Thursday, May 24th, 2012

An Open Letter to Jay Leno About Stealing My Video and Then Getting It Removed From YouTube

Dear Jay Leno,

First off, my intention is not to fight you on this. You have more cars than I have dollars, and so I know I don’t stand a chance legally, and on top of that, I don’t really understand how legal stuff works. But the truth is you kind of fucked up my shit and I need to talk to you about it.

In 2007 my good friend Travis Irvine was running for mayor of his home town, Bexley, Ohio. He asked for help making him a funny campaign commercial. So together, me and my pal Travis composed, performed and recorded an original campaign jingle onto my four track (we did, not you). Then, I directed and shot a silly music video for that song featuring Travis strolling about his town, looking patriotic, friendly and mayoral. Remember that video?

I think you might, because in 2009 Travis called me about it. He was in a frenzy and needed to know if I’d seen your show that night, which of course I had not. You see, Travis had received a call from a high school friend who claimed to have seen Travis on The Jay Leno Show. So the next day, we both watched your show on the internet, and sure enough our video was in a piece at the end. I remember it was at the end because I had to watch the whole show to find it and boy that is a long show, it felt like I was watching forever. How long was your show, like three hours? During the bit you played five stupid local campaign commercials and one of those commercials was the video I was telling you about earlier. After you played our video on national television, you said something like, “I love that song!” as the audience cheered in approval. So thank you for that. It was nice of you.

Anyway, it was a good laugh for Travis and I, but we forgot all about it a few weeks later. End of story, right? Apparently not, Mr. Leno.

I’ll have you know that I was searching for our said video on YouTube, and it turns out that the video has been blocked. Blocked by you! Isn’t that fucked up?

Your company NBC just up and blocked our video and claimed that we are copyright infringers! But we are not! We made it! And this is the video that you said you loved! Now, if you try to watch our video (and again this is the video that had nothing to do with you until you used it in your show without asking) on YouTube it’s just a big black sign that basically says, “the makers of this video stole this video from NBC, so you can’t watch it!” Jay, what in the hell is going on here?

Look, maybe I’m overreacting, and I hope I am. I should let you know, that some of my friends have tried to talk me down and explain copyright laws and YouTube, but I just don’t care. It’s not even about that specific video being blocked, I mean, I’m in the process of uploading that shit on Funny or Die right now. It’s not about that. It’s about you, Jay Leno.

I think I know how this all went down. And in order to help me make my point to you, I’ve written a script, because I want to speak your language. Just imagine this is a sketch on your show. You will play the part of you. Have an intern read the other part:

The Story of Jay Fucking Over Brian and Travis

Written and copyrighted by Brian Kamerer (not Jay Leno or NBC)


You (Jay Leno) walk into a room filled with writers.


Writers! Find me some funny video on the internets.


Ok, we found this funny music video/campaign commercial, should we take it and play it on your TV show?




Should I get in touch with the guys who made it on YouTube or something, and tell them we are going to play it?


No, of course not.


Really? It would be super easy, I could just click here and tell them when the video will air?


Don’t you dare contact those two boys. Why would two aspiring comedians who made a funny video be interested in their own network television debut? What are they going to do, tell their Moms and their friends that they are going to be on NBC’s The Jay Leno Show? Who cares? Fuck those guys.

The writer shrugs and does his cold dead job for Mr. Leno. Cut to three years later. You, Jay Leno, walk back into the writer’s room.


Hey remember those loser kids, we played their bit once, remember those guys? Let’s get em.


What? Who? Why?


Those guys, we took their video about three years ago and played it, I loved that song, remember?


Oh yeah, sure, I remember those guys. So, what is it you want to do to them?


I want to have the boys at NBC say that we own the video, so that if they try to watch their video on YouTube, they won’t be able to, and it will look like they stole the video, like Carlos Mencia!


Or we could just leave those two nice boys alone. After all, you loved that song, remember?


You’re fired!  Secretary! Get me someone who has the balls to frame these two unknown assholes, so that eventually their work will be blocked on YouTube!  And I need fifty more classic cars!


Jay, I don’t think you’re actually that bad of a guy. According to my friend, you might have been a slightly racist comedian back in the 80s, but I won’t hold it against you because it seems that all comedians were racist and homophobic in the 80s. Let’s just say that my friend is wrong and ignore all that and assume you’re the cool, laid-back, car-nut everyman that I want you to be. So put yourself in my shoes. Or put me in your shoes. Just for a moment, imagine that I did this to you.

Imagine that I am some sort of sexy-Girl-with-the-Dragon-Tattoo-hacker. Now imagine that I’m watching NBC and I use crazy awesome recording gear to make a pirate recording of your opening monologue. Then imagine I take ABC hostage Die-Hard-style and broadcast your monologue on ABC to trillions of people and I manage to steal all of the advertising money, because I’m just that slick. Also, imagine that after all that nonsense, I use my hacker powers to somehow manipulate the internet so that every time people search you on YouTube, a screen comes up saying, “Jay Leno is a Copyright infringer. He steals from Brian.”

Wouldn’t that be fucked up? I mean, I would have to be like a fucking mixture between a criminal and a witch to pull off something like that. And yet you did all of this to me without a problem. Are you a hacker-witch? What I’m trying to say here is that if I did what you did, I would go to jail. You did it, and then probably bought a new sports car!

