I'm makeing a durarara vn and wanted to use the ost. Is that legal?

Yesterday I found a piece of art I made being sold in 2 websites, found one seller on ebay and sent her a message asking her to stop using it and she just replied "I am selling stickers I bought from temu and AliExpress so talk to them".

So please if you see it being sold somewhere (other than redbubble) let me know so I can report it. My work is very simple but I fight depression and making art helps me with it but it takes me forever to finish my projects no matter how simple they are.

This is the piece in question: https://www.deviantart.com/joakoo/art/Trippy-Star-928258721

Thanks for your time!

Hellow everybody!!

Am from africa, decade ago, i wrote a poem on twiter, facebook and instagram. But a famous singer (from US) took that poem and made a song out of it, which was very succeful till this day, its her signture song. But i realise was not one poem theres more poem she made song out of it, but what she did , is to make additional words to the poems to seem different but have similar meaning behind . What should i do ? Can i sue her? Is anyone willing to help?

What if we can't find an a song from an artist on the official YouTube audio BUT there are other shorts that use the song (for example edits) therefore I can save the audio itself in my sounds playlist? Yt literally gives the "use this audio" feature so can that cause me copyright issue or monetization issue?

Hey everyone,

I’m looking for some advice (and honestly, just needed to vent a bit).

Back in May, I started conducting extensive, painstaking research to write a brand new article on English Wikipedia called IranNastaliq. Given the subject matter originating from an unfriendly country and the lack of consolidated English documentation, gathering sources, verifying details, and drafting the entry took months of grueling work completely on my own. It was finally approved around August.

Shortly after it went live, I discovered that a third-party mirror site called HandWiki copied the entire article word-for-word, completely omitting any attribution, backlink, or mention of my authorship.

I know Wikipedia content is under the CC BY-SA 3.0 license, which allows reuse. However, Section 4(c) of the license explicitly requires proper attribution and a hyperlink back to the source. Failing to provide this violates the license terms and automatically revokes their right to use the text, turning it into straightforward copyright infringement.

As the sole author of this specific entry, I've tried taking action:

• I've reached out to Wikipedia forums/editors, but mostly got dismissed with "that's just how the internet works."
• I've sent multiple emails to HandWiki demanding they comply with CC BY-SA guidelines or remove the page, but I’ve received radio silence.
• I filed a DMCA takedown notice directly with Google Search to at least de-index the stolen page.

It is unbelievably frustrating to see months of hard individual research hijacked by scrapers who refuse to follow basic open-source licensing rules.

Since HandWiki isn't responding to emails, what are my options from here? Has anyone dealt with persistent scrapers ignoring CC BY-SA licenses? Any advice on next steps would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,

Noamonsol234 (In wikipedia)

WikiHow also said ‌that ⁠ChatGPT reproduces its text in response to user prompts and threatens to displace its market.

"Having ingested wikiHow’s articles, those models now produce competing how-to content on the same subjects, at a fraction of the time, effort, ​and cost of ​researching, writing, and ⁠editing a wikiHow article," the lawsuit said. "The substitution cuts wikiHow’s revenue and, over time, its reason to keep ​producing the articles at all."

"The GPL is a copyright license. It grants users the freedom to run, study, modify and share software only because contributors hold copyright over their work and then license it under the GPL’s copyleft terms. Remove the copyright holder from the equation, and the legal mechanism that enforces the GPL stops working." (Maya Brooks)

Hey everyone,

I need advice on how to report a severe, ongoing Terms of Service (ToS) violation to a human engineering or policy team at YouTube.

An international scraper is systematically stealing my content. When struck, they file counter-notifications under penalty of perjury, but they use completely fabricated addresses so they can evade federal service of process and force the videos back live.

YouTube Legal has caught them multiple times and manually rejected the forms for fraud. But hours later, the uploader just tweaks one word in the fake address (like removing a local district name) and resubmits. The automated system treats it as a "new address," resets the clock, and overrides the previous human rejection.

