Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • We need to see the actual document from the IAS where it is written - "The Operator's evidence shows no payment for the Appellant's vehicle, or anything similar. It does show two payments for the same registration in quick succession. I would take a reasonable guess, based on the circumstances described, that the person paying has paid for the registration of the person they assisted again." You can't just type it up yourself. At the hearing in July or August or whenever the judge will have two Witness Statements. One from Bank's director says you never made a second appeal. You say you did make a second appeal and the IAS concluded that payment was made. The judge will immediately twig that either you or the director is lying.  But who? Fail to show the documentation form the IAS and instead just produce something you've typed yourself will make it look like you just made up the appeal and you are lying and you will lose the case. Please let us see what the IAS adjudicator sent.
    • I used to have a retail outlet in London selling my husband's photography.  We also had a co-op with staff so they weren't directly employed by me, but I paid for the other overheads etc.  When my husband died, I carried on as usual for a while but then I became ill and moved quite far away so logistically was becoming very difficult.  I came to an arrangement (verbal) with one of the guys I trusted, that I would send him the images to print and sell as normal, and I wouldn't take any money, as a short term solution until I got back on my feet and worked out the best way to do things. He would pay all the  rent, insurance etc... Over a year later, not able to give things away for free anymore,  I drew up a contract as a wholesale agreement, so I would get everything printed and sent to him and I would invoice his for what he ordered. I noticed form the beginning that he wasn't ordering enough or frequently enough to be making any money, and was suspicious he was doing his own orders on the sly and ordering just enough from me to keep my happy.  I checked with my printer, which I've been with for 20 years, and he sad he wasn't getting orders for my images from anyone else. I emailed a few other printers to ask them to keep a look out for some images but I soon realised this would be impossible to police.  The only option really would be to buy a print from him and check the stamp on the back of it.  I finally managed to get hold of on the prints on sale, and sure enough, he did not order it through me.   In the contract he signed in 2022 it explicitly states that he must destroy all files I had previously sent him etc etc so e is in breach of that.  When I drew up the contract, I was careful to make sure it was legally binding, but before I let rip at him, I need to know where I stand.  The contract is here: PARTIES This WHOLESALE AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is made effective as of 30th June, 2022, by and between ############################## The Supplier and the Client, collectively referred to as the "Parties," hereby agree to the following terms: TERMS AND CONDITIONS SALES OF GOODS The Supplier agrees to provide the following goods to the Client (“Goods”): Description of Goods ################################# Doc ID: 3d54c1d336d8780243801e0e068ebd33114b088b BOTH PARTIES AGREE: The Client purchases the Goods through the Supplier directly, and agrees to delete/destroy any previously held digital images (Goods) owned by the Supplier, and agrees not to use any such files for monetary gain, outside of this agreement, either directly or through a third party from immediate effect of this agreement. The Client purchases the other materials necessary for resale of the Goods independently of this agreement. The Client shall have exclusive rights for resale of Goods at ###########, and also with permission, as a retailer of the Goods elsewhere, provided that there is no conflict of interest between the Supplier and the Client. The Client is free to decide their own retail prices, for the Goods. The Supplier shall use #####  to provide the printed Goods on Fujifilm Crystal Archive paper, with Lustre finish, and will not use any other Printer unless #### cease to trade, without prior approval from the Client. The Supplier shall not impose restrictions on size or frequency of orders made by the Client. The prices provided by the Supplier shall not increase for a minimum of 3 years, unless the prices of the raw materials rise, in which case the client will be informed immediately. Any discounts/promotional prices of raw materials shall be passed on to the Client by the Supplier, and the invoice will show adjustments for this, as well as credit for return postage of any damaged goods. This agreement can be terminated by the Client without notice; the Supplier must give notice of no less than 90 days, unless the terms of the agreement are breached, in which case, the agreement can be terminated with immediate effect. PAYMENT Orders must be paid for upon receipt of invoice, via Bank transfer: ######### Doc ID: 3d54c1d336d8780243801e0e068ebd33114b088b DELIVERY AND INSPECTIONS All orders received by 12.00am (midnight) shall be processed by the Supplier the following working day and delivery of order shall arrive in accordance with the Royal Mail schedule, or DPD, should express delivery be requested. The Client shall be liable for the delivery charge which shall be added to the invoice. The Goods will be delivered to the address specified by the Client. The Client shall be provided with order tracking, and should any problems arise with the ordering system or the couriers (Royal Mail, DPD), the Client shall be informed without delay of any such issues. The Client will inspect the Goods and report any defects or damage to the Goods in transit as soon as possible upon receipt of Goods, and will retain damaged Goods for return to Supplier for refund/replacement. GENERAL PROVISIONS CONFIDENTIALITY The prices of the Goods and other information contained in this Agreement is confidential and will not be disclosed by either party unless with prior written consent of the other party. INDEMNIFICATION The Client indemnifies the Supplier from any claims, liabilities, and expenses made by any third party vendors or customers of the Client. GOVERNING LAW This Agreement will be governed by and construed in accordance with UK Law. ACCEPTANCE Both parties understand and accept the wholesale arrangement stipulated under this Agreement. Doc ID: 3d54c1d336d8780243801e0e068ebd33114b088b IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the Parties has executed this Wholesale Agreement as of the day and year set forth above.   Signed by us both electronically.   I haven't broached any of this yet, and I am looking for some advice about what action to take.  The main issue I've got is that he has still go those images.  If I terminate the contract, I will need to know that he no longer has those images and I can't think of a bulletproof way to do this. I'm thinking I might tell him I will continue with the contract but ask for a  sum in damages and say that if I find out he's still doing it down the line I will terminate the contract and sue him for damages. The damages side of things I'm not sure how it would work as he is self employed, and I'm positive he doesn't declare all of his earnings to HMRC, in order to find out how much I have lost, would the court demand to go through his tax self assessments?  I'm not sure how to proceed with this, I don't want to lose that place as an outlet as it is in a prime spot in London, which is why I let him have those images in the first place as I would have had to pull out altogether at that point.  I am regretting it somewhat now though.  Please help.
    • I cannot locate anything in my paper work that states 2 payments were made? Perhaps you could point this out? In reply from IAS it states "The ticketing data has been attached" nothing was sent to me. I made a response to the IAS all this was done online
    • Thanks again for your responses. The concern I have here, is that freeholder of the land (a company, who presumably would have been the ones to have initially instructed PPM to manage the parking here), will have proof of exactly how long the vehicle was on site for, as the driver was meeting operatives from that company on a separate matter. On this basis, if the matter was to get to court, I feel all the other technicalities about signage, size of signage/font, lack of start/finish times, will not be enough to have any case dropped? This PCN was brought up to the freeholder but they have advised that PPM will not waive this charge. 
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Copyright Infringement on Ridley Scott's "Raised By Wolves" TV Programme