Jay, I humbly ask you to please stop calling me a thief on YouTube. It’s not true, and I don’t want the YouTube community to think I’m a jerk. And I know you’re reading this going, “Brian, you don’t understand! It’s not me, it’s just some NBC internet robot that scans YouTube videos and then compares the videos to the vast NBC library and just blocks the YouTube videos that match up, because the robot assumes the video has been stolen. Besides, you don’t own anything on YouTube! Don’t be mad at me, funny man Jay Leno! I liked your video! It’s the robot’s fault. The robot fucked up.”

Don’t hide behind NBC on this one, dude. And don’t blame YouTube. And forget about the robots. I’m not talking to the robot now. I’m talking to you, Jay Leno. Where does the buck stop on The Jay Leno Show, if not with Jay Leno himself?  The buck stops with you Jay.

Jay, please apologize for using our video without asking, and then getting our video blocked and publicly calling me and my friend Travis thieves. I’m sure you would like to talk this through with us on your television show, but I’d rather meet somewhere more objective. My first choice would be to discuss this with you on the People’s Court. I had hoped arbitration would not be necessary, but I fear we are opening that door. Hope to hear back from you soon!


Brian Kamerer

Brian Kamerer is a writer and musician, check him out here and here.

Travis Irvine is a comedian, filmmaker and occasional politician. Watch this and this.

Sponsored Content
  • Guest
  • IhateDisqus

    You should sue NBC and Jay Leno for copyright infringement.  Seriously.  There are a number of organizations that will help artists find pro bono (free) legal counsel.  One in Chicago is the Lawyers for the Creative Arts.  
    http://www.law-arts.org/  Other cities might have similar organizations.  Even if there is not one in your home town, there may be lawyers in other cities (like Chicago) that will take on a case like this in Ohio.  You should not only be able to stop them from banning your video, but get money for them using your video on-air without a release from you first.  Talk with a lawyer.  Soon.

    Good luck!

    • Jimbo Sherwood

      ha  bono

    • Theize44

       I'm a copyright lawyer.  If they played your entire video for its own value, and didn't, say, comment on it or make fun of it, then you probably have a strong case.  Not clear how much you could recover in damages, but they would probably settle out for decent cash.

      • Ih8crooks

        Shut up.
        If its his its his.
        Stealing is stealing.
        Lawyers are crooks that dont go to jail.
        Your statement alone shows what bullshit the system is.

      • Valid

        Doesn't your DMCA have a cause of action for false takedown notices? 

      • http://www.facebook.com/jonny.lerner Jonny Lerner

        Regardless of whether or not he deserves compensation for it being played on the air, he definitely has a case in demanding compensation for potential earnings lost from youtube ads.

      • OHSNAPz

        Ih8crooks is an idiot. But so is Jay Leno. ZING

      • liquid_republic

        Then why don't you represent him? Makes sense to me…

      • Iraq Vet

         Sure you are. More like a copyright troll are what the odds are.

      • jetch

        a copyright lawyer??? and you don't know the difference between work of art and a POLITICAL AD?!?!?!

        and he's going to receive damages because this unknown ad shows up on a nationally televised, very popular (i don't know why) show??

        yeah, time to your pants on, and mow the lawn before dad starts yelling again.

      • IhateDisqus

        jetech — you are dead wrong.  Political ads can by copyrighted works of art.  There is no exception for political ads.  Most people won't sue because the candidates want the publicity, but that does not mean that they are not copyrighted.  

      • jetch

        Ihate:  no, i'd say you're dead wrong.  "most people won't sue because the candidates wants the publicity…".  so if the publicity they get is bad (as often happens), then they sue???  the fact is they won't sue because they know they'll lose!

        rather than direct brian to a pro bono lawyer, why don't you pony up the cash to hire him a lawyer??  you sound so sure of yourself, put your money where your mouth is.  maybe you and "theize44" can go into together.

        the *only* way a lawsuit works for brian is if nbc just doesn't want to deal with it so they settle out of court.  in which case, it's not about right and wrong, that's just a shakedown.

        ps: why do you hate disqus??

      • IhateDisqus

        Jetch — a political ad is no different than any other ad for a product (in this case, the product is the candidate).  Advertisements are copyrightable.


        There are many, many more examples, but I am a little busy to find them all for you.  It does not make you any less wrong though.

        why the f-ck would I pay money to hire this kid a lawyer.  There are millions of cases out there that have merit.  I cannot fund or represent them all.  It doesn't make his claim any less valid.

        NBC likely would settle out of court.  But that also doesn't make his claim invalid.  The only reason NBC gets away with things like this is because most people think like you (wrongly) and don't recognize that they have rights to the content they created.  NBC will freely sue others for copyright violations, but most content creators don't have the in-house legal department or budget to do the same.  Again, that does not mean they don't have claims though.

        Your repeated ignorance is really astounding.  

    • Jay Leno

      I am very sorry.

      • http://www.facebook.com/petryclifford Clifford Petry

        Help him out on this Jay!

      • jetch

        Jay: you're a man of few words, but what you do say is powerful!

        jay leno in the house, everyone!

    • the616kid

       Are you twelve? This isn't copyright infringement however, fraudulent DMCA takedowns are illegal.

