• Macaroni_ninja@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    190
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    I hate Tik Tok and also hate copyright disputes but can’t help but smile when these big corporations have arguments over money and people start taking sides, like Tik Tok or Universal cares about any of their customers.

      • Transporter Room 3@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Let them almost kill each other, then whoever is dragging themselves away from the fight go over and American History X their entire business.

        I can dream…

      • ares35@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        that’s how i am when the big media companies and the cable/satellite companies fight over fees and retransmission rights.

    • EatATaco@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      20
      ·
      5 months ago

      Why would having a personal interest or maybe a legal opinion rely at all on whether the companies care for you?

      • Macaroni_ninja@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        5 months ago

        Who said you can’t have an opinion? You can write a paper on the case for all I care just don’t pretend corporations are our friends, or god forbid feel sorry for Tik Tok.

        • EatATaco@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          5 months ago

          The top level comment said it was ridiculous that anyone would take a side. So while they didn’t say you couldn’t have any opinion, but that you were ridiculous for having one.

            • EatATaco@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              5 months ago

              Then they should make it more clear, because that certainly is not clear from what they said.

        • EatATaco@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          10
          ·
          5 months ago

          The people who created the modern form of chess are long since dead, so they don’t have any idea of my existence at all. Yet I still enjoy playing chess. Should I not enjoy the game because the people who created it don’t care about me at all?

          • essteeyou@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            5 months ago

            The inventor of chess can’t do anything that affects your life any more. Companies can, and do.

            • EatATaco@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              5 months ago

              No matter how far we move the goal posts, I’m still going to base what I enjoy on what I enjoy, and not on what corporations are doing or not doing. I find it a bit sad that people would let what entity controls something to dictate their enjoyment of it.

              • essteeyou@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                9
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                5 months ago

                I enjoyed Reddit, but then they started doing things I didn’t agree with, so I left.

                I used to want a Tesla, but I’d rather not support someone like Elon Musk, so I won’t get one.

                I used to love songs by a certain band, and then the lead singer turned out to be a pedophile, so I stopped listening to the music because it was no longer enjoyable.

                Sometimes you’ve got to vote with your wallet, or your attention, or whatever affects the relevant party. Companies definitely affect you, and I don’t think it’s wrong to make decisions based on things other than just enjoyment.

                • EatATaco@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  I ultimately agree here that you should vote with your wallet. I never said nor suggested that one should make decisions solely on what they enjoy.

                  The top level comment was about how people are “taking sides” and that is ridiculous because the companies don’t care for people. My original point was that someone might have a personal interest in the matter or an informed legal opinion, and might take a side based on these things.

                • EatATaco@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  Your account is 2 months older than mine. What’s your point?

  • Jaysyn@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    126
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    5 months ago

    I’ll take, “Things That Won’t Affect Me at All” for $400, Alex.

  • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    82
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    Universal music owns the rights to Remember (walking in the sand) by the Shangri-las.

    Oh no.

    Oh no.

    Oh no no no no no.

  • _number8_@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    64
    arrow-down
    19
    ·
    5 months ago

    this is everything awful about the modern internet. i hate that they can just go and retroactively destroy creations like this. imagine if someone lost the rights to a song and they forced you to send the cassette back

      • Overzeetop@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        5 months ago

        No, the music overlay music offered in the app is licensed and can be added. Creators who are performing covers, I believe, generally have the license held by TikTok or have their videos muted/taken offline. Special arrangements are made for intentional or encouraged content . That is a guess, but things like Megan Trainor’s “Gucci” where she is both the original artist and a participant would be a case like this. I would think Grace Kelly and sing alongs on arrangement-bound copyright material like Pentatonix doing public domain carols (or even Roger’s and Hammerstein) are negotiated licensing if outside of their pre-negotiated license.

      • Lightdm@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        5 months ago

        No, they just put it as background music in their videos, but didn’t actually pay for it. I would guess it constitutes fair use?

    • the post of tom joad@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      5 months ago

      Copyright and ip laws are so fucked in favor of rent-seeking megacorps who hold their hands out expectantly for shit someone else created decades ago.