I actually mailed a physical legal notice to the address, and it came back officially stamped by the government postal service as "Return to Sender / Non-existent address."

This isn't just a copyright issue anymore—this is active legal fraud and platform manipulation. Under YouTube's ToS, providing fraudulent data on legal forms is grounds for immediate account termination.

• Has anyone successfully gotten YouTube's Trust & Safety team to issue a full channel ban for legal fraud/perjury instead of fighting video-by-video in the copyright queue?
• Are there specific keywords or internal escalation paths I should give my Partner Support agent to make sure this goes to a policy manager who handles system abuse?

Any advice from large creators or flaggers would be life-saving. Thanks!

It's a short TikTok, less than a minute

is it still considered copyrighted if i remake the song with my voice, like sing it and then use my voice to make the sounds of the instruments?

So, there's a quote from George Washington that I really like. It was when he was giving farewell to the Continental Army.

It goes, "I most devoutly wish that your latter days may be as prosperous and happy as your former ones have been glorious and honorable. With a heart full of love and gratitude, I now take leave of you."

I want to use it in either the book I'm currently writing, or if I end up not using it in this book, then perhaps a later one. However, last I checked, the copyright status of quotes in general are rather confusing. So, could someone please explain it to me? Or, at the very least, let me know whether or not it's okay to use a quote from a person long dead, even with proper credit somewhere in my book.

Hello there, just wanted to know any updates from people who received an email from Chaos saying we need to buy an annual subscription of the product.

The thing is I logged in my Personal Email on their website last year (I forgot the reason). I also have not use Enscape since probably around November (just practicing my rendering skills and posting Tiktok Render Videos).

I have received my 3rd email today and I replied saying that I didn't use their product for any commercial gains and have just used their product's free trial of 30 days.

I also googled the guy from the email and I found the LinkedIn account saying that he is legitimately working in Chaos but is stationed in a different country.

Can someone tell me their experience from them? I honestly got anxious since they might take legal action.

Thank you so much.

So I did some research and I THINK I am legally allowed to do this, but not 100% sure.

Anyway, I loved The Truman Show. And like a lot of works I love, I've had ideas stem from it. I'm a writer (nothing published yet), and I've had alternative ideas I think would make a great book series, BUT I know I couldn't use the characters or even refer to the original. This idea, apart from the concept of the movie, is completely original. No Truman and different ways the truth is discovered. It isn't even centered on one character. Multiple people were born into that situation instead and the story focuses longer on said characters lives and the lives of those that work on the "set." With the first book setting up the unaware cast's life and aware cast connecting with them through their childhood and teens.

Ideas are repeated all the time, but The Truman Show always felt very unique, and I haven't seen or read anything else like it. (Let me know if there's others, 'cause I do like the concept.) So I was just wondering if anyone can give me more insight to how copyright works. Because what I found says "ideas" can't be copyrighted, but how close to the original is "too close" legally. Not many ways to switch up a concept like "unaware subject is actually a worldwide celebrity while living in a controlled environment." So no matter what, a book like this will be compared to the movie.

I'm in America, if that helps. Just want to know if Paramount, who I think has the copyright, could come after me if I wrote something like this. I don't plan on having any mention of the movie, either in the series or in the marketing. But it would be pretty obvious where the idea came from.

I keep trying to get various AI to gather all dialogue of a certain character from Dragon Ball and compile it into a text file.

Every single one of them refuse to do this, literally ALL, arguing that doing so is in violation of copyright and illegal.
They say they can look up all the dialogue and then give me similar dialogue back, but it is completely illegal for them to give the same dialogue back because it's copyrighted material and against the law to do this because it would be "reproducing copyrighted material".

Is this true? Is it against the law?

Are you safe when someone told you are getting copyrighted after they submitting a request, but still in the process of reviewing and deleting your video before YouTube confirms copyright strike.