      • IhateDisqus

        Please explain.  I admittedly don't know much about the YouTube terms of use at the time — although I would be surprised if posting something on YouTube waived any copyright infringement argument forever, against all other broadcasters of the content.  If you are talking about "fair use," the original airing of the material on a for-profit television program, without authorization from the creator, still may very well be copyright infringement.  Maybe there is a "fair use" argument by NBC, but I seriously doubt they want to put their business model at risk by making a strong argument that they should be allowed to take other people's works and air them on television based solely on a little comment before.  What would stop any other channel (or blog host) from airing full episodes of their shows with a little comment in front.  They would open a wide door to "fair use" being used against them. 

        I am not addressing the false DMCA takedown.  I don't know enough about the DMCA takedown law to know the potential penalties.  All the more reason to talk with an IP lawyer soon about all the facts.

      • papa

        you are wrong. Using music that belongs to someone else without their consent is a copyright thing. I work in music.

    • You're all stupid

      You do know this is just a ploy for advertising for the website "Funny or Die"?, right, I mean you can't be that naive. It's a hypothetical scenario made up just for the purpose. I like your gumption, but dude, it's not real.

  • http://twitter.com/megh_wright Megh Wright

    you should send an invoice to the Leno show for $50,000. for TV rights to your spot. If they're so big they can't recognize someone else's rights, they may be too big not to just pay you off. (This isn't Megh writing this, but a mysterious friend). 

    • Washburn

      I am Megh's Mysterious Friend!

  • Give Me a Break

    So this happened three years ago and you're mad about it now? Get over it. It's shitty, but you have no legal ground to stand on because of Youtube terms of use. And since you already reposted the video, this article is just a self-pitying attention grab.

    • Somethinbadass

      Please never speak again

    • http://www.facebook.com/witzgall Kenneth Carl Witzgall

       Youtube wasn't nearly as ubiquitous three years ago, asshole. And when you're promoting your stuff online, to where do you usually point people? YOUTUBE.


    • -_-

      ^ are you serious? people get sued for over 50k for an illegal download, and you don't think that Jay Leno/NBC stealing a video to blast it all over national television, claim it as theirs, and bash the originators isn't worth getting mad about? even if it's 3 years later?

      give ME a break. letting shit like this slide just makes it okay for big businesses to trample over the little guys. plus NBC is claiming copyright infringement on the originators? hypocrite, ridiculous, assholes, are some words that come to mind.

    • Drnick124

      You've obviously never read the Youtube terms of use. 

    • Nölff

       You just want to complain about something. Who wants to fight? HIIYYYAAAA!!!!

    • Be Informed

       Wow dude, clearly you've never had anything stolen… lucky f*cking you. Guess what, I'm coming to your house tonight and stealing your car and driving it to work from now on and telling all my co-workers that I bought said car and I own it out right and no one else can ride in it but me. Give me a Break? more like get a fucking clue!

    • tomandyourmom

      Does your mom know you're on the internet, talking with grown-ups?

  • yincrash

    Send youtube a counter notice in response to the dmca notice, and they will put it back up.

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/PRMUHABK5PZE5EYVCXI4D7P5UM Max

      So people are supposed to continuously keep claiming their content back, each time a troll takes it down? How convenient!

      • benanov

         This is the procedure in the law. Complain all you want, but for now it's how things are done. The worst part is "under penalty of perjury" never actually seems to result in perjury convictions.

      • Splat

        Sort of, BUT…

        A false DMCA claim (as made by Leno/NBC) is classed as perjury, which is a criminal offence (apparently).

      • sandyvc

        In life  you are responsible for covering your own back. Get a job in a big corporation and you will see the head honcho steal your reports and put his own name on them. Musicians have often needed to hire a lawyer to go after people who take their music. Petty writers will try to claim someone stole their ideas for a book they have not written themselves. Suing is the favourite indoor sport in the US. You have to actually do the work of getting your work back not just whine about it. It is unfortunate but this even happened before the Internet. Life is unfair, it is unfortunate and can only be changed by actually getting off your arse and pursuing justice for yourself until there is at least a critical mass of voting citizens who go up against big business. While protesting banks and investment houses it might be worthwhile to go up against the entertainment giants. Take on NBC, ABC, FOX… 

    • John Consiglio

      It wasn't a DMCA that got his video taken down in the first place.  Read my comment up several comments, from WRW (me).  It explains what happened.

      • yincrash

        Then your recourse is to sue for damages.

  • Mike Harris

    You've obviously got a huge amount of anger about this.  Take that and just put it in cryogenic cold for a moment.  Let it freeze solid, just for a moment.

    Are we as icy as the permafrost, just for a moment?

    Listen: this wasn't done by a human being.  This wasn't done by Leno.  This wasn't done by NBC lawyers.  This was done by a computer program they use, called "Content-ID".  It's all mechanized.

    It made a mistake in your case.  They'll reverse it.  You just need to go through the steps to have it reversed.

    (Yes, it IS asinine that you have to go through the steps to have it reversed.  You're not alone in being pissed off on that point.)

    As someone said, send a DMCA counter-notification to YouTube.

    "How," you ask me, "the hell do I do that?"

    Read this: http://www.youtube.com/t/copyright_counter

    Then go here: http://www.youtube.com/my_videos_copyright

    • opalgmn

      "The machine gun we sprayed indiscriminately into a crowd hit you, it wasn't like we meant to shoot you intentionally!"

      • http://twitter.com/x_2day 2 day

        "accidentally banning someone's YT vid is equivalent to shooting firearms at them in a massacre!"

