Copyright claims of Thyagaraja songs by recording labels

[varsha]

https://www.eff.org/copyrightweek
http://benetech.org/2014/01/17/the-case ... -fair-use/
quote
The next time you set your digital device of choice to record your favorite show so you can watch it whenever you want, take a moment to be thankful that you’re protected from lawsuits from the entertainment industry. For on January 17, 1984, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that consumers could tape their favorite TV shows and watch them later without the copyright holder’s consent. Such action, the Court decided, didn’t constitute copyright infringement because it was fair use, that is, a limitation and exception to the exclusive rights granted by copyright law to the author of a creative work.

Logo for Copyright Week 2014.This ruling by the Supreme Court in Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc., 464 U.S. 417 (1984), also known as the “Betamax case”, is a landmark copyright precedent that has had enormous implications for the media economy. It affected every step of the evolution of digital media—from the VCR to the digital video recorder to YouTube. It also underscores just how critical a balanced copyright law is for technology innovation.

Why do we at Benetech care about this so much? It’s because our mission depends on a balanced intellectual property system that encourages innovation. As a different kind of Silicon Valley tech company—a nonprofit with a pure focus on social good—our goal is to see that the best of technology gets applied to social needs left unaddressed by for-profit businesses. The tools we develop for that purpose span a range of fields—from human rights, to global literacy, to the environment—but no matter what area we work in, we depend on an IP system that’s friendly to technological advances and to positive social impact.

...............
..............
Conclusion

At their best, IP laws encourage technological advances, reward creativity, and benefit society. Practical and creative innovators need space to operate and ensure those benefits reach the people who desperately need new solutions but are often least able to afford them. To make this possible, we must ensure balance in copyright laws and defend fair use as a laboratory for creativity. With the leverage of technology and the foundation provided by well thought out IP laws, we can inspire both economic growth and social good.
unquote

[parivadini]

constitute copyright infringement because it was fair use, that is, a limitation and exception to the exclusive rights granted by copyright law to the author of a creative work.

Hi we claimed fair use/public domain for this.Our appeal got dismissed and the claims of the recording label upheld.
Cant do much if they have a statutory document which says they are the legal copyright owner.

Regards
Venkat

[harimau]

Can you guys appeal to the Intellectual Properties Board? They have an office right on the main road (Grand Southern Trunk Road/Mount Road/Anna Salai) in Guindy.

See if you can get a blanket ruling that the works of Thyagaraja, Deekshithar, Syama Sastri, etc., belong in the public domain.

[Rsachi]

Folks,
I have submitted a petition to You Tube as follows:
PETITION LINK:
https://www.change.org/petitions/you-tu ... atic-music

(PLEASE CLICK AND SIGN!)

Dear You Tube, you know that worldwide, listeners of the classical musical form of India, Carnatic music, reach out thousands of times everyday on You Tube to wonderful uploads of great music by artistes, organizers and other listeners.

I have come to know (see photo) that Lahari Recording has successfully got you to block an upload of a live concert recording of a Carnatic musical composition "O Rangashayi", claiming worldwide rights.

To set the context, Carnatic music comprises a rich body of lyrical+musical compositions by Thyagaraja (1767-1847 CE) and others. These thousands of compositions are learnt under teachers for many years by musicians who thereafter present the compositions with or without many improvisational elements like raga alapana, niraval, swara, etc. Each such presentation of the self-same composition therefore is UNIQUE and appreciated by listeners live or via broadcasts and You Tube uploads many times over.

If a music label (eg a member of IPRS.org) claims copyrights to the original musical composition instead of copyrights to their own specific recording track of a particular artiste, this would be laughable; and more so reprehensible to the development and encouragement of Carnatic music. The extant example is perhaps a tip of the iceberg as these recording company labels may effectively armtwist you and exploit You Tube for their monetizing their own records instead of encouraging new presentations and newer musicians. This will KILL CARNATIC MUSIC.

You Tube would do well to understand the ethos and creative forces at play in Carnatic music. As we speak, the centenary of Thyagaraja is being celebrated in Thiruvaiyyaru, Tamil Nadu. Songs like O Rangashayi will be performed by several musicians, heard and enjoyed. If those assembled heard that someone holds copyrights to this song, they will be scandalized.

If there is a commercial label of the reading of say the Bible, would that label prevent any new Bible readings from being uploaded on You Tube for violating copyrights!? Who can ever hold copyrights on Bible readings or Carnatic music compositions!?

