Pick A Side: Video Of Creepy Girls Singing To Donald Trump Taken Down Over Copyright On WWI Song
from the yuge dept
I really hate stories where there is no one to root for. Unfortunately, this is one of those stories. C’est la vie. If you were ambulatory enough to get to your computer these past few weeks, you likely came across a video from a Donald Trump rally, in which a group of five young girls, only three of which are seen in the video, called the USA Freedom Kids hip-bobbed a serenade to the Trumpster about how awesome America is. It was horrible. It was jingoistic and patronizing with just a dash of discomfort as these young girls were dressed in pleated red, white and blue skirts and tops. So that you don’t think I’m exaggerating the level of horror here, see the video of the whole thing below, if you can stomach it.
That video is from the YouTube account for The USA Freedom Kids. I embedded their video instead of this one that was uploaded by a Phoenix, Arizona Fox affiliate, because, well…
Yeah, it was taken down by EMI. But why, you ask? While many of us would thank anyone or anything that could tear the existence of this horror show away from wherever unsuspecting innocents might happen across it, what stake does EMI Music have in this song sung by The USA Freedom Kids?
It’s possible that YouTube’s auto-removal bots finally caught some infringement (real or perceived) on the song, though if that’s the case, it’s odd it took them so long.
The more likely case, though, is that someone realized that “Over There,” the World War I song that Freedom’s Call’s tune is taken from, is still copyrighted. And that the copyright belongs to Sony/ATV Music Publishing, EMI Music Publishing’s parent company. Fox 10 Phoenix didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment, nor has EMI.
Given the autobots haven’t gobbled up other versions of the recording, it appears most likely that EMI specifically targeted the one shared by Fox. Now, look, what the hell am I supposed to do here? I don’t want that video to exist, but I also don’t like EMI being able to disappear content of any kind in favor of protecting their rights to a song that was created before my grandfather graced Earth. It’s like trying to decide whether to back Stalin or Pol Pot in a fistfight: I’m just wishing there was a way where everyone could lose.
There are so many reasons why it’s ridiculous that EMI could take down this video to begin with: the age of the song, the nature of the use for political speech by these girls, the fact that a news organization did the sharing in its capacity on reporting the news, etc. But this is what you get when you mix silly politics with insanely over-reaching copyright law, I suppose.
Filed Under: contentid, copyright, dmca, donald trump, takedown, trump girls
Companies: youtube
Comments on “Pick A Side: Video Of Creepy Girls Singing To Donald Trump Taken Down Over Copyright On WWI Song”
Still happy to see it happen.
While I think Trump might be the least corrupt politician running for president, I still greatly enjoy every single time a Politician or Business owner of ANY KIND gets their shit canned over Copyright, because they DESERVE IT, AND it helps to raise awareness.
Will I be voting for Trump? Yea, no, I refuse to vote for ANY candidate I deem to be morally or socially corrupt.
There is not a singe person right or left running for president that deserves the job!
I will likely vote when one comes along to start ramping up the DA’s office to start charging multiple members of house & congress with all sorts of fucking shit!
Until then all of these bastards will either advance the Rights desire for a Tyrannical Police State or the Lefts desire for a Tyrannical Communist state… not sure what the fucking difference is after all has been said and done!
Re: Still happy to see it happen.
If he’s the least corrupt politician, that’s only because he’s only been a politician since he started running for President. He has, for example, used eminent domain to get local government to force homeowners to sell so he could build stuff. But he wasn’t a “politician” at the time.
Re: Still happy to see it happen.
Bernie Sanders doesn’t seem corrupt. The only allegations I’ve seen of Sanders’ corruption is paying family members a pittance for actually helping out with his campaigns, you know, like family members do in businesses all the time.
Trump probably offshores and tax-dodges as much as he can.
Re: Re: Still happy to see it happen.
“Trump probably offshores and tax-dodges as much as he can.”
Don’t know about the first, but doesn’t EVERYONE do the second? I know I tell my tax attorney, “If it’s legal, take the avoidance AKA tax dodge. (One, two, and your idea, three.) If you can tell me how to somehow adjust things to make it legal (especially on a going forward basis), do it. If you think that it’s a valid tax, pay it. If you think it does NOT properly apply to us/me and can correctly support your position to the IRS then do NOT pay it. No smelly stuff and everything’s all above board, but twist and turn as appropriate.”
If it’s legal, avoid incurring, reduce, or even paying the tax. If Congress changes the law and you (the tax guy) can change to match, great. If not, fine; better luck next time. Sorry, but doesn’t EVERYONE EVERYWHERE do that? Or am I just actually smarter than you guys?
I pay my fair share of taxes, but if it’s legal then I reduce my tax load. If Warren Buffett wants to pay higher taxes, he can effectively pay them RIGHT HERE, RIGHT NOW, THIS VERY SECOND directly to the US Treasury.