erikborgo
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1367 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Why don't you complain to YouTube, if your original music added to YouTube, has been used elsewhere ?

 

Of course you have no proof, any music added to Youtube was the source of any music being used elsewhere.

 

I think this is going nowhere, because you are likely to be ignored and don't have the resources to take this forward as a legal challenge. You could end up spending more, than the value of any music.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

My first two ranty emails were the only ones that reception@ and Ridley received.  The polite email I sent to Ridley Scott's personal email address has been bounced back to me - that latest email hasn't been received.  I had sent that email after someone manually disconnected their website from it's hosting server.  The Administrator of the domain name scottfree.co.uk is the only person able to change the web forwarding settings.  It was done manually.

 

Ridley may have panicked after receiving an email from a complete stranger, at his personal email address and may have feared that his website had been hacked, but all I did was guess his mail address correctly.  People tend to follow a pattern when choosing how to create their @email moniker, and that pattern can be guessed at by looking at the other email addresses at any given domain name. 

 

I'm a little worried about my use of the word "foot shot" in my second received raty email.  I was trying to use the "shoot yourself in the foot" phrase in relation to the dangers of using muisicians of "low character".  This was merely an abbreviation, I wasn't suggesting violence of any kind.  If I send my letter by post, they'll have my address.

 

There is clearly a problem if gigantic media concerns can simply steal from musical minnows posting their original music on Youtube.  They used my music to fill 32 seconds.  This matter may indeed go absolutely nowhere or quickly become unaffordable, but I must try. 

Edited by erikborgo
Link to post
Share on other sites

> Why don't you complain to YouTube

 

Youtube immediately takes material down if it's been used illegally elsewhere on Youtube.  I'm not sure what Youtube would be willing to do beyond Youtube regarding copyright infringements, they don't have the copyright.  Any legal action seems to be horrendously expensive.  But I will ask, if I can find a human to communicate with.

Edited by erikborgo
Link to post
Share on other sites

But I understand that only the source material has been taken from YouTube. The infringing copy has not been placed on YouTube. If that's right then there is no point in talking to YouTube

Link to post
Share on other sites

My original intention with my music composition hobby was to create a "One Hit Wonder".  It can't be that hard, can it?  Pop music creators all use the same basic set of chords and the biggest hits use a only very small handful.  For six months in 2008, I tried very hard, and I thought I had succeeded when the "First Post" newspaper featured one of my tunes on it's website.  The viewcount went crazy.

