/vt/ - Virtual Youtubers

[Anonymous No.]

Holobass did nothing wrong

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070004
He did a lot wrong at the end, but less than /vt/ blames him for.
If Cover had sent a fan artist a DMCA, not responded to their inquiries and then used their fan art somewhere that might be within their legal rights, but it would be fucked up. Same here.

[Anonymous No.]

Okay Holobass.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070004

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070049
What valid queries were there? The derivative works guidelines are clear. You can't profit off them. Holobass tried to make money off it, got slapped down and had a sperg out about it. There's no grey area here, he was just retarded

[Anonymous No.]

Who? Another retarded clipper?

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070004
he did though. all he had to do was google 'hololive fan work terms' and he'd have gotten to this page https://en.hololive.tv/terms and he would have understood why he couldn't put his shit up on music services. Like how stupid can you get

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070004
t.holobass

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070093
Made a very popular musical remix of Ame reading Pop on Rocks, had a meltdown after Ame sang it on her charity stream and threatened to copyright strike it.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070084
>>6070166
The musical fanwork guidelines on the page are about remixes of Hololive music. Original music using the voices of talent would be a different situation.
And with how shit the Spotify payouts are it's hard to say that's any more "for-profit" than the 500k sub clip channels with ads floating around. In his position I'd probably assume it was counted under "SoundCloud and other music sharing sites" (Where they explicitly say you CAN profit off of ads, which Spotify does run) and go ahead, honestly. If he was selling records or putting it behind a paywall sure, but that's different.
(Also I think the fanwork guidelines didn't include music until after Cover had already DMCA'd him, although obviously I can't check the timeline there with his videos down.)

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070313
What the fuck? Why are most of the "artists" this retarded? If I was able to draw and my oshi picked one of my drawings as a thumbnail I would be the happiest person alive, it's the same with a song

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070474
The person you're replying to forgot to mention Cover kept copystriking his remixes.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070501
no cover prevented him from putting it on spotify, because money

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070474
Because Ame hated the song and didn't promote it unlike Kiara for instance if she got a song like that. His first mistake was to simp for Ame that don't care for her fans unlike Kiara.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070004
he Mizuryu Kei'd himself

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070364
>Original music using the voices of talent would be a different situation.
No it wouldn't. It's their voice. It's their IP. You can't sell it without their permission. Period. You can't just use other people IP and change it up a bit and resell it anon, you can't do that anywhere.

Anyway you're defending a faggot who knowingly did the wrong thing (He tweeted about how he knew he wasn't really supposed to put it on Spotify to get money but would try it anyway, and joked about how long it'd be up before it got striked, so it has no defense in terms of being ignorant that it wasn't allowed) and had a massive sperg out about it. Don't waste your time, the dude is a faggot, acted like an idiot and got the kick in the balls he deserved. Nothing more to it than that.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070568
>You can't just use other people IP and change it up a bit and resell it anon
Actually, you can in any other developed country. Japan just don't have good parody laws.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070004
even Holobass claims he was wrong, why bring up this shit again?

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070568
My point was just that it isn't actually covered in the fanwork guidelines. whether it's legal is a separate situation.
(FWIW, I'm fairly certain his songs WOULD have been considered transformative, and therefore covered under Fair Use, in the US, but Cover's JP and I'm pretty sure he's a leaf so that's kind of a moot point anyway. And even if it was a US company and an American, he would've had to take them to court over it and they could've just drowned him in legal fees so he would've lost even if he won the case.)

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070474
Anon, go look up the full story cause what that anon said really doesn't take anything into context. Better off just watching his last vid on his channel to get a better view of what happened. It involved cover not contacting him, him putting up his music on spotify, getting it removed, then afterwards sperging out, catching himself sperging out, then putting up a last video and fucking off

[Anonymous No.]

>Lyrics owned by the Seuss estate
>Voice and image of Ame owned by Hololive
>Beat and music sampled from royalty free music
Yea, he was an absolute retard for monetizing the song and having a meltdown after it was taken down.

[Anonymous No.]

lots of bootlickers itt

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070004
He should've took advantage of the sympathy and made a Patreon and just kept churning out tolerable remixes of Holos talking.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070607
>Japan just don't have good parody laws.
Nope. Wouldn't fly in the US either. Amelias voice makes up too much of the product. An attempt to claim parody would be struck down. What's your next cope?