      • goldaar

        In reply to 2 day, people have died to protect free speech and everything else the that is wrong with this situation, so I don't think it's too far of a leap really…. That being said, analogies don't really need to be on the same scale relative to your initial base, they just must be the correct scale individually.

      • goldaar

        In reply to 2 day, people have died to protect free speech and everything else the that is wrong with this situation, so I don't think it's too far of a leap really…. That being said, analogies don't really need to be on the same scale relative to your initial base, they just must be the correct scale individually.

      • jetch

        wow! exaggerate much?

      • jetch

        goldaar:  protect free speech??? get over it will you, it was a stupid glitch in a software system no different than getting an annoying blue screen in windows.  get it resolved, get over it and move on! there's no need to be talking about "people dying to protect free speech".  that's a little over dramatic don't you think?

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/PRMUHABK5PZE5EYVCXI4D7P5UM Max

      I hear you, but you need to realize that creating an automated process that is retarded IS RETARDED!

      • Skbritton

        Language dude!

      • CrunchTech

        @Skbritton – English. Most likely.

    • Duhhhh

      *Whooooooooooosh* <=== That's the sound of his tongue-in-cheek post going over your head.

    • http://twitter.com/MartianEmpress Rezeya Montecore

      Mike, you've obviously got a lot of difficulty perceiving humor. Take that and just put it in cryogenic cold for a moment… 

      • RyanGrant

         There was no humor in that post.  It was the same stupid "HURR DURR I HATE LENO!" that morons have been putting out on the internet for 20 years.

    • Iraq Vet

      That's no excuse, and only highlights how wrong the big powers are against the little guy.  Say Hi to Jay for John Q Public for me. BTW… your second link stinks, almost as badly as you posting for NBC.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Joey-Rogers/100000171754392 Joey Rogers

      You'd have a decent point if it weren't for the fact that you don't seem to be acknowledging the fact that Leno was the one who seemed to be infringing copyright laws first.

      I haven't watched the video, but it sounds like he didn't ask to show that vid, let alone give them credit, and since Leno's show isn't exactly a charity and he is making money by showing this video, he at the very least needs to be requesting permission.

      The fact that they removed his video from youtube merely adds insult to injury and displays the irony of all this.

      • jetch

        Joey, your forgetting the fact that it was a POLITICAL AD! they are not copyright protected, and for good reason! 

        just think of the politician you hate the most, obama, romney, palin, whoever it is.  you gonna tell me comedians can't play and/or poke fun of their ads???? 

        did you also read the post where the guy says he and his friend were *excited* to see their political ad played on national television???? 

        if anyone did anything wrong, it's youtube for not quickly correcting this obvious error.

      • http://www.facebook.com/bpickell2003 Brian Pickell

        Jtech for the sake of argument. Lets just say that Political ads are not able to be copyright protected.

        Since this is a political ad; how was Jay Leno and the Tonight Show able to copyright the video? Even though it was aired on their show it doesn't change the fact that the video was a political video, but yet they were able to get it copyrighted and removed from the original authors youtube channel. How do you explain that?

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=663669914 Sean Richardson

         @jetch:disqus Political ads are copyrightable.  There is a certain amount of fair use involved when a comedian gets involved and is actively making fun of or satirizing the content, but legal advice has led to the tendency to build in certain limits — only showing the part that you're actually discussing/making fun of, only showing it within a short window from its original airing, stuff like that.

        Further, you can ignore ALL of that, and there's STILL a copyright on the song in the ad, which completely changes things.  Given that Leno clearly did *not* do anything transformative on the song, and that his only comment about it was "Hey, good song," it would be a very difficult argument to convince any legal entity that its usage was not a copyright violation.

    • WRW

      Mike, check out this link.  This will show you how with Youtube's flawed content ID system, Counter DMCA is not an available option because Youtube in certain cases takes down the video without a DMCA, and based only on the content producer's claim (and subsequent re-affirmation) to the material in question.


      I had a video of mine, one with 27 million views at the time, id'd by content ID by a channel called eurozeitgeist (it actually seemed like an official YT channel, but that's irrelevant).  This is how the process went for me.  They sent me an email telling me that a video in my account in actuality belongs to this other entity (Eurozeitgeist).  I was given the option to protest this content ID (it was not a DMCA, and my protest was not a counter DMCA).  After I affirmed that the material was actually mine, it went back to EuroZeitgeist and they were given the opportunity to re-affirm ownership or release my video (which had already had the ad revenue switched over to EuroZeitgeist mind you).  They chose to reaffirm ownership and Youtube basically told me I was out of luck.  That was that.  There was no option to counter DMCA because there was no DMCA to begin with.  Youtube controls the videos on their site and they took Eurozeitgeist's word for it.  This isn't the way content ID always works mind you, but a portion of those with Content ID have this privilege to be able to just affirm ownership without DMCA and get videos taken down or revenue switched over to their adsense.  

      I contacted Youtube partner support, they were of no help at all, only offering me canned responses.  I complained on the forum while at the same time recruiting counsel that was referred to me by the EFF whom I had contacted almost immediately.  At this point several great people on the YT partner forum came to my aid, bringing my case to the attention of Google staff, who resolved it within the week (without counter DMCA, or anything like that).  Not everyone is as lucky as I was.  If I had not been an active member of that forum, and people didn't know my work, I would have been out the roughly $20k/year that that particular video earns me.  It would have been a long and drawn out legal battle I'm sure.

