Tim Ellis wrote:
It would appear that you think, if a rip-off clip remains on YouTube, it's because the person being ripped off doesn't care.
Tim Ellis is correct.
They may in fact care a great deal. (I'm fairly certain that Chris Hart and Tina Lenert are not happy with their concepts being ripped-off) .
The problem is that YouTube/Google is seemingly arbitrary about what they will and will not remove upon request.
Sometimes they will go all reactionary at the least hint of legal action and they'll yank a video , even if it is not technically breaking any laws, just to avoid any potential problems . Other times YouTube will ignore repeated pleas to remove a video that contains stolen material or offensive material .
A non-magic example : there are several cartoons in the Popeye series, some of the Looney Tunes , and even the odd Mickey Mouse cartoon that have accidently lapsed into Public Domain. And yet YouTube has repeatedly bowed to pressure from Viacom, Warner Bros., and Disney to yank these Public Domain cartoons from YouTube, even though it is easy to look it up and see that the cartoons in question have a lapsed copyright.
But you see YouTube is reactionary and jumps fast if a big corp. like Disney or Viacom complains , so they'll yank a video and even cancel a user's account if one of the big boys gets their nose out of joint.
Maybe what Chris Hart or Tina Lenert needs to do in the case of the videos that are rip-offs of their acts is to have a letter drafted by an attorney , as opposed to just complaining about it as an individual .
YouTube is inscrutable and very difficult to read or predict how they will react to a request to remove a video.
The other problem is that sometimes requests to remove a video have backfired on those asking for it to be removed if the person who posted the video fights back and if it turns out that the video in question was not technically illegal then it can hurt the person who requested the removal. It can get to be a very dicey situation unless you are very sure that you can make the accusation of theft stick. (theft in the legal sense, not the ethical sense. Ethically there is no question in my mind that Chris Hart's act was ripped off and ethically it's wrong. Unfortunately it's not always against the law to be unethical. The solution here is not necessarily to censor , as in asking the video to be banned from YouTube, but rather censure
on the part of the magic community and especially the clubs and organizations who book acts for convention shows. If someone is known to be a rip-off artist then they shouldn't be invited to perform at magic conventions or club meetings etc. Let them feel the disapproval of the magic community, both fans and performers. Maybe the rip-off artist doesn't care , but it's better than just standing by silently ... )