 

Not knowing where the sudden increase in views was coming from and suspecting some sort of nefarious activity, I disabled the embedding of my music - this led to the complete stop of views.  In 20/20 retrospect, I should have let it roll.

 

Advertisers spend massive sums of money on seemingly inconsequential little jingles.  A small series of attractive notes can be vaulable:  I have no idea what Brian Eno was paid for the Windows 95 "Startup" noise.  Therefore, after awhile I stopped posting my good material on Youtube, planning to do so only after registering at PRS.  It's a bit late now.  Quite honestly, I never expected anyone to steal the music I have posted.

 

If I had joined PRS, I could have attempted the ceasing of Royalty payouts to those musicians from PRS by opening a copyright dispute.

Link to post
Share on other sites

> The infringing copy has not been placed on YouTube. If that's right then there is no point in talking to YouTube

 

Youtube is positioning itself as a paid-for streaming service like Netflix and Amazon.  Perhaps it's simply a matter of time before "Raised By Wolves" appears, I could try to stop Episode 5 streaming then.

Link to post
Share on other sites

> Of course you have no proof, any music added to Youtube was the source of any music being used elsewhere.

 

They have greatly increased it's length from about 4 seconds to about 32 seconds, plus added obscuring (and beautifully applied) reverb and effects.  This makes make digital fingerprinting impossible.

Link to post
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, erikborgo said:

> Of course you have no proof, any music added to Youtube was the source of any music being used elsewhere.

 

They have greatly increased it's length from about 4 seconds to about 32 seconds, plus added obscuring (and beautifully applied) reverb and effects.  This makes make digital fingerprinting impossible.

 

I'm no musician, so what does that mean?  Is it going to make it more difficult for you to establish that someone must, on the balance of probabilities (ie more likely than not), have copied your composition?  Your composition in this case being a unique (I presume) sequence of ten notes played over a period of four seconds.

 

Can you definitely establish that you had distributed your composition to third parties prior to your posting of it on Youtube in June 2020?  Can you show how those third parties would have made your composition available to the "Raised by Wolves" composers to allow them to copy your work?  (Remember:  it isn't necessarily enough to show that the two peices of music are the same, my understanding is that you need to show that they actually copied your work, which means somebody must have made it available to them to copy.  Unless you can show how they would have heard it before writing the "Raised by Wolves" sequence, I think you'll find it difficult to prove any breach of copyright).

 

I think you really need legal advice on this.  I think that if you try to go it alone you will, as uncle bulgaria suggests, simply be ignored.  I suspect that film and TV producers are used to dealing with (and ignoring) intellectual property claims, and I'm afraid your earlier attempts at communication may lead to you not being taken seriously (or being taken seriously in the wrong way).

Link to post
Share on other sites

> I'm no musician, so what does that mean

 

I mean that I'm not a trained musician and I have no musical qualifications.  After taking one guitar lesson as a teenager, I'm self taught.

 

> a unique (I presume) sequence of ten notes played over a period of four seconds.

 

It's a unique ten note sequence.  Aside from that, they've used a drect recording (digital copy/sample) - it's the same instrument, ie the unique instrument sound I created.  You can daisy-chain many instruments together in DAW software with different settings within each instrument or effect, to produce something unique.  It's best to create something unique to prevent copyright problems down the line.


> Can you definitely establish that you had distributed your composition to third parties prior to your posting of it on Youtube in June 2020?  Can you show how those third parties would have made your composition available to the "Raised by Wolves" composers to allow them to copy your work?  (Remember:  it isn't necessarily enough to show that the two peices of music are the same, my understanding is that you need to show that they actually copied your work, which means somebody must have made it available to them to copy.  Unless you can show how they would have heard it before writing the "Raised by Wolves" sequence, I think you'll find it difficult to prove any breach of copyright). Can you definitely establish that you had distributed your composition to third parties prior to your posting of it on Youtube in June 2020?  Can you show how those third parties would have made your composition available to the "Raised by Wolves" composers to allow them to copy your work?  (Remember:  it isn't necessarily enough to show that the two peices of music are the same, my understanding is that you need to show that they actually copied your work, which means somebody must have made it available to them to copy.  Unless you can show how they would have heard it before writing the "Raised by Wolves" sequence, I think you'll find it difficult to prove any breach of copyright).

 

Other than proof of the emails being sent, I can't prove anything.  Once it's been sent, it can end up anywhere.  At least one of the people I sent it to knows a Film Composer (his brother in law).  Another is a producer and publisher of electronic music, who has extensive contacts in the music industry and knows people who compose sountracks.