      Anyway, my point is that it isn't anywhere near as simple as 'just file a counter DMCA'.  Read that link I posted and you'll see a little more clearly just what Youtube is doing.

      –John C.

      • DJF

         You can still sue EuroZeitgeist for copyright infringement and misappropriation, among other causes of action.  Although getting jurisdiction over them may be difficult if they are a foreign user…

    • John Consiglio

      Mike, check out this link.  This will show you how with Youtube's flawed content ID system, Counter DMCA is not an available option because Youtube in certain cases takes down the video without a DMCA, and based only on the content producer's claim (and subsequent re-affirmation) to the material in question.


      I had a video of mine, one with 27 million views at the time, id'd by content ID by a channel called eurozeitgeist (it actually seemed like an official YT channel, but that's irrelevant).  This is how the process went for me.  They sent me an email telling me that a video in my account in actuality belongs to this other entity (Eurozeitgeist).  I was given the option to protest this content ID (it was not a DMCA, and my protest was not a counter DMCA).  After I affirmed that the material was actually mine, it went back to EuroZeitgeist and they were given the opportunity to re-affirm ownership or release my video (which had already had the ad revenue switched over to EuroZeitgeist mind you).  They chose to reaffirm ownership and Youtube basically told me I was out of luck.  That was that.  There was no option to counter DMCA because there was no DMCA to begin with.  Youtube controls the videos on their site and they took Eurozeitgeist's word for it.  This isn't the way content ID always works mind you, but a portion of those with Content ID have this privilege to be able to just affirm ownership without DMCA and get videos taken down or revenue switched over to their adsense.  

      I contacted Youtube partner support, they were of no help at all, only offering me canned responses.  I complained on the forum while at the same time recruiting counsel that was referred to me by the EFF whom I had contacted almost immediately.  At this point several great people on the YT partner forum came to my aid, bringing my case to the attention of Google staff, who resolved it within the week (without counter DMCA, or anything like that).  Not everyone is as lucky as I was.  If I had not been an active member of that forum, and people didn't know my work, I would have been out the roughly $20k/year that that particular video earns me.  It would have been a long and drawn out legal battle I'm sure.

      Anyway, my point is that it isn't anywhere near as simple as 'just file a counter DMCA'.  Read that link I posted and you'll see a little more clearly just what Youtube is doing.

      –John C.

    • the616kid

       The blame needs to fall on someone. If this is how DMCAs are being handled, it is wrong. The end. Don't be a drone. Content ID is a shit system and any MORON who lets something run fully automated, is just that, a complete moron.

      • jetch

        you'd have to be a moron to think it could be done any other way than automated.  you gonna have a thousand workers reviewing videos on at a time?

        yeah, it's a stupid error and yeah it needs to be fixed, but it sounds like it could easily be fixed if youtube would get off their ass and fix it.  blaming the software that was designed to do what it does is stupid.

      • http://conky.tumblr.com conky

        @jetch Viacom sued Youtube for A BILLION DOLLARS. If media companies honestly believe this is the scale of the losses they're suffering thanks to Youtube, they're insane not to spend a 1-2% of that figure on a thousand workers to comb through new videos.

      • http://conky.tumblr.com conky

        @jetch Viacom sued Youtube for A BILLION DOLLARS. If media companies honestly believe this is the scale of the losses they're suffering thanks to Youtube, they're insane not to spend a 1-2% of that figure on a thousand workers to comb through new videos.

    • Miguel Cruz

      Why does the fact that it's mechanized excuse anything? NBC is using a flawed process that, demonstrably, results in the unfair blocking of other people's content. It is their choice to use this process and therefore the consequences are their fault. Simple as that.

    • Anthony Walker

           Ok, the thing is, this isn't just some guy that made a video of his friend getting kicked in the nuts. This is an aspiring comedian putting these things in the open so he gets noticed professionally in hopes to further his career. This isn't just an annoyance, it's harmful to his career as a comedian, especially since it was aired, and, if he was given the credit that was due, it could have really done something for his future… he has the right to be very pissed off.

           It would be the same as the writer of this article stealing one of Jay Leno's bits and saying it was his in a public forum in order to get professional notice. Jay Leno is messing with this man's future and career, a robot may have put the block up, but that still doesn't change the fact that it was stolen without giving the artist proper credit.

      …Just saying…

      • jetch

        anthony, no it's a POLITICAL AD!  he may have had ulterior motives, but this guy made a political ad, they are NOT protected like work of art. 

        and if you want to get noticed, what better way than to have it appear on Leno?!?  he even says in his post that he and his friend were excited to see it played.  leno has as much to do with this as you do with whatever your employer does.

    • RedRider

       @jetch It's not a glitch in a software system. It was designed to operate that way under the assumption that anything they've shown before belongs to them. It's an autonomous bully. If there were solid penalties for false DMCA claims programs like this wouldn't even exist.

      • John Consiglio

        It might not be a 'glitch', but it certainly is a flaw in the system, in my opinion.  The flaw is that in this case no DMCA has to be filed in order for a supposedly offending video to be removed.  That's ridiculous and Youtube should re-examine that policy.  If it were a simple DMCA, he could counter DMCA and then if NBC still wanted to pursue it they would have to take the guy to court.  With the current system all NBC has to do is say 'I own that'….and then the other guy says 'No, you don't, I own it'.   And then NBC has one final opportunity to dismiss the claim, but instead says 'nope, I really do own it'.  Youtube takes their word for it (amazingly) and the guy has his video taken down (or his ad revenue steered toward NBC, as that is NBC's option) and has no recourse whatsoever besides hiring an attorney for what would be a complicated and lengthy lawsuit.