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070805
I just find it funny that everyone hates this guy but gargles the balls of clip channels who make way more money than any of his shit ever did.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070805
Sorry didn't mean to reply to you I just forgot to erase the numbers before hitting post

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070805
Then hip hop can't exist. What Holobass did is the essence of the hip hop scene, i.e. sampling.
Also, in terms of an actual legal case, you can upload an entire segment of another person's work in its entirety, title the video to reasonably be understood as criticism, and that flies as transformative. Japan is just too anal.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070712
I hate copyright laws but this dumbass literally self destructed for no reason. I'm pretty sure his youtube videos still made ad revenue until he went nuclear.

[Anonymous No.]

It doesn't matter even if Cover was okay with him, Seuss was also in the song. Worst case scenario is Seuss takes both him and Cover to court for monetizing their work without permission.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6071050
Huh? You still need to clear a sample before commercially releasing a sampled song. Obviously, you can fly under the radar if you're a literal who but you're getting your ass sued if you release a song without a clearance.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6071096
It's Cover's responsibility to defend the talents and the fans if that happens, just because they're a lazy irresponsible black company doesn't mean they get a pass on this.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6071096
Jesus Christ the people on this board. Seuss' work is so often used in monetized content that it might as well be public domain. Seuss' estate isn't going to go after some random, tiny-ass YouTube channel.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6071174
I can bet you the ignoring was the defense. Cover's tightass legal dickwads probably advised them to strike every scrap of Pop on Rocks from the internet, but even their dumb management knew it would be PR suicide. But they also couldn't tell him that it was okay to leave it up on Spotify because of the monetization, so they compromised and ghosted him.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6071194
That's what they thought about Capcom too. Hey everyone's streaming Capcom games with ads turned on anyway what's the worst that could happen?

[Anonymous No.]

>>6071194
>Walmart isn't going to bring their legal team after me so it's fine if I shoplift
Nigger mentality. No wonder your country is falling to pieces.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6071194
Yeah, and I can find hundreds of Ghost Trick playthroughs on Youtube up for years, yet Mio still got struck twice. We might know that Seuss Enterprises isn't stupid enough to ruin their image over this, but before the holocaust bullshit everyone thought the same about Capcom.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6071173
What are you talking about? Do you think songs that diss people, using their likeness to do it, has the permission of the person getting dissed? What the fuck. It's like you people live in a world where a shitton of parody artists don't exist.
And again, you're just ignoring the legal case of what is considered transformative by a US court.

>>6071288
>>6071325
Please shut up about Japanese companies. Stop comparing the legal environment of not-Japan with Japan.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6071340
What the fuck are YOU talking about? You're the one who mentioned sampling in Hip-hop.Diss tracks aren't the same as sampling. Do you even know what that is?

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070951
Because clip channels are common and part of the stream community. Ofc cover can always copystrike them but most if them at least has the decency to not go around putting it on their patreon or any type of paywall for people to watch. That's basically what holobass did

[Anonymous No.]

https://en.hololive.tv/terms

[Anonymous No.]

>>6071383
>In music, sampling is the reuse of a portion (or sample) of a sound recording in another recording.
Which is exactly what Holobass did.
If you include a portion of a speech of the person you're dissing in your diss track, that's sampling.
And please try not to be pedantic about what "portion" means.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070004
Nice try, Holobass

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070364
>Original music
all he did was arrange the vocals, that's not even his track.
what part of timing a recording of someone else reading a book some else wrote to a backing track someone else wrote is even original art.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6071514
https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/permission-sampled-music-sample-clearance-30165.html
Feel free to read at your own leisure.

Here's the full Amelia reading also: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7HEghZCens.. Feel free to clarify how the Holobass sample was just a "portion".

[Anonymous No.]

Didn't he put it up on spotify to push someone off who put it there first?

[Anonymous No.]

Holobass could have used the influx of viewers to his channel to promote his own original music, but had to be an absolute fucking moron and blow it all up.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070004
Lets remind ourselves what this faggot actually did.
>Be faggot
>Openly violates the terms of use for fan content
>Gets slap down by trying to monetize on Spotify
>Is impatient prick that can't wait a few weeks for a response
>Thinks Cover should drop everything just to deal with special snowflakes
>Too cheap to hire proper lawyer to write a letter regarding a obvious legal dispute
>Proceeds to come on /vt/ begging anons to be his personal army
>asking-for-a-friend.jpg
>Asks anons to harass Ame on stream on his behalf so that Cover will notice him
>Gets called a rigger by everyone for being a faggot
>Proceeds to twitter meltdown and delete his channel
>And nothing of value was lost

[Anonymous No.]