What?? I shouldn’t have a tax attorney? Then the tax laws shouldn’t be so f’in damn insane in the first place. Let’s do everybody to a only-income with a no-exemptions escalation tax rate, at least that’s understandable. BTW: “When they started in the 1860s, the max rate was 10%. Only 10% of households paid income tax,” so 90% of them LEGALLY DID NOT HAVE TO PAY according to WP. The “Freeloaders” vs the “One Percenters” of the 1900s.
——
– as opposed to a going backward basis, I presume. Doctor Who must use that doing his taxes. Or being a foreigner and infrequent visitor to the UK, does HE not pay his own fair share of taxes? And what is the fair share for an alien? Or is UNIT too cheap to pay him in the first place?
Re: Re: Re: Still happy to see it happen.
See here, this is what I like. Everyone says, but that other guy probably does shady stuff with their taxes.
People that say this stuff make it clear that they are drinking someones cool-aid. Will any of us ever find the perfect candidate? No we won’t but we should never ever think that our guy is not corrupt in some fashion either.
Yea, trump is no cream puff, but bernie sanders is still pedaling the same old bait and switch of the left which is… Hello Americans, you are pissed off at the rich… vote for me so that I can tax them more giving the government MORE money but NOT YOU. I will still also build in tax loop holes into my laws so that the the ones I close for political appearances will be offset. You will love me for my backstabbing and you will love me for my tolerance. I made it clear that I had no spine when I apologized for saying “all lives matter” instead of “black lives matter”.
Sorry folks, Bernie is still a politician that is beholden to his party. The only reason I possibly have any consideration for Trump is the fact that he thumbs his nose at everyone and refuses to apologize.
I would like Trump more if he ran as independent, but lets be honest he is playing political games just like everyone else and I still see people buying the SAME FUCKING SHIT!
I see no fundamental change even if Trump gets into office, hope I am wrong, but nothing will change until “The People” change and understand what it means to be a member of “We The People” and supporting a constitution that is “For The People & By The People”.
This nation is still doomed until the party system has been thoroughly broken and exposed for the curses it sets upon the people. Political Parties are nothing more than a mechanism to lock down candidates that the people have voted into office, keeping them under yoke that they can not do as they please the way those like Ted Cruz has done.
The fact that the Party hate Donal and Ted are certain signs that these guys are the least corrupt in the field at this time… and that is saying something for a thoroughly corrupt party like the Republicans. Hillary and Bernie are still loved by their crowds and this is a terrible terrible thing.
Re: Re: Re:2 Still happy to see it happen.
The GOP machine may hate Cruz – but the man is literally in bed with Goldman Sachs.
Re: Re: Re:3 Still happy to see it happen.
My god, the things that bed must have seen.
Re: Re: Re:2 Still happy to see it happen.
So what you’re saying is we should root for people everyone hates. I see…
You make no sense.
Re: Still happy to see it happen.
Trump is “the least corrupt politician” only by technicality. He’s the one who’s BUYING THEM OFF and openly brags about it! Our political system is so corrupted that the plutocrats can run for office directly instead of buying off politicians by proxy.
Re: Still happy to see it happen.
You realize that this:
Lefts desire for a Tyrannical Communist state
leads to this:
desire for a Tyrannical Police State.
You cannot have the first without the later. Also, the Left desires a police state just as much as the right. Obama has certainly enjoyed using it.
Nineteen-seventeen
“Over There” sheet music:
Re: Nineteen-seventeen
That says Copyright Ball State University 2008.
Re: Re: Nineteen-seventeen
“That says Copyright Ball State University 2008”
The sheet music itself clearly states “Copyright MCMXVII”.
I think Ball State is trying to claim copyright over their “digitization” of the sheet music. Which is ridiculous, really. There is no creative component in simply scanning sheet music.
How could it be copyrighted?
Wait. How is this still under copyright? If it was owned by a corporation, the 95 years would have expired in 2012. Cohen died in 1942, so using Life + 70, it should also have expired in 2012 if he owned the copyright.
Someone please explain this to me.
Re: How could it be copyrighted?
Sony says they own it, so they own it. Pretty simple. You gotta problem with that?
Re: Re: How could it be copyrighted?
But can Sony prove they own the copyright. What they might is a copyright to a movie/TV/recording performance of the Over There. The is not a copyright of the song itself.
Also, I would like to see them enforce a claim against the original recording (1917/1918) by Nora Bayes who did in the mid 20’s.
Re: How could it be copyrighted?
The simplest explanation would be that we’re just being trolled.
Re: Re: How could it be copyrighted?
or it’s another WB happy birthday incident where they claim they own the copyright and intimidate threaten people into paying them off over it.
Re: How could it be copyrighted?
Is is possible that sony owns the copyright to the specific recording that was used? I believe that also has it’s own terms of copyright, separate from the copyright on the sheet music. (I don’t have the time to look it up right now though)
The act happened. The video happened. There’s videos of people pooping into each others mouths out there online. Just like they don’t deserve to be taken down due to erroneous copyright takedowns, so too should this video have been left alone and not taken down with an erroneous takedown.