    • julius rosen

      excellent response .

  • http://oolong.co.uk Fergus

    Also, surely you can sue them for libel? Or at least threaten to? Clearly their robots are falsely spreading harmful claims about you and your copyright-infringing ways. The fact they're robots is, as you say, not really an excuse at all.

  • Sean

    There's an entertainment law firm in right over in Columbus called Dinsmore that I've dealt with in the past who can likely help you. 

  • Pafzko

    Jay Leno steals everything he does, call in to Howard Stern, he'll back you up

    • http://hollywoodite.com Hollywoodite

      Pretty much, most of 'his' videos are boosted from elsewhere. 

  • Antimangina

    If the roles were reverse he would be getting sued by NBC. I say take the assholes to court and they will just settle out of court to make you go away. Take said settlement and use it to further your career or whatever. 

  • rifttrial1

    I think the only thing sad about all this is that there are people like you who, instead of actually doing something about it, you get on the internet and whine about.  But, I take it that since you write for this shitty website, you are just another useless nerd who wouldn't know how to properly resolve a situation without using the internet.  You are pathetic, as is your generation.  I assume you are in the 20-30 age range.

    • Peter N

      what do you want him to do exactly?  go into a legal battle?  because i'm sure that will be cheap to win…

    • ss07

      says the guy whining on the internet…..

    • Phong1

      Welcome to the 21st century. Incase you haven't noticed, the Internet is where everything happens, these days, you old fuck. Smarten up before making condescending remarks to the people who will be taking care of you when you're being fed through a tube.

    • your face

      Wow.  I would love to punch you in the face. 

    • tomandyourmom

      You fuck your mom with that mouth?

    • David R Velasquez

       Dude,… back away from the bottle…. BACK. AWAY. FROM. THE. BOTTLE!    …there, there now…. it's all going to be alright.

    • chrissss

      You're right, we're totally pathetic. As a member of "that generation" I couldn't do anything about it because I was busy being deployed to fight in Iraq.

      What generation thought it was a good idea to go do that? That's right, the generation who knows how to "properly resolve a situation."

    • Olro

      You do realise the hypocrisy in that you are currently reading the so-called "shitty" website and also responding on said website with a pathetic, whiny reply. This behaviour is pathetic from our "useless" generation, but from somebody older? Wow. No words.

  • greending

    because Jay Leno was scouring YouTube for videos, saw yours and thought 'damn I have to have that video'?  You are incredibly naive if you think Jay Leno is putting together those lame little skits on his own, or if he has much input on them at all.  Your letter should be directed more towards NBC than Jay Leno.. I doubt Jay Leno has actually been on YouTube on his own..

    • Summer

      Dude. DUDES. The part of the post where he imagines that this was all Jay Leno specific was a fucking joke. A JOKE. Isn't this a comedy site? How are so many readers/commenters so oblivious to comedy?

      • sandyvc

        The only genuine comedy I have seen here is in the comments not in the badly written rant. Just slinging insults is not funny to adults. 

  • Verendus

    Your script's a bit off, there. Youtube automatically screens its videos for copyrighted content. They match the video up against TV shows, movies, and the like, and if they're too similar, they file a claim against the video. I can guarantee you Leno had no part in this. It's the robot's fault, and the robot was put up there by NBC and the youtube people.

    • Google Expert

      Actually somebody has to file a claim. YouTube may remove a video due to a policy violation, but they will never put in a claim on behalf of another company.

    • Summer

      The number of people in the comments here who don't understand hyperbole or satire or generally understand that script was meant to be funny and not what he actually thinks happened is incredible to me. Incredible.

      • sandyvc

        It is not funny. It is stupid, childishly so. It is not satire though it is hyperbole. It is just a snotty rant. An adult would use a little hyperbole for effect. A kid will produce masses of hyperbole and think it is art. It is rare that an adult with a decent education produces this kind of drivel. If I were Jay Leno I would sue him for inferring that I am a homophobe and racist. All the great comedians, btw, have really good educations formal and otherwise. If this is the best he can do then he needs to find a better career.

  • Captain Awesome

    The video is so not funny that I can see why they put it on the Jay Leno Show. 

  • http://www.facebook.com/sebastian1988 Sebastian Wolff

    Not defending Jay or NBC, but it goes something like this: NBC uploads their show assets to the YouTube CMS, which is the back-end application available to high-end content providers that helps them track down their content on YouTube. Brian and Tavis's video was part of the asset library, and it ended up in the CMS. NBS has a fairly strict policy that automatically flags their content (whether it actually is theirs) which then gets it blocked/removed.

    Brian and Tavis: File your counter claim, and you're back online.

    • Guest

      Of course they'll go through all of this effort to try to thwart people's effort to put the show online, but if they actually just put the show online there'd be absolutely no issues…

    • billstreeter

      "Brian and Tavis: File your counter claim, and you're back online." unless NBC contests it, in which cast YouTube automatically sides with NBC. And then there is no recourse–I know I've been in this situation a few times. Meanwhile their video has been offline for months. 

