Thanks to everyone for helping, he's credited my theory now

Little_Boots wrote:

Darth Dingbat wrote:As for making money on Youtube, I think it's ads, mostly.

https://creatoracademy.youtube.com/page/lesson/revenue-basics

Does the guy have ads on his videos? I don't know because I'm not giving him any views...

@Darth Dingbat

I think it's likes too. Shane Dawson spoke about money and youtube in one of his vids but I can't remember what he said.

@Little_Boots

Likes probably improve a video's rank in the search results, but I can't think of any way to earn money from likes...

@Gemini: Three ads per video?! Yikes.

FrolickingFizzgig wrote:

Gemini wrote:

FrolickingFizzgig wrote:What I don't get is why he credited all the art and such, but not the paper. Like lol? Why everything but the paper?

@FrolickingFizzgig

He did in the end, however he still took it without my written permission in the first place. Even if they credit it, if i didn't give permission then it's still copyright theft.

What's funny is, I'm only 85% certain this theory is accurate this would be hilarious if it turned out to not happen but if it does then that video will look like he discovered it first.

@Gemini
If it were me I probably wouldn't be too bothered (especially if they credited the writing anyway in the video), but we're all different. I would be way more annoyed that the dude was actually making decent money on the video while reading my writing, but still, it's the internet where things get stolen all the time. Torrent websites still exist, movies are still uploaded constantly to streaming websites, you can download/read any book online, etc. I would be lying if I said I had never done any of the above things lol. I really hope it's actually worth it to go after this guy's video and I hope he's receptive to your demands.

@FrolickingFizzgig

That's true. But i gotta try lol

They money thing bothers me a lot but also the fact that this theory was my baby, its personal.

He also took info from my Joan of arc theory and visions through relics tumblr posts and hasnt credited me but that doesn't bother me that much for some reason

@Gemini edit: never mind, I wish you all the best. If it was me, I wouldn't do it. Some court cases are long and grueling, but I wish you all the best just the same

Little_Boots wrote:@Gemini did you have a copyright notice on the meta? I know writing in your own words is automatically copyright, but apparently one must have a notice of some kind on their original work if they want to 100% protect it

@Little_Boots

Not sure if that's true I think once you post it it's yours and the rules apply.


I'll have to ask my solicitor

Nope, no need for any copyright notices. If you publish something, the copyright is yours. In fact, you don't even have to publish it; if you write something down, the copyright is yours, and if a friend steals your manuscript and publishes it as his own, it's theft. It would obviously be a bit of a pain to try proving that, though!

(With obvious exceptions, like aforementioned fan fiction or fan art: you obviously can't copyright creative work that uses somebody else's trademarked characters, for example.)

@Gemini
Not sure if this will make you feel better or not about the suspicion of him only getting recognition because he's a man (and getting away with stealing because you're female), I'm part of a niche gaming community online and pioneered the first Youtube channel related to that community that actually "blew up" in terms of views and subscribers. None of the male members did, just me, and it was partly because of my gender. It made the content more interesting and unique because people were so accustomed to it being a male dominated community. When my channel gained recognition other females began creating similar channels, and now there are lots of us. All it takes is one, I guess that's what I'm trying to say. I bet if you were to make videos like his you would get views just the same.

FrolickingFizzgig wrote:@Gemini
Not sure if this will make you feel better or not about the suspicion of him only getting recognition because he's a man (and getting away with stealing because you're female), I'm part of a niche gaming community online and pioneered the first Youtube channel related to that community that actually "blew up" in terms of views and subscribers. None of the male members did, just me, and it was partly because of my gender. It made the content more interesting and unique because people were so accustomed to it being a male dominated community. When my channel gained recognition other females began creating similar channels, and now there are lots of us. All it takes is one, I guess that's what I'm trying to say. I bet if you were to make videos like his you would get views just the same.

@FrolickingFizzgig

Fizz, is it ok if I can subscribe to your channel?

Gemini wrote:Also this guy is using a good 20 minutes of lucasfilm material

When I tried to do this it removed my video for using 30 seconds of it lol

Like what the hell

They probably edited the video. Speaking from experience - slow it down by 0.5% and YouTube won't recognize it.