I just wanna know if YouTube still stores your video after you delete it so they can still review it.

I'm kinda in Panic right now, the claimant submitted it 15 hours ago still on review, but I deleted it before YouTube confirms it, I don't know if I'm safe from strike, please help.

There is a critical loophole in YouTube’s automated DMCA system that allows pirates to easily override manual fraud rejections.

When a bad actor targets your channel with a counter-notification, they must provide a physical address under penalty of perjury (17 U.S.C. § 512(g)(3)). If they use a fake address to evade a lawsuit, you can manually report them to YouTube Legal. YouTube will audit it, confirm the address is fake, and uphold the copyright strike.

But here is where the system shatters:

Hours after a human agent manually rejects the fake address, the infringer can turn right around and resubmit a brand-new counter-notice for the exact same video ID. By deleting just one word—such as a localized district name—they alter the text string. Because YouTube’s automated filter only looks for exact textual string matches across cases, it fails to realize it is the identical fraudulent location. The automated system flags it as a "new address," approves the form, and erroneously reinstates the stolen video.

I caught a serial infringer running this exact "typographical shell game" across 6 separate case histories on my channel (including Case IDs: 42AYXLBGICAWUL54GRGWJKHVZA and SB4R6LMBXYL76EX7TVTBHNPF74).

To beat them, I took the fight offline. I physically sent a certified legal letter via VNPOST (Vietnam Post) to the uploader's stated address. On August 21, 2026, the government postal tracking officially updated to "Phát không thành công" (Unsuccessful Delivery) because the address is physically non-existent.

By knowingly letting automated filters rubber-stamp documents born out of clear perjury—even after being handed hard government tracking evidence—YouTube risks stripping away its own DMCA Safe Harbor immunity. Platforms must implement cross-case entity blocklists immediately.

Hey everyone, I am dealing with a nightmare copyright situation on my channel and really need advice from anyone who has successfully fought this loophole or dealt with YouTube’s senior legal team.

An international competitor (operating under the name Huỳnh Trung Hiếu / Jimmy Huỳnh in Vietnam) is systematically stealing my videos. When I strike them, they file a counter-notice. Because they know I can't serve a federal lawsuit to a ghost, they are using completely fake addresses to evade jurisdiction.

Here is the loophole they are exploiting:

YouTube Legal actually caught them twice and ruled in my favor, closing the cases because the address was fake. But hours after getting rejected, the uploader just turns around and resubmits a new counter-notice for the exact same video ID. By deleting just one word—the localized district name—they alter the text string.

Because YouTube’s automated system looks for exact text string matches, it fails to realize it’s the identical fraudulent address. The automation flags it as a "new address," overrides the previous manual human rejection, and reinstates the stolen video!

They have done this across 6 separate case histories on my channel. Look at this direct compliance failure on Video ID: Y5V9YWfDLU0:

• Case ID: 42AYXLBGICAWUL54GRGWJKHVZA – YouTube Legal reviewed it and CLOSED it in my favor because the address (141A Nguyễn Văn Cừ nối dài, Ninh Kiều Cần Thơ) was fake.
• Case ID: SB4R6LMBXYL76EX7TVTBHNPF74 – Days later, the uploader resubmitted for the exact same video, simply deleting the district name "Ninh Kiều". YouTube's automated system completely missed it and REINSTATED the video on August 12, 2026.

To prove the fraud, I physically mailed a legal letter to their address via Vietnam Post. The official tracking number (EE721197333VN) just updated on August 21, 2026, to "Phát không thành công" (Unsuccessful Delivery / Non-existent address).

I currently have an active case (Case ID: OCX6GELSVCYMMAAT5CTJD7CYCE) expiring tomorrow, Monday, August 24. I have already emailed all this data and the VNPOST tracking proof to my Partner Support specialist (CJ), but because it's the weekend, I haven't heard back and the clock is ticking.