Please come back to me for a detailed face-to-face discussion if you like. We can meet with hundreds if musicians and listeners in an open forum to sort this matter out. To save you trouble, I am creating this petition, which will be signed by many affected by such copyrights protection in Carnatic music.

[parivadini]

Upping the Ante !

WE are starting our live coverage of carnatic music concert today. In case our broadcast gets terminated due to any alleged copyright violation,please excuse.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJRplxJ8Y-Q



Ensoy

PS: Please feel free to share the link

[vichu1947]

Hi we claimed fair use/public domain for this.Our appeal got dismissed and the claims of the recording label upheld.
Cant do much if they have a statutory document which says they are the legal copyright owner.

This is crazy. I suggest we retaliate this way, though I hate prescribing this:

All of us have 1 or more commercial albums that we would have bought. Let us all upload these albums and start sharing the links in various forums and discussion groups. Let people download and enjoy them without of need to buy

When labels behave like thugs we too have to behave like thugs

For every album that has been bought , sale of 10 potential albums should be spoiled.

And that will bring these label mafia on their knees

[Nick H]

This is crazy. I suggest we retaliate this way, though I hate prescribing this:

All of us have 1 or more commercial albums that we would have bought. Let us all upload these albums and start sharing the links in various forums and discussion groups. Let people download and enjoy them without of need to buy

WAIT, please: stop and think.

The argument is that these companies are claiming to own something that they cannot possibly own. Our argument is that they are outside the law in making such a claim. This is a matter of reasoning, and reasoning within the law, not of just throwing stones.

What you are suggesting would be illegal. We will gain nothing by putting ourselves outside the law too.

(and anyway, it wouldn't work: there is a vast quantity of copyright music, worldwide, available on the net: that fact has not put anybody out of business yet.

Sachi, the trouble with your petition is that it does not distinguish between music written 150 years ago, which cannot be "owned" in the copyright sense, today, and music by contemporary composers which certainly can.

[Rsachi]

Nick,
I believe that a pointed attempt to establish the wrong in copyrighting compositions has been offered as an opportunity on a platter and by this example.
Once we win this point, we can go on to dispute the IPRS stand. That was point 2.

By signing the petition, we will be hugely helping the cause. Please think about it.

I have not stated that antiquity of a composition makes it non-copyrightable. The very idea of compositions having copyrights is unknown in CM.

[samarasaa]

The very idea of compositions having copyrights is unknown in CM.

Exactly! This is beginning to sound like patenting medicinal properties of turmeric, neem and benefits of yoga asanas.

Needs to be nipped in the bud.

[venkatakailasam]

deleted

[venkatakailasam]

deleted

[Rsachi]

Read/download the book

The Grammar of Carnatic Music
K. G. Vijayakrishnan
Type: eBook
Released: 2007
Publisher: Walter de Gruyter
Page Count: 358
Format: pdf
Language: English
ISBN-10: 3110183137
ISBN-13: 9783110183139
About the Author K.G. Vijayakrishnan is Professor at the School of Language Sciences, Central Institute of English Foreign Languages, Hyderabad, India.

See what he says about copyright for a composition!!

[harimau]

Venkat of Parivadini,

Let me start off with the usual queries of Mylapore mamas.

How old are you? Are you married? If so, for how long? How many children? What do you earn? )

Now that the preliminaries are dispensed with, my suggestion is for you to request an injunction from the High Court at Madras which would prevent these organizations from claiming and enforcing copyright. They will have to then come to the court and submit documentary evidence of how they have the copyright to 200-year-old songs. That ought to put an end to their shenanigans.

Yes, it will cost money but I think that is well spent. Sri R Krishnaswamy, Secretary of Narada Gana Sabha, is a Senior Advocate who practices before the High Court at Madras. You could approach him informally and ask him what to do about the matter. Even if he is not an expert on copyright law, he can put you in touch with lawyers who are. In addition, I think he would have a personal interest in the matter if it is brought to his attention as it could affect the operation of his and other sabhas in Chennai.

[rshankar]

Hi,
The Label has got back to us saying that they have "THE EXCLUSIVE WORLDWIDE rights for this song"

Venkat, this goes back to my earlier question - what does one (say Parivadini) need to do to get worldwide rights? I'm sure there's an established process...let's figure that out, and get exclusive worldwide rights for every other CM composition under the Sun...and when labels want to sell a commercial record with those compositions, they can be served the same sauce...after all, what's good for the goose must be good for the gander too....if you can't beat them from the outside, do it from the inside.

[pattamaa]

Very sad to read through, particularly after parivadini came into picture....