Darth Dingbat wrote:As for making money on Youtube, I think it's ads, mostly.

Correct. The ads/clicks matter - subscribers and likes are only necessary to push the videos in the ranking, so they'll be recommended to more people and as a result get even more clicks. That's why many famous YouTubers complained about the new algorithms which also give new or smaller YouTubers a chance meaning they'll get less clicks.

Gemini wrote:

FrolickingFizzgig wrote:What I don't get is why he credited all the art and such, but not the paper. Like lol? Why everything but the paper?

@FrolickingFizzgig

He did in the end, however he still took it without my written permission in the first place. Even if they credit it, if i didn't give permission then it's still copyright theft.

What's funny is, I'm only 85% certain this theory is accurate this would be hilarious if it turned out to not happen but if it does then that video will look like he discovered it first.

@Gemini

I don't think this is copyright theft as you haven't applied for a copyright in the first place, which I think is the law here in the UK?

You could however claim plagiarism if you can prove they used your paper word for word, but it will be difficult.

I may well be wrong here but that's my understanding of it.

Rimfaxe96 wrote:

Little_Boots wrote:Just curious but if that guy earns money from that vid, how much would he get? I've always been curious about the way YouTube and payments work.

@Little_Boots

If all his videos generate about 100k, up to 5k per month.

@Rimfaxe96

No I don't think it's as easy as that. This video gives a good idea of how it actually works -

Is sexism part of the general Star Wars fandom? I think that answer is yes. It was something I was not even aware of until after TFA, there is this pattern of behavior... female protagonists? the fanboys cry loudly, Romance? the fan boys are outraged. Reylo? THE HORROR!%& fanboys are upset... Tumblr? Pablo joins in and makes fun, ridicules "girls" and their predilection for "shipping" . Fanboy/Youtube ST fan culture... some of them are really good at what they do... but they are few and far in between... the majority just parrot and steal news and pass it off as their own.

I think copyright applies in the U.S. upon publishing any work to the internet, music, art, photo or article, I was in business with a law graduate for 3 years she had taken a copyright class after that she was really strict about anything that we used for social media, facebook, twitter, youtube etc... She was so afraid of us being sued.

I don't think you can claim copyright on anything you write on a public forum, like this one. If you've written stuff on your own website, with a copyright notice, then there's infringement if anyone uses your images/artwork, or lifts your text in chunks, without permission.

But if you put a theory into the public domain, you have to expect that people will incorporate your ideas into their own knowledge pool and discuss them. It would be good etiquette if you were credited, but hey - how many of us use gifsets here without crediting the original source? If someone quotes you word for word without acknowledgment, that's bad etiquette, but it's hard to claim ownership of ideas given how many sources there are on the internet.

I know I've been enraged that someone on some other forum has copied my own theory, then realised they posted hours before me!

Airemyn wrote:No I don't think it's as easy as that. This video gives a good idea of how it actually works -

@Airemyn

Well, often you need YouTube partners and stuff like that (sometimes these consist of entire networks, I still receive e-mails from some of them asking me to join), but it's not necessary.
My estimation with the up to 5k/month comes from a YouTuber murder case in Germany by the way; a YouTuber regularly drove through cities at insane speeds with his motorbike just for the thrill and for the fame. His videos usually got about 80k - 150k views, and even for this dangerous BS he made 3-5k per month. In his last attempt to get a great video he rammed a pensioner who died on the spot, hence why he's facing a lifetime prison sentence (= at least 15 years in Germany).

Airemyn wrote:

Gemini wrote:

FrolickingFizzgig wrote:What I don't get is why he credited all the art and such, but not the paper. Like lol? Why everything but the paper?

@FrolickingFizzgig

He did in the end, however he still took it without my written permission in the first place. Even if they credit it, if i didn't give permission then it's still copyright theft.

What's funny is, I'm only 85% certain this theory is accurate this would be hilarious if it turned out to not happen but if it does then that video will look like he discovered it first.

@Gemini

I don't think this is copyright theft as you haven't applied for a copyright in the first place, which I think is the law here in the UK?

