The Spiritual Copyright Conspiracy

Me: You seem misled to what is happening. If YouTube is flagging you for copyright, they are doing so because YouTube is complying with copyright law. It's issued when something with the video (a logo, a photo, a song, etc) and the owner of the material has proven to YouTube that they own the content. I don't think you need to blame other people that are doing their job and standing up against for having their work used by other people. What did you do to get the strike?

Me: having worked in the music industry and copyright is very painful! Where, if someone uses the same sample from a sample website, and someone registers it for content-identification, they have to say "Hey, no" but the music side of things is.. it uses algorithms. What's happened, is not what you claim has happened. The person who lodged the copyright has had to research and verify that the copyright is true and legitimate, they have had to provide the evidence to YouTube, otherwise YouTube won't process it. Someone has been taken to court by YouTube for falsely making copyright claims. YouTube helps creators!

Now, there is no such thing as "Creative Commons" in the Spiritual Community. That's saying, I'm elite, I will do what I want and I'm going to abuse you because I'm saying that I can which is ego. Spiritual Literature is protected by ordinary copyright laws. Ancient texts like The Bible, Koran, Torah etc isn't as they're in the public domain but spiritual texts are protected by copyright laws. In fact, one religious organisation took another religious organisation to court for copyright and won. I did some research as "Creative Commons in the Spiritual Community" seemed a bit strange. Here you are, being struck for copyright and what I found is this (and it's on Wikipedia... Copyright on religious works).

Religions often claim that their works were created by God, higher powers, or divine beings. Works created by such beings are not eligible for copyright and churches can't claim copyrights on their behalf. However, courts have upheld such copyrights under the argument that humans put enough creative work into compiling these divine statements to own a copyright ~ Wikipedia

Therefore... your creative commons licenses for spiritual community do not exist. So, if I've understood, coming from the music industry background. An author, who legally owns the content that you have published, has not authorised the use of their actual content and is within their rights to say, "I did not allow this". When I look at your videos, I see that advertising shows up, which means that you have a commercial/business arrangement with YouTube and you receive money for the payments. This changes everything for you, you become a business and you must declare that you legally own all the content in your video, including the literature that is being spoken.

There are also two diverse types of copyright licensing, and this is where it can get very confusing for curators, like yourself as to what is what. You're correct is that there is Creative Commons and there are six types of these licenses under Creative Commons. Some others state that you're not allowed to alter the original content and you must use attribution and you are not allowed to use it commercially. Some authors say, "attribution only" and believe that if they have the following, they are being paid for advertising if they make money and are grateful, and then if the author chooses not to release their content under Creative Commons license. They then still come under the copyright, and you can't use their content. The author needs to specify... If they say "all rights reserved" you can't use it!

From the words I've seen or the way I've read them, you've gotten confused with these diverse types of licenses, and it can be very confusing! Creative Commons, Attribution, Royalty Free, Copyright... THERE'S SO MANYYY!!!

Therefore, It sounds like you have gotten confused, believe there's something elite rights that you can strip a content creator of their rights because spirituality says so. You are responsible for understanding all these diverse types of rules as a curator and the misunderstanding, the confusion is what has gotten you in trouble. You signed the agreement. When I was a DJ, I had recordings muted by music record labels and I thought I was in the right, I thought I was promoting the artist, but I was wrong. I had my channel deleted too... I kept getting strikes because I didn't have the musician's approval to use their music. I thought if I bought it from the store, it was ok. Well, nope.... Same on SoundCloud. I had this great DJ set recording from a venue, and they deleted it because the artist said I didn't have the rights to use their song for my own promotion.

There's no negative entity, there's no elite... we stole someone's work and got caught out. It happens all the time... mistakes happen and that's why places like pixabay for royalty free images are a godsend. Because even the artist can strike a video down if you've used their picture in the video and they said no. I had their names against, it song titles, links to buy their music but that wasn't acceptable because I never got a contract.

Actually, a friend of mine had a license from an artist like Beyonce to use her vocals, because he had a license, he won a copyright strike. Without that contract or agreement for the artist/author then there is nothing you can do. The other day, I tried sharing a video on instagram and I couldn't post it because the video was detected as someone's else content. They're getting good at detection... to detect a video!!!! I couldn't share it. I also found that no matter which platform I posted it on, I continuously got in trouble for copyright. My beliefs were in the wrong... I was being ignorant. I learned my lesson, the hard way.

Respect people, help them and they will help you. Be careful when it comes to copyright because if you seriously think that because something is spiritual, it is free to use, and the author has reserved the rights to keep their copyright, which they can and you continue to post their content, ignoring their divine rights, you are taking their free will away from them, you are taking their light away from them, you are stripping them from the opportunity to get paid for their content, you are stealing their sovereignty and demanding that they must allow you to do this because you said so. In that very single moment, you do to them what you are saying has happened to you and that... that's not fair on the author to be forced to comply to your beliefs. That's control, that's power and that's not an enlightened thing to do. You have become the elite to them, you become the negative entity to them in that very single moment. If it is possible, if you can do it, I'd write to the author and apologise deeply, telling them that you didn't know, this copyright business is confusing and really be honest, sincere and accept the responsibility. My guess, the light is teaching you a very tough lesson like I did when I was arrested for drink driving, I had to change my patterns.

Therefore, I hope, I really really really hope that you understand and appreciate the hour that I've gone into trying to assist by explaining my own circumstances, to highlight what I've learned.

Me: There's a lot of crazy crazy stuff. A news station was suppressed for interviewing doctors and debating about vaccinations... the CDC in the US shut them down. Although, you've not understood that what I'm saying... this is the abuse of people's intellectual property, bullying and you're promoting to your followers that this is acceptable, that they can steal your content, they can take anything you produce and publish it, that you have no rights to freedom or creative express and you're promoting it. You've clearly taken content from somewhere that should not have been distributed freely... You might be doing what everyone else is doing but they're probably corrupted by ego. If you're promoting 5D, why follow them, where's the integrity, discernment, ethics, morals?

Me: From the research I've done on strikes, to understand why it happens. The main reason is generally because there's been content taken from a third-party and she's commercially published it without a contract. As a commercial content curator, they are contractually obligated not to engage in copyright, and someone's hired a legal person to deal with it.