Kids, creepy videos and politicians
A video of kids singing to politicians, meh. What’s new? Obama has had it happening for years. It is very likely that there are lots of videos where kids are singing songs to politicians in creepy ways all over the place.
Re: Kids, creepy videos and politicians
It isn’t about creepy kids sing to politicians, it’s about the fact it was taken down. Do try to keep up.
Re: Re: Kids, creepy videos and politicians
My comment was on this – you obviously cannot comprehend that. What happens afterwards is relatively irrelevant – just simple politics (“control the people or they will control us” mentality).
Do try to keep up little one.
This isn't hard
Tim, come on. Either you think the First Amendment is a thing, or you don’t. It doesn’t have an “I personally find this creepy” exception. Picking a side should be easy even if you find it distasteful.
Given that the video was already made, the mere fact that it is up on a site is not a problem. Censoring it, however, is a HUGE problem.
Re: This isn't hard
Totally agree with all your posts. You are well informed.
Sides are for losers
If you’re deciding whether to support publishing a video, you’re actually taking the choice away from everyone else. Who died and made you referee? Why should you get to choose for me what I get to watch? Damn right you shouldn’t.
Not liking a video is a stupid reason to think it shouldn’t exist. Don’t pick a side; support uncensored speech for all.
Frightening ...
From this side of the pond (Europe) things are looking bleak for we see things happening in the US of A which are countereffective for what the “Yankess”were famed for. Not only a candidate who would be more in place in one of our east-sided neighbours but also the absolute demise of the word “freedom”. And the speed at which things are happening is even more frigtening. The video you embedded is already taken down. That smells to censorship …
Re: Frightening ...
Just keep thinking “it can’t happen here” and you can see how bad things will get with that mindset ruling most people
The pain stops when you stop hitting your head against the wall
If you were ambulatory enough to get to your computer these past few weeks
Obviously then I was not.
Thanks Techdirt for brining this to my attention.
“Now, look, what the hell am I supposed to do here? “
Easy, support the Trump video. The concept of freedom of speech is not not valid if it supports all speech, not just the palatable stuff. The only way you know that your speech is truly protected is if the speech that you find odious or offensive is also protected. If somethings being censored, so could you be, so object to it even if you agree that instance should be hidden from view.
Here’s a not taken down copy of the song, tho I only listened to 15 seconds of it, it is really terrible but, Donald Trump should still win in the name of free speech.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vPRfP_TEQ-g
Am I the only one bothered by the fact the children look like whores?
Re: Re:
You haven’t seen kids’ beauty pageants yet. Don’t look if you value your sanity!
Up yours Sony, and up yours USG. As far as our household is concerned the song is pre-1970 and therefor in the public domain, 1959 and earlier for movies. You can buy our lawmakers, but you can’t buy us. We already have the largest prison population in the world, and good luck selling your Kool-Aid to the Iranians. Just for the record I feel the Bern, but if that can’t happen will back the Donald.
Over There
Courtesy of the Library of Congress:
(YouTube also has a video set to music from a 1917 recorded performance by Arthur Fields. Additionally, there appear to be other YouTube videos available via simple search.)
Autobots vs. Decepticons...
From the article, “Given the autobots haven’t gobbled up other versions of the recording,…” I always thought that autobots were the good guys, and the decepticons were the ones trying to make life miserable. LOL!
Re: Autobots vs. Decepticons...
You beat me to it.
I was wondering if someone would catch this. 🙂
So, yes, this smacks of Megatron’s gang’s dirty work. Let’s leave Optimus Prime out of it. 🙂
Copyright
Taking the video down conveniently prevents anyone from assessing whether anything in it really is copyrighted. Presumably, a video of someone singing the US National Anthem would be actionable if the supporting band’s performance was copyrighted… Copyright has become a destructive parasitic infection. As long as their lobbyists can buy politicians nothing is going to change.
Wow! OK.
Wow! OK. This is gonna haunt those kids well into their college years – if they even make ’em.
That was just brutal. Wars have been fought to keep kids like that from ever achieving anything, and to keep that rino Trump, and the rest of the inbred swine (cc 300 (2006)) from ever becoming President.
I wonder if those eyes glow in the dark… damn. Misschevess wee’uns.
Re: Wow! OK.
They’ll get a scholarship to Liberty University. /s
Regardless of what I think of Trump, is there an issue here that the only takedown targeted a news network with which Trump is currently having a spat? Although I suppose that would require EMI to back Trump, and I have no idea what their position (if any) is.
I don’t want that video to exist […]
Then you are a censorious hypocrite.
All you’re saying here is that the YouTube copyright bots took the video down for what you consider the “wrong” reasons, when, if you had your say, that video would be removed everywhere just because you think it shouldn’t exist.
And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? (Matthew 7:3)
The USA
“USA Freedom Kids”… “Freedom’s Call”… young dancing girls clad in Stars & Stripes…
What, no giant Uncle Sam on stilts? For shame, Trump.