds to fix. I am currently going through ALL my videos and relating to ALL my freesound downloads and correcting the attribution. I am also deleting the donation option while im at it. Im also going to reword my channel description and terms of use. And to be completely honest I have only received one donation and which was a sum of $5. I'm going to take that $5 and donate it to the freesound website.

    Im doing everything I can here to fix what has happened.

  • avatar
    40 sounds
    29 posts


    Back on topic, my terms of use has been changed, removed the donation option directly from my channel. I have correctly attributed all of the videos raised on this thread, I am now going through the rest of my videos with freesound content.

  • avatar
    1086 sounds
    395 posts


    If anybody filled out a Copyright Infringement Notification on YouTube and would like to undo that, now that the license situation is being cleared, you can send a retraction to YouTube at http://youtube.com/yt/copyright/retractions.html

    Cheers

    Click here to lend your support to: Freesound 2011 donations and make a donation at www.pledgie.com !
    Donate to Freesound.org
    so it can serve even more and better sounds to you in the future!
  • avatar
    1882 sounds
    1711 posts


    qubodup wrote:
    If anybody filled out a Copyright Infringement Notification on YouTube and would like to undo that, now that the license situation is being cleared, you can send a retraction to YouTube ...

    Before you are reassured by SoundEffectsFactory’s claims to have changed their ways and retract your YouTube complaint , consider whether they have been “completely honest” or misleading ...

    SoundEffectsFactory wrote:
    ... to be completely honest I have only received one donation and which was a sum of $5. I'm going to take that $5 and donate it to the freesound website.

    Their YouTube channel hosts both video and still-image adverts for which they are paid, aka “enabled for monetization”. The channel has been running for a year and has had 4.4 million views. To try to give the impression that only a single-figure sum of money is involved is misleading. To try and buy Freesound users off with a measly five bucks donation/fine is an insult when you consider the advertising revenue their YouTube channel, (in-part fuelled by unauthorized Freesound content), must generate.

    BTW the YouTube terms and conditions on “monetization” do state you can only use Creative Commons content where commercial use is permitted, (so anything with a NonCommercial license is verboten), and that you may be required to give credit to the Creative Commons content creator ...

    google.com/youtube wrote:
    You can monetize royalty-free or Creative Commons content if the license agreement grants you rights to use it commercially. Sometimes rights owners require you to credit the creator of the content ...
    https://support.google.com/youtube

    ( IMO you should pay $5 to each person who has been subjected to the horrific adverts on your YouTube channel, like this one ...

    for "reckless infliction of emotional distress" :¬)

  • avatar
    306 sounds
    74 posts


    I noticed that the attribution to my heartbeat is added.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ickVneWQ72Q

    However, it only shows when you click "show more". I don't believe that many people do. So the effect is negligible.

    There should be a readable link to at least Freesound.org in the first three lines of the YouTube description.

    I have never asked nor supported that third parties publish my material original donated to Freesound. I hope that SoundEffectsFactory knows what he is doing.

    On the other hand, I see the vast potential of going to YouTube as a publishing and advertising platform. Maybe freesound should go there ourselves with our top100 sounds. Big logo in the middle of the 'movie clip' + links and names of authors visible. I wouldn't mind.

  • avatar
    1882 sounds
    1711 posts


    SoundEffectsFactory wrote:
    I will attribute videos as follows:
    "Sound name" by "Author name"
    URL to sound
    URL to licence terms.

    In reality you've added indirect links via a short "bit.ly" URLs, e.g. ...

    SoundEffectsFactory wrote:
    Regular heartbeat with enhanced sound quality making it easier to hear.

    Attribution:
    HeartbeatEnchanced.wav by HerbertBoland
    Link: http://bit.ly/14zaqI6
    Licence Terms: http://bit.ly/X8ve4W

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ickVneWQ72Q

    Why should anyone conceal the license terms behind a "bit.ly" short URL ?,

    Such a redirection does make it easier to hide the true license in the future by redirecting the "bit.ly" link to somewhere else, say to "CC0" rather than "attribution" , or simply breaking the "bit.ly" link so no license info is shown, by accident of course.