>>6071340
Then the issue is moot, isn't it? Since Cover is a Japanese company and will err on the side of caution with what they have legal experience with - apparently newly-acquired legal experience, at that - with Japanese law.
And do you think Seuss Enterprises hasn't gone after works which have arguably been more 'transformative' than this?

https://www.loeb.com/en/insights/publications/2020/12/dr-seuss-enterprises-lp-v-comicmix-llc

>ComicMix argued that it had added “extensive new content”—the Star Trek elements—to the Seuss works, but the court reasoned that the mere addition of new content “is not a get-out-of-jail-free card that renders the use of the original transformative.” ComicMix’s book simply took the Seussian elements and implanted them into its book alongside Star Trek elements “to get attention or to avoid the drudgery in working up something fresh, and not for a transformative purpose.” The court pointed to a number of illustrations in the ComicMix book that were intended to be near-exact re-creations of illustrations from the Seuss works, plus Star Trek elements, and concluded that no new expression, meaning or message had been added. The first factor therefore weighed against a finding of fair use.

If a book with rewritten text and illustrations was ruled as being against fair use, how well do you think a song with the text read out verbatim is going to do in court?

[Anonymous No.]

>>6071582
Oh good now you're using the music label corpo crap that have erected limitations on sampling. It's like justifying the ridiculous copyright lifespan of works by citing Disney's legal greed.
I think it's okay for commercial music to exist where the entirety of a person's speech is sampled, especially when it is clearly transformative and isn't just a straight rip. If Cover and/or the Seuss estate disagree, sue then.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6071683
Just imagine if the song actually struck by Seuss Enterprise. I'm not surprised if I see news title like "Hololive Song Being Struck Down by Seuss" if that happens and that is bad for Cover

[Anonymous No.]

>>6071726
Cool dude, I'll be sure to let the judge know if ever I get sued for copyright infringement.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6071726
The question is not weather it is transformative or not. Even if we agree that he was well within his right to profit off of it, there is a correct way to deal with a legal situation and a retarded way to deal with it.
Not hiring a lawyer and asking anons on /vt/ to start a harassment campaign for him instead, is not the proper way to do it. He should have just hired a lawyer to write a letter to get things rolling and then wait patiently for a response from Cover's cooperate lawyers. If the argument is "but that is too expensive", then his profit from selling the songs were not going to be substantial enough to be worth defending anyways. AKA can't prove damages in court = you have no case.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6071683
How well do I think a completely different fucking medium would do in court on a copyright case, thus obliterating infringement arguments like "style of illustrations and font" because they don't exist, would do in court? I don't know, retard, what do you think?

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070539
Ame will promote the artists if they are good.
Good, not popular.

[Anonymous No.]

Made a shit "song"

[Anonymous No.]

>>6071877
>it's not good because I don't like it
Dumbass.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6071839
>The question is not weather it is transformative or not.
I'm arguing with retards that think what Holobass did wouldn't hold up in court if he got sued. You're just diverting to something else that I don't care for.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6071681
Also he's ugly and smells bad.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6071471
/thread

[Anonymous No.]

>>6071890
t. holobass.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6071853
I think Cover knows more about risk assessment than you, and that even the possibilty of getting into a legal battle just because a schmuck made something without their say-so isn't worth it.
Also if you had actually read it, you'll know your 'style of illustrations and font' factor explicitly played no role in their ruling against the work.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6071940
>Cover
>Knowing anything
Lmaooooooooooooo

[Anonymous No.]

>>6071981
My point exactly. Even the bunch of ignoramuses over there know better than to put themselves and their streamer's account at risk for some shitty mashup not even worth a few thousand dollars. What, you think Youtube is going to remove the strike while you reassure them, "yeah I'm absolutely going to win the court case, trust me bro"?

[Anonymous No.]

>>6071913
And your just as retarded arguing about a hypothetical situation that wont ever happen because this situation is not worth either parties time or effort because one party is a soulless entity and the other is Cover.
Ya sure lets say he wins in court, then what? Is he going to be able to recoup his costs? Will this set a new legal president that better defines how these situations should be handled in the future? No none of that would happen because these things are subjective and totally dependent on the judges opinions on vaguely written law. Stop being a new fag to how the legal systems work.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6071940
>...and that even the possibilty of getting into a legal battle just because a schmuck made something without their say-so isn't worth it.
Legal battle with whom? This is the same mouth-breathing argument Holotards keep going back to when it comes to Cover's neurotic need for permissions from even Western game devs.
>But Capcom!
Nobody is suing anybody over Holobass's work, retards. It's not even in the realm of possibility. Zero chance. Never happening. Nada.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6072085
Please shut the fuck up. My stance is nobody is getting sued. I'm not the one that keeps positing the possibility of a court case.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6072125
Then stop replying to retard posts about it? But no you can't resist the (you) bait.