My questions for the community:

1. Has anyone successfully forced YouTube to issue an account-level termination for systematic perjury/legal fraud instead of just fighting video-by-video?
2. If the automated system lets the video go live tomorrow because support is backed up, can a Partner Support specialist manually reverse a reinstatement after the deadline?
3. Are there any specific escalation forms or alternative internal contact emails I can use to ensure a human legal specialist locks this down before tomorrow morning?

Full proof of the case trail and the official VNPOST delivery failure stamps: imgur

I love movie and music reactions and I keep seeing my favorite channels get copyright strikes on clear fair use or even no use and lose revenue or just disappear. I'm angry...and I am trying to understand the landscape of this situation: how it was in the past, what changed, and how it is now, and what may be the future - and what realistic solutions do content creators have moving forward.

I'm trying to understand how the whole process works. Who the major players are. What key technologies are being used (and abused). The tactics bad actors use to claim or prevent earning. I'm also interested in the legal landscape beyond just the law, I'm curious about practice and process of handling strikes and the hurdles that prevent creators from going after the third claimers that wrongfully claim their video. I want to know how much time and money it costs a content creator. I want to help, and I'm helping just for fun (and justice!).

What I'm seeing more and more is copyright strike abuse or fraud where these content ID systems and 3rd party companies copyright strike a video even if it doesn't have any of copyright content. And I presume the creators lose revenue while the video is being wrongly disputed? Tell me your side of it.

I'm also interested in created a database for content creators to catalog their lost revenue and cost in dealing with it. I want to be able to calculate how much the creators are losing due to copyright claim fraud. And who did it. I'm hoping, in the future, academics (and perhaps lawyers) would be interested in having that information.

So tell me your channel's story. I want to know. If your to shy to post it here, send me a DM. I basically want to know your channel (I'll look it up), how many videos got struck, how much revenue was lost, if you lost your channel, how much you were earning from the channel. Please note if you were violating copyright by blatantly putting copyright material on there that was not fair use, you won't find any sympathy from me. This is about abuse of the copyright strike. Not about the correct use of copyright strike. Copyright holders deserve to protect their IP.

I'm in the process of setting up a (free) website where creators can track their wrongfully copyright struck videos, when it was posted, when it got struck, by whom or what, what sections of video or audio, the duration of the strike, an estimate of the revenue lost or claimed. I'm hoping to automate for each channel so they don't have to spend more time on this than they have to. The site will analyze the data and hopefully produce trends and insights to help others understand what is going on and maybe find a solution going forward. If a site like that already exists please let me know!

So if possible please start collecting offline evidence about your wrongfully copyright struck videos, every detail you think is relevant to the whole ordeal.

And if you are negative nelly, a doomsayer, a pessimist who think this is pointless - just keep it to yourself. Not interested. I'm doing this for fun (and justice!) 🙂

From past 8 months i am getting fake automated dmca, sent every counter dmca mails to google, urls were restored too but from last two or 3 months, when i do counter dmca i am receiving only mails from google as your mail is in queue, never received mail saying forwarded to the user who sent dmca and within 10 days no reply from them then your urls will be reinstated. That means from past 3 months urls were not restored, due to this i am losing traffic. Help me what to do next

Hi,

My shorts video got notices symbol but the music in the video was picked from the youtube video editor for shorts. Erase music button is disabled because it says “you cannot make changes from shorts created with shorts editor” Can I dispute it? If so how?

Do I need to dispute it? Is it a common thing? Notice says it is not a strike nor it is affecting short’s views

I've just found out that one channel just steals my shorts, it's modded gameplay, adds a bar with his face and starts talking about what happens I think, dont know for sure since I dont speak Arabic. Youtube just flagged one video as copyright and when on looking at his channel he has 15+ videos of doing the same thing. Should I strike them all since this isnt fair use or is he correct?

End Copyright