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=663669914 Sean Richardson

       I think part of the problem was that he didn't contest their illegal usage of his copyrighted material in the first place.

  • d g

    CONTENT-ID did this. taking this to court won't hurt anyone but youtube.
    NBC/Leno are not to blame because 
    1.they used the skit, which then got marked as copyrighted. 
    2.CONTENT-ID marked it as infringement and blocked it.
    CONTENT ID is part of youtube, and whatever loss of money it produced is because of YT.
    3*.NBC/Leno could be sued for using your clip without your aproval. Cash could be won from this, though would be a DICK move… being shown on JayLeno show actually brings you a lot of views which equal money.


  • http://kitandkat.myopenid.com/ Phil

    There are two things you can do. First, do a DMCA take-down of the Leno episode. Secondly, sue for copyright infringement. You can only recover actual damages unless it's registered with the copyright office, in which case, statutory damages of $150,000 apply.  You can still register, even after publication. You'll need to wait 30 days. Get a GOOD lawyer. A wimpy one is a waste of time.

    • IhateDisqus

      You don't need to have registered with the copyright office to recover damages.  Copyright protection is automatic upon the creation of the work.  Registering just helps with the burden of proof that you created the work, and allows for greater damages.

      • sandyvc

        If these kids still have the original video and it has a date on it they should be able to get recompense. If not then they need depositions by everyone involved. That they did not bother to copyright it in the first place shows how little they knew about such things when they did the video. If a person goes into a particular profession they are responsible to know the rules. No one else is. Perhaps, if anything comes of this guys career this will have been a good lesson. Cover your own ass. 

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=663669914 Sean Richardson

        @sandyvc:disqus "That they did not bother to copyright it in the first place shows how
        little they knew about such things when they did the video."

        You've actually just shown how little you know.  Amazingly, you took a statement by @IhateDisqus:disqus that said "you don't need to have registered" — which is 100% true and legally accurate — and interpreted that to mean (1) that they didn't register it and (2) that they needed to in order to be protected.  The first is currently unknown (most likely, if this was a political ad, it would be work-for-hire and the copyright owner would actually be the campaign or the candidate or somesuch), but the second is completely false and is the polar opposite of the statement that you think you're agreeing with.  Try to know facts before you post drivel.

  • Brad

    The irony here is that to watch his video I had to sit through a Tosh commercial. A guy who's entire show is taking shit off the internet and making lame jokes about it.

    • John

      Tosh doesn't (as far as we know) go on to flag the content he has "borrowed" for copyright infringement.

    • Ryan

      Tosh also informs the people who are going to be on his show, that they will be on his show. I know a couple of people that have been asked by Comedy Central if they could use their video on Tosh.

  • http://www.facebook.com/torguy Tor Helmer

    So as a computer programmer… why wouldn't the copyright robot figure out that the original video was uploaded 5 years before the NBC show aired?  Shouldn't that be taken into consideration?  Seems kind of bullshit to me.  I could see maybe a 1 month window of opportunity on this but it sounds like complete and utter bullshit to have your video automatically taken down when it's the original content.  If anything the jay leno show should have gotten some warnings for using YOUR content.

    • http://www.christinawarren.com Christina Warren

      No, because it's not about the date — it's about the content. In fact, the Content ID system is good enough to recognize audio recorded from a TV set (versus being dubbed as its own track) and a video recording of a video recording.

      As for the meta-data, the Content ID thing doesn't know anything about ownership other than what is isn the backend — in this case, they've got a library of clips from NBC Universal, it matched with this video and applied the default rule in place with the "rights holder" — which in this case seemed to be removal.

      It's shitty that Brian will have to file the counterclaim and make his case, it really is, but it's the nature of the beast. Not defending YouTube, Leno or NBC, but the fact is, this sort of thing is an edge case. It sucks for Brian, truly, but it's a really bizarre and specific situation that highlights one of the major flaws of an automated content recognition system.

    • http://www.christinawarren.com Christina Warren

      No, because it's not about the date — it's about the content. In fact, the Content ID system is good enough to recognize audio recorded from a TV set (versus being dubbed as its own track) and a video recording of a video recording.

      As for the meta-data, the Content ID thing doesn't know anything about ownership other than what is isn the backend — in this case, they've got a library of clips from NBC Universal, it matched with this video and applied the default rule in place with the "rights holder" — which in this case seemed to be removal.

      It's shitty that Brian will have to file the counterclaim and make his case, it really is, but it's the nature of the beast. Not defending YouTube, Leno or NBC, but the fact is, this sort of thing is an edge case. It sucks for Brian, truly, but it's a really bizarre and specific situation that highlights one of the major flaws of an automated content recognition system.

      • Emko_irl

        I can't see why it would be hard to incorporate code into the "robot" to check the dates.. a simply if..else statement could work in removing a video if the content ID matches and the clip in their library is older than the one being checked, and if not then do nothing.. simple. 

        No one can make excuses for it being a program, you can't say "it's just how the program works you can't do anything about it".. Of course you can, and the program didn't write itself, a person wrote it and it would be so simple to add a date variable to all clips in their library, and to retrieve the post date of a you-tube clip and compare them.. that is elementary programming.

      • fredfnord

        > Not defending YouTube, Leno or NBC

        …now, really. Plenty of what you said made sense, but possibly you don't recognize the fact that your entire post consisted solely of a defense of YouTube and NBC? I mean, there was literally no actual content that you wrote that was not, essentially, a defense of this practice.

