Ok…so I write to YouTube because someone posted an old film of mine without permission. And after jumping through hoops of fire to get my content taken down (content with was uploaded without a single hoop), what do they post on the old link page? This:
“This video is no longer available due to a copyright claim by Gorman Bechard. Sorry about that.”
REALLY?
“Sorry about that!!!!”
Shouldn’t it be more along the lines of: “The person who posted this was a thieving asshole who had no right to post it in the first place. His account has been canceled.”
I mean, seriously, who’s side is YouTube on? The illegal poster’s? Or the person getting raped by their service by people who can post whatever they want?
YouTube needs to get a grip on reality, grow a pair of balls, and stand up for the people getting ripped off, instead of kissing the asses of the illegal posters.
Either that or one of these fucking pirates needs to have their head beaten in with a baseball bat, just as we would if we caught them breaking into our home. No difference.
Except pirates are enabled by YouTube and their like.
It’s bullshit.
Guy With Typewriter 
Gorman, I understand why you are angry and you have every right to be. I’m a firm believer that artists/creators deserve to be remunerated and compensated adequately for their work. If something is worthwhile to you then it should be worth paying for.
As an artist and creator of original material, I’d really appreciate your opinion on a different angle to this issue. What’s your take on situations where films are out of print and despite great demand, the film studio has no plans to make them commercially available and in response, fans produce bootlegs?
I know of fans who’ve gone to the lengths of buying cinema prints of hard to find films and producing and sharing their own Telecine transfers. Would they come under the category of thieves as well?
I have stacks of cult-films and director’s cuts on Laserdisc that will never receive a re-release on newer formats. If they were to end up being shared online so that fellow fans (and potentially new ones) could enjoy them (and perhaps give clueless studios a wake-up call), would that also constitute piracy?
Andrew, I can answer that one for myself. My first film “Disconnected” is long out of print. Not that long ago someone posted it on YouTube, and I had it taken down. I’ve had numerous companies come to me about releasing it on DVD, and I have refused. I personally want it to stay out of print. I understand there are fans that want to see it. But I don’t want it seen.
Hell, I’ve had people hold screenings of Disconnected or Psychos in Love without asking. When I confront them, they say they couldn’t find me. Really? They obviously never tried, because a quick google search brings you immediately to my website where there is a working “contact me” link.
As for old studio films, I’m sure it’s more about the bottom line, but I’m seeing everything slowly being released. And if there’s really a demand, it would be released.
I do have issue with films not in public domain being put online without the creator’s permission.
If you were to say film XYZ from Studio ABC is not available, and yet someone with a print contacted the director who’s still alive and asked their permission and the director said yes, then, sure…
Or if the studio is long out of business and most everyone involved is dead, then sure…
But to put online something you don’t own without ever trying to get permission just sits badly with me.
Hope that explains my side…