Forum

[Scalyback]

[center]


It's a Triumph.1950's? half hour film showing:-


Preamble with a tramp (2:30)

Construction of engines, gearboxes and bikes (18 minutes)

Triumph motorcycles in use (9 minutes.)








You will get an advert first, but it is a small price to pay considering the alternative (see below).











I am still getting used to Dailymotion, having had another setback with youtube. This is an old film, and no doubt the music in it was paid for etc. but just look what happened when I uploaded it, even though it was set to 'private' and not 'public'...




It's just not worth the effort is it? Of course , if you make a new vid with somebody's music, then you should have their permission or pay royalties, but for an old film like this? Well it made a first, as it is my only youtube vid to be on my channel for less than an hour!






REOC 15084

Tabellarius de verbis. Ostensor gaudium

[/center]

[Rattlebattle]

Yes, I've seen that before. Definitely the 1950s and as the bike in the tramp episode is a swinging arm Tiger 100 the same as mine it would be no earlier than 1954, when the s/a was introduced at the same time as the Tiger 110. Equally it was pre "mouth organ" tank badge so would be mid- to late-fifties. I wish someone would give me a veteran Triumph (Model P?) just for looking a bit downtrodden, he said euphemistically.....

[nigelphoto]

Sorry Scaly, I'm afraid I have to disagree on the Copyright issue. I retired in 2013 from a career in the media industry and one of the most frustrating things is having one's work nicked and used by someone else which happened several times to me that I am aware - probably a lot more which I didn't find out about. The Copyright and Design Act 1988 refers to it as 'theft' - and yes I have not only read all 282 pp of the Act but taught it at HND level. Most artists will agree to the use of a work by a private punter as long as its not for resale but they would expect to be asked. Try parking in the front of a motorcycle shop, wandering in and taking a load of tools outside to work on your bike without asking. If you still have all your teeth after two minutes I'd be most surprised - its the same thing!

[Scalyback]

I thought there was some 50 years thing on copyright, or am I wrong about that?

I certainly don;t want to rip anyone off, but for a 1950's film, I assumed it would not apply?

there is one of my vid, where you can hear some of a song as the radio was on at the time. Would that also be a problem?



As I said, I don't want to rip anybody off, but it seems rather more complicated than I expected.

[Scalyback]

Anyway, Nigelphoto, I'm only really on about youtube and their somewhat useless system, where companies are claiming against music that they have no claim over. If you don't dispute it, then they continue to make money from adverts. I even had a claim from some company called IODA from one of my vids, and I had written the bloody music (My macbook performed it). What about the guy who's dispute was turned down by the management company, and the supposed song was birdsong in an open field? what about my vid with royalty free music that WMG put a claim on, and then upheld, because they had used a sample from the royalty free music in one of their hits? And the one where they claimed that I had used a song, I opened a dispute stating that they were wrong and gave the actual song title, composer and album, and they refused my 'appeal' and still stated that the song was theirs when it wasn't even in the vid! I guess as my appeal failed very quickly, giving me the idea that they didn't read what I said and just rejected it, possibly the same with all appeals, so they can keep on coining it in on incorrect claims.



And where's my side of it? I produce a video sometimes with my own or royalty free music, some company claims it and youtube pays them. It doesn't go 50/50, I make the vid and somebody else earns from it. There is no way to contact youtube to say that their software got it wrong. Is there something in the act to help with that?

A quick google search of youtube bogus copyright claim shows up the massive problems which google are trying to solve, but until then, this sort of thing will carry on.

Rant over, Sorry guys.

[nigelphoto]

Scaly - you're not wrong about Youtube and a lot of other public artwork sites as well. The UK Copyright & Design Act 1988 actually gives a 70 year limit but there's the rub. Because all these companies are US based they abide by their own arcane Copyright laws even when operating in Europe or anywhere else. Besides which they always take the side of the large company since they know no punter is ever going to sue - might is right. I have suffered exactly the same as you and had a work removed from another site (Redbubble - Australian) even though I was the author and could prove it because I had the RAW file original. However, what's the point as one's peeing in the wind when trying to fight against these faceless corps run by lawyers and slick b*stards. PS On a Forum, always reply a rant with another rant!!

[PeteF]

I've seen these vids before and it's interesting to see how they assembled the engines in the fifties. Not a torque wrench in sight.

[Scalyback]

My royalty free vid just got claimed! LOL



ANYWAY, back to the vid, and we are talking of a date 1954 or shortly after. I was absolutely captivated, just watching how they went together. I cannot image that there would be much difference between that and the RE factory.


I can just imagine Kevin being put together like that, tested, etc. Great stuff! Pete F, I think the torque wrenches were screwdrivers, that depended on the length of the cross handle for pressure applied! Bit like the length of a whit spanner for force applied!

[jefrs]

A lot of pop music uses the same three chords as my original composition. Should I sue them?

[jefrs]

nigelphoto - as I understand it (see PRS etc) English Law takes precedence over US Law when it comes to International Copyright disputes, simply because it is the oldest copyright law.