[Anonymous No.]

Oh boy another episode of Anons Talking Out Their Asses About Copyright. I'm sure we'll make a real breakthrough this time.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6071050
>>6071173
>>6071340
>>6071383
>>6071514
>>6071582
>>6071726
>>6071839
>>6071913
>>6072085
>>6072125
Kanye West literally got sued for a short voice sample of some little girl at the start of "Ultralight Beam". Holobass is just some faggot who used Amelia's voice for the majority of his fanmade song, he doesn't own her voice and has no right to call it his property.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070004
This is false

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070004
Why the fuck does thread exist when the past ones have gone over why he was wrong. It's a little funny that there's always 1 person stubbornly defending Holobass.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070004
Holobass just suddenly decided to BTFO of himself, and it all went down in like the span of an hour. He deserves the ridicule he gets, it could have been avoided if he didn't decide to be a giant retarded sperg on the internet.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070004
I am still laughing

[Anonymous No.]

>>6072498
I'd say it's Holobass but even he said he was wrong, so it's probably just someone riding the most recent Ame Hate Wave

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070539
Get out, Kiara

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070004
No one ever does anything wrong, anon. It's just how the world is.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070501
And you forgot to mention he tried to go against the guidelines and that's why they slapped him down.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6072575
Well, OP must feel silly since there's hardly any hate for Ame here.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6073401
>hardly any hate for Ame here
I believe in the early threads way back in /jp/ there were several ame hate threads here

[Anonymous No.]

>>6073401
Yeah, the idea of it is definitely stupid. OP sees people complaining about Ame postponing a stream and decides this is the time to bring Holobass back up. Seems plausible.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070004
How would you guys react if your oshi used your art for their stream?
I would cry tears of joy and fap to the thought of it honestly.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070004
He's just a manchild and an idiot with bad PR. Like most online "creators".

[Anonymous No.]

>>6073653
op is holobass tho?
being broke and talentless is suffering

[Anonymous No.]

I remembered back in reddit r/virtualyoutubers

There are a dude that keep defending holobass and try to confront every comment that say holobass is in the wrong, even he himself got shit on the full negative karma on every post he does.

I sus that the OP and that dude is the same guys here.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6071050
If you sample something amd want to get it commercially release, you have three options:
>you ask for permission and likely pay for it
>you pretend it isn't there and hope nobody sues you
>you mess with it so much, nobody can tell where it's from

The latter two weren't an option, so if he wanted to commercially release his song, hr needed to get permission.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6073933
Same. If you're creating fan content and somehow getting paid incidentally (ads or whatever) fine, but if you're doing "fan" content that you wouldn't do if you weren't being paid, you're no longer a fan, you're a parasite. It's the same for clippers, but they get to slide because their parasitic activities are actually symbiotic.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6074139
might be a falseflagger, also how new?

[Anonymous No.]

>>6074265
Also because there isn't a huge difference between five different "Marine plays Stickmin" compilations. A clipper who stops doing clips to a large audience just because he gets demonetized is a parasite, but he is easily replaced so no one bothers spending time and energy to call him out.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6073540
Ame's debut stream was an absolute disaster, and that was all people needed to hate her. Once everybody had a chance to see more of her while she wasn't sleep deprived, almost everyone around here grew to like her.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070004
Excellent song, at least until the part where Ame trips up about 2/3rds through.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070004
Did the guy really go apeshit, or was it someone trolling? I remember some weird schizo pasta-tier tweets

[Anonymous No.]

>>6074711
Given that he deleted all of his music and his socials are still dead, yes. He really did have a mental breakdown over not being allowed to do copyright infringement.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6074860
There was some really funny shit, he was literally 4chan schizoposting

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070080
tpbp

[Anonymous No.]