Is there any other website to support live streaming and also archiving? Fighting with youtube will be hard, though i will sign the petition.

[Rsachi]

There are other video streaming services and possibilities. Livestream.com is one.
But no need to give up on YT

[venkatakailasam]

The claim made by an "Indian establishment over a composition can be settled through an Indian court having juristriction..

The larger problem is the claims of Music Publishing Rights Collecting Society operating from US ..

How they are to be solved??

[Rsachi]

IPRS.ORG WEBSITE:
THE INDIAN PERFORMING RIGHT SOCIETY LIMITED.

A lot of people are not aware, or atleast not very clear about the functioning of IPRS. They often ask, What is the business of IPRS? Well, in short, the business of IPRS is to issue Licences to users of music and collect Royalties from them, for and on behalf of its Members i.e. the Authors, the Composers and the Publishers of Music and distribute this Royalty amongst them after deducting its administrative costs. The IPRS came into existence on 23rd August 1969.

The IPRS is a representative body of Owners of Music, viz. The Composers, Lyricists (or Authors) and the Publishers of Music and is also the sole Authorised Body to issue Licences permitting usage of Music within India by any person. Composers are those who are better known as Music Directors, Authors are better known as Lyricists, Publishers of Music are the Producers of Films and Music Companies, or those who hold Publishing Rights of the Musical Works. The Society is a non-profit making Organisation and is a Company Limited by Guarantee and Registered under the Companies Act, 1956.

It is also registered under Section 33 of the Copyright Act, 1957 as the Only Copyright Society in the Country to do business of issuing Licenses for usage of Music. In other words, IPRS is the only National Copyright Society in the Country which is permitted to commence and carry on the Copyright Business in Musical Works and any Words or any Action intended to be sung, spoken or performed with the music. It has received the Certificate of Registration from the Registrar of Copyrights dated 27-3-1996.

[Nick H]

I have not stated that antiquity of a composition makes it non-copyrightable. The very idea of compositions having copyrights is unknown in CM.

If you claim that in a legal environment, you will be laughed at. Even the shopping list your wife gave you today is copyright. the copyright in all compositions, whatever the genre, belongs to the composer/lyricist/author.artist.

Whether they choose to claim rights, payments, etc, in those compositions is another matter entirely.

Harimau speaks some words of wisdom here. Get some VIPs involved. VIPs that know VIPs, and if any of them happen to be lawyers or judges, then all the better.

[Rsachi]

Nick,
To understand CM, please read that book I have linked above, it will help the discussion.

Please note what is the real issue I have focussed on: O Rangashayi as an example. NOBODY CAN CLAIM COPYRIGHT ON IT.

Theoretically, if a present-day Lalgudi or TRS or someone makes a composition, and offers to license its notation and usability copyright, do you think anyone would sing his composition? Do you think his composition will see the light of day?

I request someone to quote the famous case which Papanasam Sivan filed unsuccessfully against Ariyakudi.

I think we all should know the difference between
piracy=illegal copying and redistributing commercial label tracks, and
copyright on compositions- which is unheard of in CM. It is the nature of the beast.
It is like Venkatamakhin patenting the 72 melakartas.

[vasanthakokilam]

Sachi, I like your idea of the petition. Good initiative. I have signed. I am glad to see some action. Thanks. I also like harimau's reference to go at it from the legal angle too since this is not just a youtube problem, that is just a symptom.

Let us go with the path of least resistance with out getting into the issues above, like the nature of CM etc. As we all know it is a pretty straightforward case to explain.

68 more signatures needed as of now. What happens next?

[vgovindan]

I have signed the petition and also posted in FB.

[vasanthakokilam]

Upping the Ante !

WE are starting our live coverage of carnatic music concert today. In case our broadcast gets terminated due to any alleged copyright violation,please excuse.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJRplxJ8Y-Q

Jayalakshmi Sekar plays an excellent Asaveri, listen to it before it is taken down by the record label idiots ;(

[Nick H]

Nick,
To understand CM, please read that book I have linked above, it will help the discussion.

It is enough for me to see that it is not written by a lawyer, and is not concerned with legal aspects. It is a cultural and philosophical opinion, not a legal one. It does not count in law, nor does the idea. It is law we are talking about here. It absolutely will not work to claim, hey all that stuff is nothing to do with us because we're carnatic

Theoretically, if a present-day Lalgudi or TRS or someone makes a composition, and offers to license its notation and usability copyright, do you think anyone would sing his composition? Do you think his composition will see the light of day?