You could however claim plagiarism if you can prove they used your paper word for word, but it will be difficult.

I may well be wrong here but that's my understanding of it.

@Airemyn

Apparently just by posting something in writing it is my copyrighted material

Jakku wrote:I don't think you can claim copyright on anything you write on a public forum, like this one.  If you've written stuff on your own website, with a copyright notice, then there's infringement if anyone uses your images/artwork, or lifts your text in chunks, without permission.

But if you put a theory into the public domain, you have to expect that people will incorporate your ideas into their own knowledge pool and discuss them.  It would be good etiquette if you were credited, but hey - how many of us use gifsets here without crediting the original source?  If someone quotes you word for word without acknowledgment, that's bad etiquette, but it's hard to claim ownership of ideas given how many sources there are on the internet.

I know I've been enraged that someone on some other forum has copied my own theory, then realised they posted hours before me!

@Jakku

Gif sets are someone else's footage anyway so whoever is posting them is stealing from lucasfilm. I never understood the need to credit someone else for footage they are stealing and breaking copyright laws with lol. If someone uses my gif below without credit, I can't complain. It's not mine in the first place it's lucasfilms footage.

But when it comes to words and essays if someone uses any part of your work, word for word it is copyright theft apparently. Essay is my own words being stolen.

I don't care so much about mike zeroh talking about my theory like he figured it out because he didn't lift my entire tumblr post or read out  parts of my essay like it was his own.

The guy wrote in the description that he is still updating the credits and if he misses anything to message him. Would a case against this guy work if he linked the Tumblr account in the description?

Little_Boots wrote:The guy wrote in the description that he is still updating the credits and if he misses anything to message him. Would a case against this guy work if he linked the Tumblr account in the description?

@Little_Boots

Yep

People think that crediting someone's work exempts you from breaking those laws but it doesn't

You actually need written permission from the person who's work you are using. You are supposed to ask them first and get permission.

It should have been on my terms and I would have asked him to mention me in the video before he started reading off parts of my essay.

Gemini wrote:

Little_Boots wrote:The guy wrote in the description that he is still updating the credits and if he misses anything to message him. Would a case against this guy work if he linked the Tumblr account in the description?

@Little_Boots

Yep

People think that crediting someone's work exempts you from breaking those laws but it doesn't

You actually need written permission from the person who's work you are using. You are supposed to ask them first and get permission.

It should have been on my terms and I would have asked him to mention me in the video before he started reading off parts of my essay.

@Gemini

Ah I see what you mean now

Actually, no, you don't have to register for copyright. You don't need copyright notices or copyright symbols either. Trademarks are a completely different matter. But you don't have to jump through any hoops in order to own copyright to something you've created, whether it's a poem, a short story or an essay.

Everything of your own that you post (text, images, etc.) is yours regardless of the medium. You can post it on a forum, on Tumblr, on Twitter, wherever, and it doesn't magically become public domain. A lot of people claim that if it's on the internet, it's public domain, but that's not true at all. The only thing with forums etc. is that sometimes when you sign up on some forum or a blog hosting site, you give them permission to use your content. So you need to be careful what you sign up for.

Fair use is another matter: somebody else's text can be quoted, for example, if the purpose is to comment on that text. You can quote a book you're reviewing, or another review that you're replying to or commenting on. But there are limits to fair use - you can't just quote the whole text and say "I liked this article!" and claim it was fair use...

And of course, there's no fair use without proper attribution. Quoting without attribution is always plagiarism. But it's only a crime if you're plagiarising something that's not in the public domain. You can plagiarise an 18th-century novel, and it's stupid and immoral and you will inevitably get caught, but it's not illegal.

A good rule of thumb is that you can't copyright ideas, so someone can steal your idea - even the plot of your novel - and it sucks but can't be helped. You can't copyright names and such either, unless you trademark them. Designs are also hard to copyright, unless you trademark a specific design (like, for instance, the Death Star design is trademarked). But text you've written, word for word, is yours. The exact photo you've taken, or the exact drawing you've made, is also yours. No matter where you've published it - whether it's online, or in the local paper that's read by a dozen people.