 

I have no idea when their soundtrack was produced.  With online streaming moving at such a fast development pace, Directors these days tend to be compelled to make last minute editing decisions.  It could be that they used my music as a filler and didn't have time to compose anything themseves and left it in.

 

Ridley Scott is well known for being thrifty - nearly all of his productions have been completed under-budget, this is very rare in the film industry.  I doubt if I will see any action without legal pressure. 

 

> I think you really need legal advice on this.  I think that if you try to go it alone you will, as uncle bulgaria suggests, simply be ignored.

 

This is the conclusion I am coming to, but they will likely respond to a letter from a Law firm.  There seem to be a lot of No-Win-No-Fee Lawyers for Copyright issues advertised widely.  Should I leave it until it has been distributed more widely to increase their exposure or strike now? 

 

Edited by erikborgo
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll try and find a way to view all the different streaming versions.  If they remove my music in Episode 5 in any of the versions, that would be a possible admission of a copyright breach.

 

Can I use the Small Claims Court? The limit is £10,000.

Edited by erikborgo
Link to post
Share on other sites

> a unique (I presume) sequence of ten notes played over a period of four seconds.

 

One of the benefits of using Youtube is their use of algorithms designed to detect breaches of copyright.  A sequence of notes within published music similar to the ones I uploaded is automatically regarded as being legitimate and mine would be automatically deleted.  It happens quite often. 

 

A friend of mine tried to upload his documentary to Youtube about the many similarities between a popular spy novel and a recent TV spy drama, by using extracts from two TV dramatisations.  It was immediately flagged as in breach of copyright automatically, and deleted.  The music gave it away.

 

There are ways to beat the algorithm: Reverb and time stretching works, as in this case.  Lots of music is distributed illegally on Youtube at half speed by using this method - to be downloaded and speeded up later.  Until a publisher flags it up manually.

Edited by erikborgo
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Under Part 27 of the Civil Procedure Rules that govern civil disputes:

 

https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part27

 

The court will rarely make an order for the losing party to pay sums in respect of the winning party's 'costs, fees and expenses', e.g. legal fees.

 

There are exceptions which allow the court discretion to make an award for the fixed costs attributable to issuing the claim, court fees paid by the issuing party, travel and accommodation expenses which a witness reasonably incurs in attending a hearing, fees incurred in the instruction of an expert to attend the hearing  - limited to £200.

 

Therefore my costs (if I lose)  will be limited to about £800, at Small Claims Court.  Should I open a case in Small Claims Court?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would love to upload a copy of their version and mine but to do so would breach their (invalid) copyright.  I have a recording with a version of theirs which I have sped up, followed by mine which I have slowed down and they have exactly 11 notes (missed one earlier) - exactly the same notes that are in mine, and in the same order!  One note is doubled in exactly the same place.  This is deeply irritating.  I must have satisfaction.  Just a credit would do.

Edited by erikborgo
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's absolutely insane that they deleted their website hosting - doing so has the effect of deleting their received emails, because their mail server is deleted too. 

 

The mail server is part of any hosting package - I sell hosting packages myself and know that when you receive a bounced email after the hosting has been removed, it's because the mail server was operating within that hosting package (it can be separate, it wasn't in this case) and has been deleted.

 

I also know that web forwarding has to be set manually.  They have done this on purpose, straight after receiving my ranty email threatening legal action.  But it could of course be a coincidence.  Why didn't they just change their email addresses?

Edited by erikborgo
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 12/09/2020 at 09:06, erikborgo said:

I tend to label - as in this case - my noises as trailers for upcoming movies such as "The Matrix 4 Trailer Final" or "James Bond - No time To Die" or similar, to get more views. 

 

Have you ever considered that perhaps you should not be doing this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, erikborgo said:

> I'm no musician, so what does that mean

 

I mean that I'm not a trained musician and I have no musical qualifications.  After taking one guitar lesson as a teenager, I'm self taught.

 

 

 

??? 

 

Maybe you misunderstand the quoting function on these boards?  I was not asking you what the phrase "I'm no musician" (I was referring to myself by the way, not you) means, I was asking you what this in your post #57 means:

 

 

8 hours ago, erikborgo said:

 

They have greatly increased it's length from about 4 seconds to about 32 seconds, plus added obscuring (and beautifully applied) reverb and effects.  This makes make digital fingerprinting impossible.

 

 

Does it make it more difficult to prove copying?

 

(Are you being serious with this thread or is it tongue in cheek?)