Do you think they do not own the copyright in their compositions? Of course they do. Just because something has not been enforced, or charged for, does not mean that it it is not there. No doubt, they are just happy to see their compositions performed. But watch them suddenly discovering their copyright if one of those songs becomes a hit film song, gets translated around the world, becomes a number-one international hit, with one or more rock bands minting millions from it...

Possible useful arguments...

1. There is no existing copyright in the works of the great composers who died over a hundred years ago. (In fact, in any work where the composer died >[insert correct number here] years ago). It cannot be claimed by anyone, because it does not exist.

2. That the party claiming ownership of copyright in a more recent composition do not, in fact, own it. They must prove that they do.

[varsha]

Harimau speaks some words of wisdom here. Get some VIPs involved.

http://www.hindu.com/2011/02/02/stories ... 640200.htm
Pointing out how modern technology was increasingly used for piracy of musical works, she quoted the Korean example of implementation of the ‘three strike' concept, by which users of internet would be disciplined from downloading materials illegally. This had led to the increase in sales.

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/03/k ... ee-strikes
In July 2009, South Korea became the first country to introduce a graduated response or "three strikes" law. The statute allows the Minister of Culture or the Korean Copyright Commission to tell ISPs and Korean online service providers to suspend the accounts of repeated infringers and block or delete infringing content online. There is no judicial process, no court of appeal, and no opportunity to challenge the accusers.
....
This Wednesday, Korea's National Human Rights Commission recommended that the three strikes law be re-examined, given its unclear benefits, and its potential violation of the human rights to receive and impart information and to participate in the cultural life of the community.
...
But back in Korea, the entertainment industry's experiment in Internet enforcement has been a failure. Instead of tackling a few "heavy uploaders" involved in large scale infringement, the law has spiraled out of control. It has now distributed nearly half a million takedown notices, and led to the closing down of 408 Korean Internet users' web accounts, most of which were online storage services. An investigation led by the Korean politician Choi Jae-Cheon showed that half of those suspended were involved in infringement of material that would cost less than 90 U.S. cents.
......

[Rsachi]

Varsha,
Interesting story that about Korea. I have spent many weeks in several trips to Korea on business. That is one country (like China, Canada etc) where almost NOBODY buys a movie DVD. EVERY movie in the world is available online in a pirated version, and people's Internet skills are measured by how easily they download and watch pirated movies.
My family and friends living in Canada have a legendary-bordering on laughable-contempt for purchasing CDs and DVDs...it seems to be an act of idiocy to them. BTW Korea is the most Internet savvy nation in the world as per studies.

Well Indians are never far behind in these matters. When Lagaan was released, I called Ashutosh Gowarikar to congratulate him. I asked him when the movie DVD would be commercially released. he told me that it would be a couple of years (they hoped people will buy tickets and see movies In a theatre) but ON THE DAY THE MOVIE WAS RELEASED IN USA, same day pirated movie DVD was readied and available in US.

The story was the same in Australia for his other success, Jodhaa Akbar. My Indian friends laughed at the idea of spending 12-15$ a movie tkt when they got the DVD pirated of course for $5.

The IPRS.Org and You a tube moves etc are acts of total desperation since even big labels like Virgin and EMI and Sony feel totally threatened by piracy. We now therefore see that Thyagaraja is claiming copyright for his song through some cheap record labels. He will be singing:
Pirated CD chaala sukhama, song-Du download sukhama!?

[vasanthakokilam]

We are not alone:
https://twitter.com/simoncozens/status/ ... 7635251200

[SrinathK]

Youtube probably hasn't learned the distinction between copying a movie and multiple performances of a musical work -- bots can only read labels. But it must be made very clear if going by the legal route that the compositions belong in the public domain.

[rshankar]

Youtube probably hasn't learned the distinction between copying a movie and multiple performances of a musical work -- bots can only read labels. But it must be made very clear if going by the legal route that the compositions belong in the public domain.

youtube bots may be doing what you're saying, but it ain't no bot from Lahiri that's claiming ownership of viriboni and the like...

[varsha]

Manohar Naidu entered the music business by accident. He had been working for a cosmetics dealer, who, happy with the young man's performance, gifted him a tape recorder. Manohar Naidu saw business potential in it: he used it to record songs from a record player, and started selling his own "pre-recorded" cassettes.

That was in 1980, when record players still held sway. But the gramophone, as it was called, was being threatened by the handier cassette player, which people had started buying even in smaller cities and towns.