>>6074860
I can sort of see how he felt, he thought he had finally gotten an incredibly rare opportunity, something that could launch him into his dream career; he probably thought those fanartists like Klaius who didn't do anything with their new reach were dumb and wasted their chance. Unfortunately, he massively overplayed his hand and made his fear come true.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6074711
In a nutshell...
>Holobass makes Pop on Rocks
>it becomes really popular
>people start uploading it on Spotify to make money off of it
>Holobass sees this and decides to upload an "official" version to Spotify (and make money off of it)
>Cover copyright strikes the song
>Holobass is confused for some reason and thinks he should be able to put the song on Spotify despite clear guidelines from Cover that people are not allowed to make money off of Hololive fan content, with the exception of ad revenue on Youtube videos
>Holobass tries to get in contact with Cover to work out some kind of deal
>Cover never responds
>Later on, Ame does a charity stream
>It goes way better than anticipated, and she needs to keep setting new stretch goals for higher donation threshholds
>She runs out of ideas, and asks chat, who suggests a live performance of Pop on Rocks
>They hit that goal like 10 minutes later and Ame does the performance
>about an hour later, someone tells Holobass that Ame performed Pop on Rocks because he wasn't even watching the stream
>Holobass gets angry and rants on Twitter that Cover should have contacted him before using the song despite clear guidelines from Cover that any fan content may be used by Hololive talents in their streams
>Mentions he's considered copyright striking the stream
>a fucking charity stream
>everyone calls him out for being an asshole
>Holobass deletes his entire twitter account and all the videos on his Youtube account
>uploaded a video a few hours later to his account where he admits that he was in the wrong, but felt like he needed to walk away from Hololive content after all of this

[Anonymous No.]

Ame, Kiara, Gura, take this shit to DMs please.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6074983
The fear that he was invited himself.
I still remembered that he jokingly tweet of how long before it got striked and strike it did.

[Anonymous No.]

He did a lot of wrong trying to monetize his shit

[Anonymous No.]

Every time an artist making fan works gets screwed, an angel gets its wings. Make original things, especially if you want to get paid

[Anonymous No.]

>>6075064
>He did a lot of wrong trying to monetize the shit that he didn't has owned it.

fixed that for ya

[Anonymous No.]

>>6075385
>He did a lot of wrong trying to monetize the shit that he didn't own
Fixed that for you, did you have a fucking stroke or something?

[Anonymous No.]

>>6075439
He had more than 1 sentence and edited it to make it shorter but kinda fucked up.

[Anonymous No.]

cant blame the hussle out of the guy, qasnt he going homeless

[Anonymous No.]

The new & better Pop on Rocks.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Re6OGXN_DDI

[Anonymous No.]

>>6075015
Man, I'm technically a tourist in /vt/ because I only follow Gura and I've never heard of this drama before. Really goes to show that there's depths and layers to any fandom.
Got a date for these so I can archive diving?

[Anonymous No.]

>>6075814
Same date as Ame's charity stream, if you want to find it. Honestly though, there's not much more to it than that anon already summarised.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070004
>did nothing wrong
he is a brony who under another alias has been making pony music for years

[Anonymous No.]

>>6072395
Did they win the case? I can sue you right now for anything. Literally doesn't matter if the case gets thrown out. Being sued doesn't mean automatically you are at fault or have broken the law, retard.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6076550
Kanye settled out of court.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070951
have you not seen all the clipnigger hate threads, there's not a single clip translator that gets universal acceptance, either because they suck or people making up rrats because they just don't like the existence of subbed clips

[Anonymous No.]

>>6076550
He won

[Anonymous No.]

>>6071681
Don't forget, this faggot is a ponyfucker too.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070712
The law is there to be followed

[Anonymous No.]

Both Holobass and Cover are wrong. Cover couldn't even bother to respond back to any inquiries Holobass had. Not even yes or no to any emails from him. Zero communications and completely ghosted him despite all attempts to reach out to Cover through official channels. It's partially the reason why HB sperged out on Twitter.
Meanwhile, Cover decided to suck the dick of NKODICE Dev and had to publicly apologize on Twitter to that attentionwhore, even though legally speaking they didn't have to. Do you see the hypocrisy? I don't even understand what Cover is thinking anymore. So I would argue the fault on Holobass isn't 100% exclusive.

[Anonymous No.]

>Holobass
Coco left because of you.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6077545
>SLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUURRRRRRRRRRRRPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP

[Anonymous No.]

more like holoASS

[Anonymous No.]

>imagine defending a ponyfag
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCvUtaBeN6_PXtVAaDUcQ-Ug/featured

[Anonymous No.]

>>6077123
I think that's 2manysnacks, the one that did Korone and Polka animations

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070004
I always wonder if you sampled the voice of a holo for a song, like let's say a bit of migo boat would cover go out of their way to send a c&d to you or something

[Anonymous No.]

yes ignore the dr. seuss part all together

[Anonymous No.]