    Qubodup gave you a lesson in how to attribute properly here ...
    http://www.freesound.org/forum/legal-help-and-attribution-questions/33381/?page=2#post65494 so you can't say you weren't shown the correct method.

    SoundEffectsFactory wrote:
    Link: http://bit.ly/14zaqI6
    Link to what ?. How does a reader know what it's a link to,
    (would you click on a shortened URL which just says "link" ?).

    Show no mercy Freesounders: "SoundEffectsFactory" is evidently an incorrigible weasel.

    PS
    don't click on any shortened URLs created by dodgy characters : you don't know where they'll take you, ( unless you expand them first ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Short_URL#Privacy_and_security ).

  • avatar
    142 sounds
    1279 posts


    I respect you taking the time to write in this forum, however...

    The question is Sound[deception]factory, why did you lie in the first place?

    This is the only reason why I am NOT accepting your attempts to reconcile, and stand by Corsica's statement fully.


    I am the thing that goes bump in the night...

    ╭─────────╮
    PLEASE VISIT
    ➤ Phazebook
    ➤ HeadCloud
    ╰─────────╯
  • avatar
    1310 sounds
    1386 posts


    Dear All at Freesound

    TheSoundEffectsFactory has promised to put right what was wrong.

    I believe you can tell by my first post that I was really upset by what he had done.
    If he does what he has promised to do, I would like you all to consider the matter settled. I speak, of course with no authority and I am not speaking in representation of Freesound.
    I am not aware of any of my sounds having been used in this way (I have had no time to check for myself in the last few days), but that does not change my view on the matter anyway.

    I might be wrong, but i believe for most Freesounders this is a matter of principle and not one of seeking any form of financial gain.

    As for TheSoundEffectsFactory, goes without saying that people will be checking to make sure you have made the changes you promised. And to make sure you do not slip back in the future.
    People who make contents available on CC licenses give their work away for free. All they ask is foe your thanks and your respect. Shouldn't be too much to ask.
    And please user direct links to Freesound rather than what you have setup at the moment.

    I do hope for a friendly resolution of this matter.

    hmmmm..... erm..... I forgot...
  • avatar
    40 sounds
    29 posts


    Timbre wrote:
    In reality you've added indirect links via a short "bit.ly" URLs, e.g. ...

    What does it matter? All the links I have are shortened simply due to the fact that it looks cleaner and I can track clicks. This goes for all the links on my channel. It doesnt conceal anything or make anything indirect. I dont know what you are talking about you just click it and it takes you to the licence. How about you contribute something constructive to this thread instead of picking apart everything I say and everything I do. Im trying my best to correct what I have done here and attribute correctly.

  • avatar
    1882 sounds
    1711 posts


    AlienXXX wrote:
    .. If he does what he has promised to do, I would like you all to consider the matter settled....

    ... please user direct links to Freesound rather than what you have setup at the moment.

    Nope they are still sticking with the "bit.ly" redirections ...

    SoundEffectsFactory wrote:
    Record Scratch
    SoundEffectsFactory·465 videos
    13,836
    Uploaded on Jan 18, 2012
    My Facebook!
    http://www.facebook.com/SoundEffectsFactory

    DOWNLOAD LINK!
    http://bit.ly/My3mml

    Attribution:
    record scratch.wav by luffy
    Link: http://bit.ly/Y4qNXV
    Licence Terms: http://bit.ly/X8ve4W

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CPGcpIXeA-4

    And I think I now know the reason for the "bit.ly" obfuscation: the "DOWNLOAD LINK!" above leads to paywithatweet.com , (so even if SoundEffectsFactory removes the PayPal donation request links, they still get direct income, (in addition to the YouTube advertising income), from paywithatweet.com when people use the "DOWNLOAD LINK!" they have provided). If an explicit Freesound.org link was provided where they punters could get the sound for nothing it would mean less income for weaselly via paywithatweet.com

    Would you like to see how many people have downloaded Luffy's record scratch [Freesound #3536] from weaselly SoundEffectsFactory's paywithatweet.com link ...

    and up until a few hours ago they would not have known that sound required attribution and may not have bought it (with-a-tweet) if they had known, hence the obfuscation of the attribution license too.