With Rs 500, Manohar Naidu launched his label Lahari. He identified unconventional outlets for his tapes. Bangle stores, cigarette stalls and electronic spares shops started selling his tapes.

http://www.themusicmagazine.com/manoharn.html

[vasanthakokilam]

wow!

[parivadini]

A request.

Whereas honestly we are overwhelmed and completely humbled by the support from the rasikas forum who have gone out of the way to come out to support(someone volunteered even to pay for the lawyer and asked bank account details,another rasika said "this is no more your battle" ). A sincere personal request is not to link political party or religion or caste or other similar attributions to this cause. I think as rasika's we have a fair claim which I am sure can be won in any court of law in the long run,however adding political and religious overtones to this might be detrimental in the long run.

As Nick's now famous edict goes - "Let us Stay Focused"
From our end we are
1. Going all out to spread this across social media
2. Sharing Sachi's cause.org message
3. Started talking to the Press
4. Will be meeting the lawyers thru this week

In all posiblities we might not have the bandwidth to sue labels however we could put up a public interest petition which does not have much cost implications and will be taken up by courts as long as there is proof of sufficient public interest (again sachi's message will be useful in that,will request for the xls detail of signees if they have no objection to be added on the PIL)

Will keep you all posted,meanwhile continue to hear our coverage.

Thanks
Venkat

This message might not be understood by all but I am sure the concerned will get it.

[rajumds]

Singed the online petition. But there is no point in taking up the case with You tube. They are only going by law. If someone makes a claim of copy right violation, they look at both sides and if one party has a registered right , they rule in their favour.

We need to take up the issue with IPRS who seem to have given the rights to the recording companies. First IPRS is not a government entity but one registered under copy right act. We need to educate / legally challenge them about the folly. The recording companies are targeting You tube because they perceive free online music content to be a threat to business. Live performances are not a threat and are not challenging them. But legally they can bar any one from singing the pancharatna kritis in Thiruvayaru.

Are artists aware what they are getting into when they sign on the dotted lines. There has to be some association/forum of musicians who should take this up. If the carnatica team is following this thread , they can comment.

One option will be to file a PIL against IPRS for issuing copy right to CM compositions.

This link may be of interest in this issue

http://www.thehindu.com/business/Indust ... 590790.ece

[askn]

While I fully agree with the spirit of this conversation , I do want to provide a little context to this discussion so that any future course of action proceeds in the right direction.

1. The labels do not have copyright / cannot copyright most CM compositions as they are in public domain
2. Other compositions that are not in public domain , the copyright belongs to the composer ( unless the record label has specifically acquired the right from the composer )
3. The label has not made a claim of copyright against Parivadini , i.e sent them a notice etc. asking them to take down a video from the Parivadini site ( as far as I understand )
4. Only content from YouTube has been taken down
4. The YouTube Content ID system is put in place for YOUTUBE's protection , so that they are not taken to court / sued for contributory infringement. ( Google has been dealing with litigation ( Viacom vs Google ) and other threats of litigation from music & film industry organisation for many years now.
5. Some labels are mis-using the YouTube processes to take down content from YouTube.

So Parivadini or any one else who is streaming / organization an event has nothing to worry about from the labels so long as they don't use YouTube to broadcast.
Since the labels have not made a public assertion of copyright against anyone ( YouTube is a private entity ) , need to check with a lawyer whether any course of legal action exists.

Am guessing that this will need effort from different angles , including talking to the labels

[parivadini]

The label has not made a claim of copyright against Parivadini , i.e sent them a notice etc. asking them to take down a video from the Parivadini site ( as far as I understand ) -

3 strikes and we are out! we are now 2 down!

Only content from YouTube has been taken down
Can be taken down.

So Parivadini or any one else who is streaming / organization an event has nothing to worry about from the labels so long as they don't use YouTube to broadcast.Since the labels have not made a public assertion of copyright against anyone ( YouTube is a private entity ) , need to check with a lawyer whether any course of legal action exists.
Am guessing that this will need effort from different angles , including talking to the labels

All the platforms which we have done as a part of our back up strategy -likes of brightcove,livestream,ustream etc etc have a Zero Tolerance on Copyright due to the threat from big labels,so it would be more like postponing our problem rather than solving it if we chose to go on to other platforms,also from networks effects point of you this would be expensive.