Is there proof that he didnt create the backing track? You know, the beats and music?
Also man, nobody knows what sarcasm is here huh.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6080116
No, he has a pony music channel
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCvUtaBeN6_PXtVAaDUcQ-Ug

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070004
holobased

[Anonymous No.]

>>6079880
Holy kek. This can’t be real

[Anonymous No.]

>>6074596
It was? I saw it i thought it was alright, it was definitely not Korone levels of debut disaster, what was wrong with it?

[Anonymous No.]

>>6078439
Those two situations are very different. In the case of Holobass he was abusing their intellectual property. They didn't care he was making remixes until he tried to monetize them. There's nothing to even say to him except "Read the fan work guidelines" because if he did he would have saw "Do not use our content for business purposes". Here are the guidelines if you want to read them yourself https://en.hololive.tv/terms

With NKODICE they most likely bent over because it's an issue with their talent and someone else's intellectual property, not their own. Their fan work guidelines don't factor in at all.

[Anonymous No.]

So none of you chimps can answer the question here >>6080456 basically invalidating a lot of the arguments in this thread because if he made the back track then that's the thing that Ame played on stream and he would be 100% valid to copyright strike the stream.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070004

I don't know shit about Japan Law, but I think dude made transformative content with Pop on Rocks and should be allowed to monetize it.

idk if I'm fully agreeing with you on the "did nothing wrong part" though, what he did afterwards was.. ehh.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6082178
I know right how dare he use sarcasm on the internet

[Anonymous No.]

>>6082178
It's not about "Japan Law" but more so Cover guidelines. I think Cover would be okay if the video itself had ads but he kinda crossed the line when he tried to monetize the song itself.

Yes it sucks that they didn't respond back after Cover striking down his stuff but is on their guidelines so is kinda his fault for not reading it. The only thing I think it wasn't okay was the fact that Amelia used the song after the fact but probably she didn't know all of this shit going on.
I just find it silly that he went full schizo about this whole situation since a lot of it was his fault too.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070671
>>6070004
>>6070049
>>6070313
>>6070364
>>6070520
>>6070501
>>6070607
>>6070655


copywrite laws don't work like how this schitzo teammate thinks they do.

He took
1) ame's voice (without permission)
2) dr suess's written work (without permission)
3) someone else's music (without permission)

mixed them together and wanted to get paid. Copywrite law doesn't work like this. I can't take michael jackson's beat it, and set it to a reading of tom sawyer with morgan freedman reading it, and call it MY work and try to make money off it. it's just delusion. He needed all 3 parties permissions to make the work in the first place (meaning it could have been copywrite struck by any of 3 parties) and likely permission never would have been given for him to monitize it as well.

This dude is a certifiable schitzo who thinks he's entitled to youtube bucks. just stop giving him a platform.

>>6071050
>Then hip hop can't exist. What Holobass did is the essence of the hip hop scene, i.e. sampling
no, sampling is allowed in 2 situations. depending on how it's sampled. if the music track is ripped without alteration they need permission from the composer to sample, which they usually can get if they agree to profit share or it's old enough or they're part of the same record company, or their friends. The other situation is if they TRANSOFORM the music into something else, by changing the beat or increasing the tempo, or changing the instruments. Copywrite is sorta loose about musical plagiarism, it doesn't take a lot of change to a peice of music to skirt plagiarism charges (a good example of someone who didn't originally get permission to sample, is vanilla ice's "ice ice baby" which sampled "under pressure" form Queen/david bowe without permission or significant enough transformation, as a result he had to reach an agreement with both artists for an undisclosed amount of $$ to keep rights to the song and avoid court)

[Anonymous No.]

>>6082521
Where's the proof he took someone else's music? I had never heard it before.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6082555
I don't have the link right now, someone else might, but he took it from another artist. 4

[Anonymous No.]

>>6082575
Get me proof before I can believe you.

[Anonymous No.]

More like Holo ass, am I right fellow teakeks?

[Anonymous No.]

I liked his Ride on Time Gura/Pan Piano remix

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070004
Obligatory mention that he was a horsefucker. Good riddance. Getting Holobass off the ground is up there on the list of /hlgg/'s many crimes.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6082521
I don't disagree with what you said and holobass should rightly be crucified.

But I don't get this
>The other situation is if they TRANSOFORM the music into something else, by changing the beat or increasing the tempo, or changing the instruments.