Copyright is fascinating to me and I don't know why...

Thank you so much @Darth Dingbat

Darth Dingbat wrote:Actually, no, you don't have to register for copyright. You don't need copyright notices or copyright symbols either. Trademarks are a completely different matter. But you don't have to jump through any hoops in order to own copyright to something you've created, whether it's a poem, a short story or an essay.

@Darth Dingbat

But it's a creation off of someone elses idea. In this case, LucasFilms. If this writing was a completely original work, what I mean by that is brand new characters being spoken about and scratch LucasFilms from the equation, I would fight for justice then. The writing is original, but what the writing is about is something that was created in the 70s. What I am worried about is fighting about this and LucasFilms name being brought into it. No disrespect but I am actually worried

Little_Boots wrote:

Darth Dingbat wrote:Actually, no, you don't have to register for copyright. You don't need copyright notices or copyright symbols either. Trademarks are a completely different matter. But you don't have to jump through any hoops in order to own copyright to something you've created, whether it's a poem, a short story or an essay.

@Darth Dingbat

But it's a creation off of someone elses idea. In this case, LucasFilms. If this writing was a completely original work, what I mean by that is brand new characters being spoken about and scratch LucasFilms from the equation, I would fight for justice then. The writing is original, but what the writing is about is something that was created in the 70s. What I am worried about is fighting about this and LucasFilms name being brought into it. No disrespect but I am actually worried

@Little_Boots

Well, yes - if you're talking about SW fan fiction, you're using more than just somebody's idea: you're using their trademarked characters and so on. Somebody's fan fiction about Rey and Kylo Ren isn't a copyright infringement, but it's a trademark infringement, and arguably that's worse because big companies like Disney are really strict about their trademarks (they need to be). But obviously fan fiction is mostly left in peace these days, as long as nobody tries to make money with it.

But commentary is a different matter. If you write a review of TFA for a newspaper, the copyright belongs to the newspaper and/or the writer.

The lightsaber theory is commentary as well. As is @FrolickingFizzgig's fairytale essay, and so on and so forth. It's not a creative work that uses elements of somebody else's work*. It's commentary and analysis of that work, which is a completely different thing.


*) You can actually even create something off of somebody else's work, as long as you don't use trademarked elements. Witness Fifty Shades of Grey, which apparently started out as a Twilight fan fiction, but the author changed the names of the characters and voilà - a new work. To me, that seems like a really shady practice, but there's no question that the copyright of Fifty Shades belongs to the writer and publisher of Fifty Shades.

Lets say for example, I created Star Wars. Or you, or anyone of us created a very popular story with very popular characters. Now, they are my original creation. So, I know people love this story and it's characters, and obviously people want to be creative with the characters etc, they write stories, they write theories etc.....I am just chilling out at home and I hear that someone has brought my characters, my creation to the court of justice to benefit them. Would I let it just slip by? Actually asking a genuine question here. Fair enough, the writing of the meta is original but what it is about is not. This is court. Are LucasFilms gonna hear about this??

Little_Boots wrote:Lets say for example, I created Star Wars. Or you, or anyone of us created a very popular story with very popular characters. Now, they are my original creation. So, I know people love this story and it's characters, and obviously people want to be creative with the characters etc, they write stories, they write theories etc.....I am just chilling out at home and I hear that someone has brought my characters, my creation to the court of justice to benefit them. Would I let it just slip by? Actually asking a genuine question here. Fair enough, the writing of the meta is original but what it is about is not. This is court. Are LucasFilms gonna hear about this??

@Little_Boots

But these are different things, you know. Somebody writes a story about Rey and Kylo Ren in the galaxy far, far away, using trademarked names and concepts... and self-publishes it on Amazon... and Lucasfilm's lawyers will be all over that in a heartbeat. It's a trademark infringement.

But this much-quoted review of TFA isn't Lucasfilm's property: http://time.com/4150168/review-star-wars-the-force-awakens/

And this book, a feminist analysis of TFA, isn't Lucasfilm's property: http://www.bookdepository.com/Rey-of-Hope-Valerie-Estelle-Frankel/9780692614655?ref=grid-view