Cheers

[askn]

Strongly suggest you talk to the labels with which you are facing this issue

[arunk]

I would suspect the big labels are simply copyright trolling (this is not uncommon) which works when you are big and you are threatening little guys (patent trolls are famous for this). Thus, unless the painpoint is applied differently (harimau's advice would apply I would think) they simply would continue and willing to say "let the court tell us otherwise, till then we will play in whatever way that is advantageous to us as the system allows for it". It does appear they are scheming the system.

Perhaps, the content platforms simply would prefer to "play it safe" and perhaps not really interested in mediating. But, if they are taking down accounts based on incorrect claims, I wonder if they could get into trouble elsewhere (like unlawful termination suits -- which they must protect against)? So maybe there perhaps is a way, or they simply make you agree to terms of service that says "we are not responsible for mediating copyright claims/violations - it is your headache" (?)

Arun

[parivadini]

Served hot for today's concert - the pancharathna kirthanai - lets see if this is our last strike and we are out!
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid ... =1&theater
Cheers
Venkat

[Rsachi]

I have 141 guys who have signed the petition to You Tube thus far!
Good response, don't you think?
We need still more...

[rshankar]

Parivadini, Harimau's suggestion is getting much more attractive by the minute...get a broad injunction against all holders of rights against any of these compositions...

[rshankar]

I have 141 guys who have signed the petition to You Tube thus far!
Good response, don't you think?
We need still more...

can you please repost the link, or can the mods please make a sticky thread for the petition?

[vasanthakokilam]

Let me try to do something about sticky

[tkb]

This is indeed a genuine problem and we are also on the verge of getting affected too soon on this issue! @Rsachi please let us know if there is any link and we would like to sign the petition as well.

rgds tkb

[vasanthakokilam]

The link to Sachi's post in this thread is this; http://www.rasikas.org/forums/viewtopic. ... 75#p255968

Sachi, My initial idea was to split your post into a separate thread and make it sticky. But that is not a good idea since the rest of the conversation will be out of place.

Please open a new topic in this section and copy your post to it. I will make it sticky. Thanks.

[vasanthakokilam]

Sachi, saw your new thread http://www.rasikas.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=22841.
It is now a 'sticky' topic.

[srkris]

Parivadini, get a paper signed by the artists concerned giving you the right to broadcast their music, and send it to youtube.

Words put on paper and signed by the great and the good will matter.

[parivadini]

Yesterdays concert claim for Dudukugala has been released by the label(the same label which said they OWN) a "good will gesture"
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid ... =1&theater

We also have been invited for a "discussion" and have been assured by a gentelmen called Mr.Ravinder Pathak at IPRS that if we forward the links to them they will release the same with youtube!

Kudos to Sachi,apparently youtube is being flooded with protest emails.

Look forward to the forums view on this.

Cheers

[parivadini]

The Label apologized
Had an appointment with the IP Lawyer at 1630 to file petition, at 1609 they sent a mail,apology and claim withdrawl.
We owe more than just one to you all,promise we will try to repay this over time!
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid ... to_comment

So its back to business, off to a live webcast - 2 fantastic concerts today do check it out.

Thanks all
Team Parivadini

PS: they also were not very amused with the publicity that they got is my understanding

[mohan]

Great to hear this outcome. Hope they inform Youtube so that this doesn't happen again!

[Rsachi]

Mohan, Parivadini, and everyone, there were until a while ago 234 signatures to my petition, and You Tube received in their copyright department 234 email messages all saying this:

Sachi R. Sachidananda started a petition "You Tube: Prevent Unfair Copyrights claims in Carnatic music" targeting you on Change.org that's starting to pick up steam.

Change.org is the world's largest petition platform that gives anyone, anywhere the tools they need to start, join and win campaigns for change. Change.org never starts petitions on our own -- petitions on the website, like "You Tube: Prevent Unfair Copyrights claims in Carnatic music", are started by users.

While "You Tube: Prevent Unfair Copyrights claims in Carnatic music" is active, you'll receive an email each time a signer leaves a comment explaining why he or she is signing. You'll also receive periodic updates about the petition's status.

Here's what you can do right now to resolve the petition:
Review the petition. Here's a link:
http://www.change.org/en-IN/petitions/y ... atic-music
See the 232 signers and their reasons for signing on the petition page.
Respond to the petition creator by sending a message here:
http://www.change.org/en-IN/petitions/y ... 2ba90d535d
Sincerely,
Change.org

It is quite likely that such a torrent of messages over the weekend wouldn't have amused the You Tube folks, and that would have influenced in all likelihood the IPRS folks to call up Parivadini.

Seems like we won this round, eh! =; =;

JAI HO RASIKAS.