Didn't he do exactly this for the remix? Changed the tempo of Amelia's voice, did some weird beat shifts in the middle, etc. I didn't hear anything about 3) where he stole someone's music but unless it's literally a 1:1 carbon copy and all he did was overlay Ame's voice over it, wouldn't Pop on Rocks be fine?

Like I said I hate the guy but credit where credit is due unless you can prove to me he literally just copy-pasted everything.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070004
This retard sheep spam account

[Anonymous No.]

>>6075015
>people start uploading it on Spotify to make money off of it
Which reminds me, why aren't Cover doing anything to take down these clipniggers from Spotify?

[Anonymous No.]

>>6083980
>take down one
>someone else uploads
>repeat

[Anonymous No.]

>>6084002
It's ridiculous the lengths these niggers will go to make a profit.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6083879
>He did everything himself

[Anonymous No.]

>>6083844
That is not by far enough to be "transformative", or you'll see plenty of Disney or Michael Jackson song remixes in the market.
And even if it was, Cover clearly doesn't care about people using their talents' voices in songs - it has never tried to take down a single holo song remix from Youtube, and doujin circles sell music made with their voices as well. This issue was clearly from Cover's fear that Seuss Enterprises might snap and decide to go after them.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6083879
>choreography?
Was this motherfucker dancing to Hololive? kys HoloAss.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6083879
I like how you can just glance at his username and immediately know he has nothing worthwhile to say.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070364
>>6070568
He knew, he also had explicitly stated that anyone could use the song however they wanted as long as it didn’t violate copyright. He conveniently forgot that part we he started crying like a bitch and threatening a charity stream.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070364
>>6070568
He knew, he also had explicitly stated that anyone could use the song however they wanted as long as it didn’t violate copyright. He conveniently forgot that part when he started crying like a bitch and threatening a charity stream.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6084686
Think he meant arrangement.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6071638
Yes.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6081393
>except "Read the fan work guidelines"
they should have sent him an email saying exactly that
His music was popular enough that there's still threads like this, which if fucking annoying.
There's a lot of copyright violators, but only a handful like holobass, especially when the talent are going to use his shitty remix live on a huge stream
Stupid fucking intern just needed to send a simple email

[Anonymous No.]

>>6085188
so now everytime anyone makes a remix of sorts HOLOLIVE has to send the ARTIST a mail
you are a retarded faggot

[Anonymous No.]

Crying like a bitch

[Anonymous No.]

>>6073401
Even as one of the people defending Holobass (up to when he threatened to strike the stream at least, everything from then on was all on him) I know it'd be retarded to blame Ame for anything. Even with the charity stream, it's her manager's fault for not shooting the guy a quick "Hey can we use this on stream?" message (and then Holobass's fault for melting down instead of just saying "I'm kind of pissed they used my song while ghosting me" and keeping the sympathy he had.).

[Anonymous No.]

>>6085188
Fuck him, he had absolutely no reason to cry like such a bitch and throw a temper tantrum. Hololive doesn’t owe him shit, not even a courtesy email.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6085267
>but only a handful like holobass
but only a handful like holobass
>but only a handful like holobass
but only a handful like holobass

RETARD

[Anonymous No.]

>>6085658
yeah hes an immature retard
but he did
now everytime the great charity gets brought up, this faggot gets brought up to
my point is it could''ve easily been prevented

[Anonymous No.]

>>6085290
>>6085658
(Source)

Crying like a bitch:
https://archive.md/fG7CB

Permission to use song:
https://web.archive.org/web/20210507131838if_/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=42QhdIradBc

[Anonymous No.]

>>6085267
If they send you a C&D and you ask them for clarification a short "Yes, we consider this derivative music so, like remixes and covers, it can't be put up on services like Spotify." would be warranted.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6085778
Read the last line on that image, he already gave permission. They don’t need to ask permission to use something that is a derivative of their own content.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6085724
>they still need to send mails to retards with 0 reading comprehension
you are still retarded for making this suggestion

[Anonymous No.]

>>6085520
Ame had a lapse in judgement. She was extremely hesitant to sing Pop on Rocks at first. But her chat kept egging her on saying "I'M SURE HOLOBASS WON'T MIND!!!!" when obviously it was going to be a problem based on his past behavior.

She was put in a hard position because of how the charity stream worked. Getting the manager to message the guy would've been the right move but because she was on camera, Ame couldn't let her manager know she actually wanted to do it for real so there's a break in communication. The manager should've proactively reached out but there's also no guarantee that they would've gotten a response in time. Ame decided to take a chance and do it to please her audience and this is how we got to this position.

