Rob Callister

[TheTeapot]

11 minutes ago, dilligaf said:

] At least Derek Crellin has a brain.

 

Hmmmmmm.

[Mr Helmut Fromage]

Robin Turton - a persistent boil on the arse on Onchan, when you drive through Onchan he always seems to be loitering in a bus shelter or outside the Co-Op ready to bore someone with his delusional importance.

[dilligaf]

Derek Crellin most certainly has a brain. He was in the Police Force for years and I think he rose to inspector level.

I only know him from his role as Taxi Inspector, but I know a few people I respect who have good things to say about him.

As for the rest of the bods in Onchan, F***.

[slinkydevil]

Of course he pulled it. The quality was fine (it's not the Sundance Film Festival), the music was just stolen.

Don't lie and bullshit, just say that you'd made a mistake, it would probably do you some good.

 

 

[Neil Down]

1 minute ago, slinkydevil said:

Of course he pulled it. The quality was fine (it's not the Sundance Film Festival), the music was just stolen.

Don't lie and bullshit, just say that you'd made a mistake, it would probably do you some good.

 

 

The man who opens his mouth to change feet...

[thesultanofsheight]

4 minutes ago, slinkydevil said:

Of course he pulled it. The quality was fine (it's not the Sundance Film Festival), the music was just stolen.

Don't lie and bullshit, just say that you'd made a mistake, it would probably do you some good.
 

The ease with which he completely lies to an old lady there is impressive 

[paul's got wright]

1 hour ago, slinkydevil said:

So this got posted by Mr Callister today. Apart from being a bit self-indulgent:

The ‘technical issues’ would have been the facebook algorithm that detects copyrighted music. It’s very clever and blocks your upload. He of course is breaking copyright law by using the music track ‘Whatever it takes by Imagine Dragons’ (https://www.imaginedragonsmusic.com/) on his video. Unless I’m mistaken and he has licensed the music from them.

The hypocrisy of going after cottage industries using the TT brand and this MHK rips off a band signed to Univeral Records.

Media training, lol.

https://www.miksmusic.com/how-to-legally-use-copyrighted-background-music-in-video/



It'll probably get pulled...
 

 

The story far?

[Rob Callister]

I have actually tried to upload the video several times on Facebook since the beginning of January. 

I did have a few issues loading the video directly onto Facebook because of the song, which is now accepted under the “fair use” rules and by acknowledging the artist.

Unfortunately, a few of the slides are blurred when uploaded from iPad to YouTube..... and it was even worse loading directly onto Facebook. 

And it does take 40 or 50 minutes to upload, so I will try again in the morning before giving up on the idea....

Edited January 19, 2019 by Rob Callister

[thesultanofsheight]

3 minutes ago, Rob Callister said:

before giving up on the idea....

That reads like the statement of a course of action already decided upon. 

[dilligaf]

Why not give RC the chance to clear his name here ?

[slinkydevil]

17 minutes ago, Rob Callister said:

I have actually tried to upload the video several times on Facebook since the beginning of January. 

I did have a few issues loading the video directly onto Facebook because of the song, which is now accepted under the “fair use” rules and by acknowledging the artist.

Unfortunately, a few of the slides are blurred when uploaded from iPad to YouTube..... and it was even worse loading directly onto Facebook. 

And it does take 40 or 50 minutes to upload, so I will try again in the morning before giving up on the idea....

1

You didn't acknowledge the artist though. I looked. It wasn't even a snippet of the song but the full song - twice! I presume if it goes up again you'll keep the track on if you think you're right?

If you want any help with the technicalities of uploading to youtube just ask.

Here are the Fair Use myths from the Youtube site:

Fair use myths
There is some misinformation out there that might lead you to believe that fair use automatically applies if you say a few magic words. There is actually no silver bullet that will guarantee you are protected by fair use when you use copyrighted material that you don't own. Courts will consider all four of the factors described above and weigh them on a case-by-case basis. Here are some common myths:

Myth #1: If I give credit to the copyright owner, my use is automatically fair use.

As you saw above, transformativeness is usually a key in the fair use analysis. Giving credit to the owner of a copyrighted work won't by itself turn a non-transformative copy of their material into fair use. Phrases such as \'all rights go to the author\' and 'I do not own' do not automatically mean that you are making fair use of that material – nor do they mean that you have the copyright owner's permission.

Myth #2: If I post a disclaimer on my video, my use is fair use.

As we noted above, there are no magic words that will do this for you. Posting the four factors of fair use in your video or including the phrase “no infringement intended” won’t automatically protect you from a claim of copyright infringement.

Myth #3: 'Entertainment' or 'non-profit' uses are automatically fair use.

Courts will look carefully at the purpose of your use in evaluating whether it is fair, but the three remaining factors also need to be considered. Declaring your upload to be “for entertainment purposes only”, for example, is unlikely to tip the scales in the fair use balancing test. Similarly, “non-profit” uses are favoured in the fair use analysis, but it’s not an automatic defence by itself.

Myth #4: If I add any original material that I created to someone else's copyrighted work, my use is fair use.

Even if you’ve added a little something of your own to someone else’s content, you might not be able to take advantage of the fair use defence – particularly if your creation fails to add new expression, meaning or message to the original. As with all the other cases discussed here, courts will consider all four factors of the fair use test, including the quantity of the original used.

[dilligaf]

3 minutes ago, slinkydevil said:

You didn't acknowledge the artist though. I looked. It wasn't even a snippet of the song but the full song - twice! I presume if it goes up again you'll keep the track on if you think you're right?

If you want any help with the technicalities of uploading to youtube just ask.

Here are the Fair Use myths from the Youtube site:

Fair use myths
There is some misinformation out there that might lead you to believe that fair use automatically applies if you say a few magic words. There is actually no silver bullet that will guarantee you are protected by fair use when you use copyrighted material that you don't own. Courts will consider all four of the factors described above and weigh them on a case-by-case basis. Here are some common myths:

Myth #1: If I give credit to the copyright owner, my use is automatically fair use.

As you saw above, transformativeness is usually a key in the fair use analysis. Giving credit to the owner of a copyrighted work won't by itself turn a non-transformative copy of their material into fair use. Phrases such as \'all rights go to the author\' and 'I do not own' do not automatically mean that you are making fair use of that material – nor do they mean that you have the copyright owner's permission.

Myth #2: If I post a disclaimer on my video, my use is fair use.

As we noted above, there are no magic words that will do this for you. Posting the four factors of fair use in your video or including the phrase “no infringement intended” won’t automatically protect you from a claim of copyright infringement.

Myth #3: 'Entertainment' or 'non-profit' uses are automatically fair use.

Courts will look carefully at the purpose of your use in evaluating whether it is fair, but the three remaining factors also need to be considered. Declaring your upload to be “for entertainment purposes only”, for example, is unlikely to tip the scales in the fair use balancing test. Similarly, “non-profit” uses are favoured in the fair use analysis, but it’s not an automatic defence by itself.

Myth #4: If I add any original material that I created to someone else's copyrighted work, my use is fair use.

Even if you’ve added a little something of your own to someone else’s content, you might not be able to take advantage of the fair use defence – particularly if your creation fails to add new expression, meaning or message to the original. As with all the other cases discussed here, courts will consider all four factors of the fair use test, including the quantity of the original used.

Totally mad.

Let's just give up then.

 

[slinkydevil]

8 minutes ago, dilligaf said:

Let's just give up then.

 

 

Give up what?

[quilp]

Drink. 

[Kopek]

Don't be silly! Dilli without a drink in him? How boring.