  • avatar
    142 sounds
    1279 posts


    SoundEffectsFactory wrote:

    What does it matter? All the links I have are shortened simply due to the fact that it looks cleaner and I can track clicks. This goes for all the links on my channel. It doesnt conceal anything or make anything indirect. I dont know what you are talking about you just click it and it takes you to the licence. How about you contribute something constructive to this thread instead of picking apart everything I say and everything I do. Im trying my best to correct what I have done here and attribute correctly.

    I think the principal here is that you seem to be purposely deflecting attention away from Freesound.

    Everyone who has contributed in this thread is in favour of making people aware of the exact source of the sounds, at first glance, which is usually the only glance. Realistically speaking, the majority of viewers of your channel are simply going to click on your download location, and dismiss entirely the true source; which goes against our exact purpose of contributing to this database.

    In all fairness, its hard to argue this point because you have attributed (most) which is the legal requirement, although the way in which you do this can be taken subjectively; I know of which Freesound uploaders wouldn't be in favour of.

    I personally believe that you are deliberately trying to shield where these sounds came from so people will still give you merit for your (in my opinion) audacious conduct.

    smile


    I am the thing that goes bump in the night...

    ╭─────────╮
    PLEASE VISIT
    ➤ Phazebook
    ➤ HeadCloud
    ╰─────────╯
  • avatar
    1432 sounds
    109 posts


    Please remove any sounds of mine. I don't have any regrets and claims. But if I write that the sound is editorial and consist sounds without release of accidental recorded people, that is the reason to not to put this sound in monetized channel as a source file. I don't care about attributions etc. It's violation of recorded man's rights even if he's anonymous.

    Anyway after this case I'm against putting Freesound files in source form at any other place. It's for creative work not for distribution. If you had used it in real movie, composition, mix or any creative form it would be acceptable. Your request was misleading if you stated that you want to promote Freesound and sounds creators. You just wanted to be promoted by us, that's the true.

    So better buy any sound recorder, record 5 sounds daily and recreate your files on your channel to deserve your nick name SoundEffectsFactory.

    Amen

    sound addictive human being...
  • avatar
    1086 sounds
    395 posts


    A link to a redirection differs from a direct link. Using redirections could be seen as violation of 4.a. of the terms, which I encourage you to read: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/legalcode

    You must include a copy of, or the Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) for, this License with every copy of the Work You Distribute or Publicly Perform.

    To be clear: Do not change URLs that are part of the attribution requirement of CC licenses.

    The way you made profit from sounds that require attribution as by CC-BY 3 license was illegal. Please understand that you can not continue making profit from these sounds in the manner as you did without facing copyright notices against your YouTube channel. Understand that any other person trying to make profit from these works has to follow the same rules, you are not given an extra hard treatment.

    Click here to lend your support to: Freesound 2011 donations and make a donation at www.pledgie.com !
    Donate to Freesound.org
    so it can serve even more and better sounds to you in the future!
  • avatar
    606 sounds
    276 posts


    The actions by SoundEffectsFactory were clearly an attempt to profit from the work of others. Their Facebook page http://www.facebook.com/SoundEffectsFactory and YouTube channel clearly have lead others to believe he was the author the the works AND has been profiting from this activity.

    This has also put countless people at risk of inadvertently breaching copyright. How many people have been granted permission to use these sounds?

    This was not a 'mistake', it is a deliberate attempt at copyright theft for profit.

    The purpose of Freesound is not to provide content for hosting elsewhere, it is for creative use, of which this is not an example.

    For those of you interested he IS profiting from the monitization of videos which places their use on YouTube as commercial. The channel is clearly a YouTube partner channel (built on fraud) that's why it has a banner above the page. This means he receives money from any advertising shown on his videos when they are played. Your sounds have made this possible.

    If he is recalcitrant the only remedial action here is to close the YouTube channel and start again with a new channel and obey the law.

  • avatar
    203 sounds
    70 posts


    Slightly off-topic, but asked previously:

    The bit.ly shortened URL thing has another drawback. What if Libya decides to cut off all internet traffic to the .ly TLD, as Egypt did not too long ago? Those URLs will no longer work. This might not be an issue for any stable country, but Libya is in some flux at this time.

    Just something to be aware of.
    --
    Keith W. Blackwell

    -- Keith W. Blackwell