But yes, HoloBass is a retard. He could've been the next walfie but now he's burned his bridges with HoloLive.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6085963
He already gave permission. It’s a moot point.
>>6085658

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070568
what, you do know people don't own their face and voice ? you fucking retard

[Anonymous No.]

>>6082555
He didn't it's just a shit rrat to try an protect Ame from using his karaoke version. It's 100% his own original track and Ame didn't have the rights to use it. Teamates just refuse to admit this so they lie about it.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6086265
Are you fucking retarded? Learn how to read.
>>6085658

[Anonymous No.]

>>6086126
I don't know if Cover even owns stream audio, legally. They could still DMCA, and as a fan I wouldn't take it to court or anything, but I'm not sure what the precedent is, if any, on that.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6086372
>I don't know if Cover even owns stream audio, legally.
They do. Not sure why you would think audio would not be protected when video is.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6085658
"Whatever copyright law allows you to" is a very vague statement. He'd be an asshole to actually pursue legal action over it, but you could argue using his instrumental a monetized stream (even for charity) is not "allowed" by copyright law.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070004
>thought he could commercially profit from his fan mix
>thought Cover needed his permission to play his fan mix on stream

That isn't even autistic. That's Down's Syndrome territory.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6082521
Okay, you're a little confused about copyright law but you have the spirit of it.

Sampling is technically almost entirely illegal depending on which ruling you look at. The landmark case that most people agree with is this case where n.w.a. just two seconds of a song and still lost their case:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridgeport_Music,_Inc._v._Dimension_Films
However, later on a case against Madonna said the opposite, where as long as the sample is pretty unrecognizable it's alright:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VMG_Salsoul_v_Ciccone

What this guy did though obviously would not fall under any of these laws, but he's not actually ~entirely~ wrong. Technically, while Ame's voice is a sample on top of a sample (with the lyrics being written by Dr. Seuss and Hololive owning the recording), Holo bass actually *does* own the rights to his song. Just because you sample something does not automatically make it the property of the thing that you sampled, because it's just a constituent work, something that's part of a larger whole.

The sampled person can DMCA to get the song taken down, sue for damages, etc... even sue for ownership, but technically he does own the copyright for now, so he can sort of DMCA against her as well? At this point you start to get into grey areas that haven't been decided in the courts yet.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6086444
Wasn't sure if statements made as "Amelia Watson" would be owned by her or Cover if protected, and also not sure if streams in general are copyrightable or not
I'd assume yes, and if nothing else Amelia's design IS copyrighted, but I've never actually looked into it.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6086623
sampling without permission* I should say

[Anonymous No.]

>>6080116
you say that like there can only be one brony who makes hololive fan content.

every content creator on the internet that you like is either a brony or an ex-brony

[Anonymous No.]

>>6086444
Technically YouTube owns it

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070004
>dindu nuffin
The only thing that stopped him from attempting to copyright claim a live rendition of something that he'd Frankensteined together from other people's IPs was optics. He acted like a greedy, entitled faggot despite not having a clue and suffered the consequences.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6087363
That is not true, at all. You retain full ownership of the copyright of the videos you upload (as long as you already owned it) but by uploading it you are granting YouTube license to display the content you uploaded.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6086636
They are owned by Cover. And yes streams are copyrighted, which is why you can't download someone else's stream and then reupload it on your channel without their permission.

[Anonymous No.]

Holobass was a fucking fag about the incident. The only thing I hope is Ame didn’t feel bad for this dude.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6087454
I agree uploader retains the copyright but considering YouTube can moderate and monetize any and all uploads regardless who uploads content and regardless of what the uploader desires and also taking into account they can also refuse to take down videos unless legally forced I would say from a practical standpoint YouTube owns all the content. Even if you ask a video to be removed it's not actually deleted, it's still in the database but is marked as inaccessible for users without staff privilege.

[Anonymous No.]

You retarded chimps still can't provide proof that the backing track, the instrumental, the thing Ame played on stream, was taken from someone else.
How pitiful.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6082999
99% of things spawned out of hlgg should be taken behind the shed.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070364
So if I sampled an interview from Will Smith for a song and it became a best seller you think he'd be fine with me making money off of it?

[Anonymous No.]

>>6094779
Whether he's fine with it has nothing to do with legality. He could sue you, and I think he'd lose.

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070080
>SVARA

[Anonymous No.]

>>6070004
His meltdown was unjustified BUT to this day I hear people say he 'threatened to take down the stream' when he said the exact opposite.

[Anonymous No.]

he's an asshole and did it to himself.