Interesting article you might wanna read.
Specially if you intend to sell your music with AudioJungle,Shutterstock Music, Pond5, and TunePocket
or similar others.
https://www.wired.com/story/stock-music-hate-speech-youtube/

 

I would like a special TOS such that my music can be used by anyone, including literally Hitler, for anything they want to use it for. Especially for things that offend sensitive internet ninny-nannies. The meddling assholes are trying to censor and attack people they don't like by posturing with disingenuous pretention like "wahh, do the artists know how their creation is being used?".

 

Satie well said. These people that claim to be so offended over something that it must be eradicated.
I do not set out to offend but if a person is then that is their problems.
Also giving such people a sorry is not enough, All they do is move the goalposts, Ergo it is never accepted,
Fuck them and the ability they have of finding problems in any area they infest plus their fake outrage,
Hurt feelings.

All the best to you both

Dean

 

Colin Flaherty does not commit so-called (ridiculously-termed) "hate speech," he presents facts obfuscated by the Media due to their ulterior agenda. Besides, that term is so skewed and misleading, as is the egregious misappropriation of the word "hate" in lieu of "bigotry" and "prejudice" – I don't feel like deconstructing the semiotic mess that that presents.

As for just tossing one's work up onto some licensing "platform" and letting whomever have their way with it because they'd paid for it is like letting random johns do it in your butt without a rubber.

 

hahaha... this is stupid.

 

Have Los Lobos weighed in on this yet??

 

I for one would be absolutely disgusted if my music was used by some sarcastic asshole to push his poorly veiled racism. Fuck your apathetic neutrality.

Several days ago I've watched a youtube video of the Rollings Stones in the studio back in the 60's, and one of the commenters replied "back in time when Britain was white and not full of Muslims" or some such drivel. Absolutely cringed at what any member of the Rolling Stones would think of this statement in regards to their video, not to mention how unrelated that was.

 

You submitted it, you cashed the check, you signed it away. Now you feel you've the choice to decide what happens to it? Uh-uh, nope. Hate speech is garbage but the more you shine a light on it, the more real it becomes. Stop flashing every moron with hate in his heart on the news or television, stop the media from driving that hate in their quest for views or likes or whatever the fuck people do now. ...but to tell me some donkey dick royalty-free site has to police content usage? Ridiculous. If you're that worried about your art, stop offering it up to the lowest bidder.

 

We roll our shades down at night because we don't wish the neighbors to post our naked bodies on the internet for all to see. By giving a licensing outfit free reign to give permission to absolutely anyone to use my music for absolutely any purpose without my prior signed consent would be an absolute disaster as an outcome. I am not well versed in the intracies of these kinds of contracts but would hesitate signing over this kind of responsibility to some just for the money, don't take it personally it's just business, kind of power of attorney firm. Another 21st century problem to deal with.

 

I understand that such a topic can get to your nerves, but hey guys, do we really need so much foul language to express ourselves?

 

Can't be bothered to read the article but I have a strong feeling that it's a hit piece on someone they deem "hate speaker" or "wrong thinker", whatever, rather than anything of substance. Because, you know, if you are going to give your music to be freely licensed, you're going to do exactly that, what's the point of writing articles about it? I see a point in writing articles to push your political agenda.

 

Life within liar precepts leads to brain deterioration: at first, it makes beings from less intelligent to totally stupid and, after a while, they go mad.
This is humanity nowadays: subservient beings (in the full sense of the word) endowed with deformed and deforming culture going into ever worse stages of mental sanity (oligophrenia).

 

There is no such thing as hate speech, there is only natural defense against degeneration, in a free country can express any opinion.

 

...although free speech can be hateful.

 

Personally I've noticed this thing with people of other color than white and Jews. It's when you call them out on some shit they did, factually did, they immediately start to play race cards, accuse of antisemitism, they victimize themselves and they demonize you. All completely irrelevant things to try hide the fact they actually did commit crimes of their own. Everything "bad" you say automatically becomes "hate speech", "hate agenda", regardless if you're actually saying right things or not, you become racist, antisemitic and all sorts of labels they try to push on you.

It's indeed a very convenient defensive position and it is also THE BIGGEST BULLSHIT EVER.

Never fall for this trap. Always call out an oversensitive bitch who tries to play race cards on you as a cover-up. Race and nationality is not an excuse and a free pass to crime for anybody, period.

 

Are you saying they all do that?

 

If not all, the majority of them certainly reverts to this sort of behavior. I've noticed this not just once or twice, but many times, would it be my personal encounters with them or while witnessing them speak to others.

 

If not all, the majority of them certainly reverts to this sort of behavior. I've noticed this not just once or twice, but many times, would it be my personal encounters with them or while witnessing them speak to others.

you see what I'm saying, Oly? you don't even need to try hard, man. usually it doesn't take long until a touchy snowflake millennial baby arrives and gets butthurt to the point of fainting.

snowflakes, snowflakes everywhere these days, man! they are the cancer of the times we're living in.

 

Last edited by a moderator: Nov 18, 2017

I don't understand why people are making this a political thing or how it is devolving into some sort of racist diatribe on 'Jews and coloreds.'

It is about contractual law and weather or not government should have a built in copyright or publishing rights exemption for a creators to be able to restrict who buys and uses their works.

The best protection one has is that when they sell their work only to a company that matches their world view, and the appropriate ethics to actually enforce their terms of service.

When one behaves like a prostitute, one get treated like one. Race, religion and ethnicity have nothing to do with it. The debate on the other hand now is (and this is a pretty high level debate since it concerns more than one sovereign country all of which have their own laws on such matters) is if you've acted like a prostitute and sold all rights to a particular creation .... should you be able to reserve certain non-nontransferable rights that can be enforced in 'court' based on a recognizable moral objection.

BTW constitutional free speech - is citizen(s), organizations, institutions vs the government - when it comes to you versus your employer, other citizens, or non-governmental institutions against repercussions there is no legally protected free speech.

 

It's the author of the video in question that decided to turn crime into a matter of race, not the criminals. Completely different issue.