Link to post
Share on other sites

> Does it make it more difficult to prove copying?

 

Why do you keep asking if I'm serious?  I do wish it was legal to post both their recording and mine played at roughly the same speed, so that you could hear it.  I don't want to be accused of copyright infringement myself, which is why I haven't done so. 

 

I don't know what state of the art forensic music copy detection technology can do, but here's what I believe they did to cover their tracks and re-engineer my musical piece:

 

1.  They slowed down my sample to fit a longer time period.

 

2.  They then chopped up their recording of my 12 notes and rearragned them to fit 32 seconds they needed to fill.

 

3.  They added reverb.  (This had the effect of blending two very short notes of my 12, which are played very close together, hence 11 notes)

 

4.  They then played my slowed down music and changed the timing of the notes.

 

5. They then played my slowed down music through a guitar cabinet and re-recorded it using a microphone into a computer.  You can hear the untidy noisy sound of the guitar cabinet in the episode fade in shortly before the first note of my music plays.  It's a very hissy sound (and very odd to hear in an otherwise well funded and squeaky clean audio presentation) , because guitar cabinets are analogue devices and music producers tend to use very old models to add atmosphere to recordings.

 

This process also makes detection of copying harder because guitar cabinets are not high quality audio reproduction devices, especially the old, unusual and badly built classics from the 60s and 70s which producers like to use.  They add character to guitar, which is what they were designed to do. 

 

This technique is often used to create the "Wall of sound" effect used by Phil Spektor, and many other producers since, by playing music through guitar cabinets in large rooms with hard walls and floors (a "Live Room") which add reverb (echo) to mix back into the original recording.  I know that this process sounds overly laborious, but it's just one of the sonic activities producers get up to.

 

6. They added more layers of digital effects to some layers (expensive pre-echo and impulse shaping of reverb to rebuild the attack of my notes - they had to do this because they had stretched it so much, which reduces the attack) to produce a smooth sonic experience, but they used the same samples of my music to make those layers, to make sure that they are the same pitch.

 

My 32 seconds of stretched out music has been streamed many millions of times.  Apparently, in North America, an artist is paid $0.091 per play in streaming format.  32 seconds is a big chunk of an hour long soundtrack.  Therefore could I ask the Small Claims Court to award me £10,000 for the first million views from the UK?   The maximum award at Small Claims Court is £10,000.  If that works, could I keep going back for the next million etc?

 

 

Edited by erikborgo
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Manxman in exile said:

 

Have you ever considered that perhaps you should not be doing this?

Youtube would take it down if it was a problem.  I believe it's entirely legal to call my music anything I like, so long as it isn't actually a forgery of "The Matrix 4 Trailer". 

 

Despite the very extensive and expensive number they ran on my music, I recognised it from the very first note.  I know my sound.  The next 31 seconds saw me becoming more and more incredulous as more and more of the notes of my music played out at me.  I couldn't breate by the time the final note played, they had obscured it most with layers of synth, but it was the pitch of my final note. I couldn't enjoy the rest of that episode.

Edited by erikborgo
Link to post
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, honeybee13 said:

Hi.

 

To answer your questions about emailing people, please wait for BF to see your latest findings before you rush into anything. :)

 

HB

 

 

I have no intention of doing anything at all until I have some guidance from the esteemed members of this website.

Link to post
Share on other sites

HBO Max alone have at least 36.3 Million Subscribers:

 

https://variety.com/2020/digital/news/hbo-max-subscribers-subscribers-q2-att-1234714316/

 

"Raised By Wolves" is a hit programme.  My music has been played millions of times.  I have no idea where I can get accurate streaming statistics for "Raised By Wolves".

Edited by erikborgo
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

"Raised By Wolves" is being streamed by Youtube TV!  Maybe I could lodge a complaint with Youtube after all.  On the other hand, Youtube TV might be a wholly different commercial entity.  It's also being streamed on AT&T, Charter, Verizon, Cox Communications, Comcast, Apple and Hulu:

 

https://www.androidcentral.com/how-watch-raised-wolves

 

It's likely been viewed many tens of millions of times.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

@erikborgo
 I am beginning to think that you may believe that you have struck gold ? Look at the  number and length of your posts. Gold fever ?

 

Are you going to gamble your house on this ?

 

It seems to me that you would could only claim a small part of any fee the music producers obtained, as you say they had significantly improved/altered the music track. The music producers may have only received a few hundred pounds for that small part of an overall soundtrack. And they are probably not paid any royalties, unless it is the main title theme music.

 

Why not ask Rick Beato a well known YouTube music genius to listen to both your track and the one on the programme ?

 

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...