    • fishos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      22
      ·
      5 months ago

      Imagine comparing free social media to a physical copy of media that you purchased.

      Are you high?

        • Blueberrydreamer@lemmynsfw.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          It’s only a ‘fair analogy’ if you’re comparing two things you own. You make videos for Tiktok. They own that content, not you.

      • deathbird@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        5 months ago

        Maybe folks are gonna start learning that just because they made content for a service, doesn’t mean that they control it.

  • BestBouclettes@jlai.lu
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    ·
    5 months ago

    Does it mean that all of existing tiktoks with universal’s music will now be silent or is it only going to affect new videos?

    • nicetriangle@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      68
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      God it would be great for a huge back catalog of tiktok videos to just be lame tweens dancing in silence.

    • Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      5 months ago

      It impacts all videos. People are going to get a shock tomorrow when they realize they don’t own any of those videos they took when they can no longer download them back with sound.

    • Mr_Blott@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      5 months ago

      I know eh?

      Huge implications

      What, for brain-dead teenagers?

      Boo-fuckin-hoo

    • Telodzrum@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Probably not, the internet seems to think that fair use is much broader than it actually is in practice. The use of copyright materials to produce a work which relies entirely on those materials is not covered when no editorial value is created by the second work. Lipsyncing isn’t parody, essentially.

      • TwilightVulpine@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        29
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        A lot of people on the internet don’t realize how much content is plain copyright infringement that simply doesn’t get pursued. Memes, fanart, edits, covers, so forth.

        Personally I think that should be reason to rethink how IP law is written, if the average person doesn’t find so many uses infringing and they have become part of the typical cultural habits. But that hasn’t happened.

    • gmtom@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      You could make that argument, but the users would need to get the unedited songs from a legitimate source first. Tiktok wouldn’t be able to provide them directly without infringing copyright.

  • CrowAirbrush@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    5 months ago

    Good, Tiktok has tiktokified enough brains by now.

    Let the brains restore and get used to longer form content.

      • CrowAirbrush@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        I know, i know…getting rid of tiktok isn’t going to rid us of the consequences.

        But TikTok definitely seemed to be a whole step on the ladder, so it should have some result i would think.

        In a perfect world the internet would become just a tool instead of a species wide addiction.

  • mlg@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    5 months ago

    UM is almost the sole reason why copyright claims on youtube are such a hellscape, so I’ll gladly enjoy seeing them fight TikTok on this.

    • CluckN@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      39
      ·
      5 months ago

      TikTok was originally an app called Musically where people would lip-sync over songs. Music was/is the core of the app so copyrighting songs would cut down the majority of their content.

  • GeneralVincent@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    5 months ago

    Controversial take but…

    Yes, tiktok has several serious glaring issues as a platform but being such an absolutely huge platform, it has been (for a while now) much more than teen dance app. It’s a platform that under represented and minority groups have found an audience to share their voice. The are legit journalists, artists, celebrities, organizations, dank memers, etc using the platform for good.

    Obv it would be great if it wasn’t all on tiktok (isn’t there a federated equivalent?) but seeing people rejoice wherever something bad happens to the platform just lacks… nuance I guess. I know it’s hard to compare social media platforms, but from what I can tell it’s one of the less controlling, censor heavy platforms. And it’s not owned by Elon Musk lol

    • _number8_@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      definitely. it’s a uniquely bad and insidious platform, but at the same time there’s still good and important content on there you’d never see anywhere else. people are too quick to dismiss it because they haven’t tried to tailor the algorithm to what they want properly and assume it’s all shitty dance videos

      • GeneralVincent@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        Yeah the algorithm imo is a blessing and a curse. You can find your niche and get really good content relevant to you that’s not the shitty dance videos. But of course their algorithm is so great that it keeps you in that bubble and keeps you watching for too long.

        And if we compare to YouTube shorts… I’ve found that place to be a hell hole. Facebook videos, Snapchat, all the other platforms have less people and a worse algorithm that pushes those kinds of annoying dance videos or (YouTube especially) right wing, misogynist, crap that I downvote, report, and select “don’t recommend” dozens of times without any change.

        Anyways 😅 rant over. We should all get off the Internet more and touch grass tbf