        'This is a really unusual bizarre edge case and it almost never happens and it's the nature of the beast and it's kind of shitty but nothing can be done.' I mean, come on, really. If one out of every thousand cars on the freeway were randomly targeted, and the owner sent a speeding ticket, by an automated radar installation, even though they weren't actually speeding, would you say, 'well, that's just the nature of the beast, and it sucks that you have to take the day off work/fly back to Arizona/take the bus across town because they impounded your car/whatever, but these things just happen?'

      • sandyvc

        If they looked at the date they would know it existed before it was used by NBC. Otherwise, yes indeed. 

        You need more than code, Emko_irl. You need to make changes to the data base as well if it does not already contain the additional search fields. A person or team of persons did the design for the app and the data base. That person or team is not likely involved with the use of the app. They are long gone on some other application. There is nothing simple about changing the data base and adding in all the data that is not there now. It may be elementary programming but doing changes to the data base is major.

    • Cobol Fortran

      You code kiddies just pile line upon line, and miss what "Emko_irl" down below here thought through….Trash In/Trash out

      • sandyvc

        No. You have to change the trash can (data base) with all its various connects to all other pieces of data as well as the app code and the GUI in all the apps that talk to each other. It still takes brains and knowledge to create complex applications.

    • sandyvc

      I agree. I think they need a few more pieces of data to check and report. If there is a hard copy report and it contained upload date and date of the show it would be a simple matter to have the report highlight the info. Simple bit of coding and change to their data base. Corporations, in my experience in software development, always go on the cheap. It is why computer consultants have had so many years of good money in good jobs. Companies do not fix anything unless is costing them too much money or their is a public outcry. The mistake so many make is thinking that any corporation gives a ratz ass about them. This guy needs to raise hell in public and to NBC. Write a civil letter to Jay Leno, keeping in mind Jay will not likely get the letter unless it is civil and intelligent. Just facts and none of the abuse or whining. 

  • Carlos Andrés Cortés

    I just can't believe that all of you people don't understand sarcasm and satire when you see it!… hey Brian, great read, laugh a lot!

    • http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/DYMQ74VK55RPNRARHMDV5UNFEE V2Blast

       Satire's generally supposed to be funny.

    • sandyvc

      That is because an adult has learned the difference between satire, sarcasm and a snotty rant against the wrong target. A litany against Leno is not sarcasm or satire. Perhaps you will learn the difference if you go back and finish high school. If not, try Wikipedia to find out what they mean. 

  • http://twitter.com/JonPaula Jonathan Paula

    Sounds to me like a simple, and honest mistake by YouTube's Content ID system.

    What's the problem? Contest the copyright-claim, and your video will be back within 10 days.

    This is not a huge deal at all, and quite frankly, it isn't even a problem, and NBC/Leno *especially* did not do this on purpose. Stop over-reacting, and just deal with this like everyone else does: by simply getting your back the correct way.

    Mistakes happen, let it go.

    • Robert

      A simple honest mistake? Do you know the scale at which these takedown notices are filed to Google? They process 1.2 million of them per month. It's not a few people sitting in a room looking at videos on YouTube all day either, but an automated process and because of 1) DMCA and 2) contracts with the entertainment industry, Youtube automatically takes everything down. Sure, contest the copyright claim he should. But NBC can easily say "nope it's still ours" and bam, YouTube takes it down. Meanwhile the entertainment industry is still making a big deal out of copyright "infringement", but when they use other people's material and claim it as their own, the actual owner of the material is over-reacting?

      • John Consiglio

        You are exactly correct, but it's even worse than that.  Youtube takes down the videos after the entity (NBC for example) simply affirms ownership, and there is no DMCA whatsoever, hence no recourse.  There is an entire article about it here:
        The flow chart actually explains it pretty well.

  • http://twitter.com/JonPaula Jonathan Paula

    Sounds to me like a simple, and honest mistake by YouTube's Content ID system.

    What's the problem? Contest the copyright-claim, and your video will be back within 10 days.

    This is not a huge deal at all, and quite frankly, it isn't even a problem, and NBC/Leno *especially* did not do this on purpose. Stop over-reacting, and just deal with this like everyone else does: by simply getting your back the correct way.

    Mistakes happen, let it go.

  • billy bob me

    Sue them.

    • Bill

       It won't work. The law was written for the big studios.

  • Freefinger

    You should sue NBC for copyright infringement by playing the video without your consent! Then send Youtube a notice that the video is yours and to ban NBC from using it… Hell they did make a shitload of money with the commercials!

    I hate Leno, he F*cked Letterman AND Conan..

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_HS2Z3PBEREUKJTP753SEXAL5VM michaelg

    Leno has been borrowing other peoples bits and ideas for a long time. He's famous for it.

    • sandyvc

      Ahhhhhh few comedians write all of their own bits. They have writers. They bring their spin to the work of others. Plagiarism goes back to Mt. Sinai when Jehovah stole the 10 Commandments from an older culture and the creation story was lifted from the Babylonians. (Iraq) 

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Taylor-McCarthy/1322016180 Taylor McCarthy

    Cool, you guys do realize this whole article was a scam to get you to watch the opening ad in the video, promote the new version of Youtube (Funny or Die) and make the owner of that cheesy clip a small fortune. Stop debating copyright  law and start talking about dingbats who make up a whole bogus news story just so they get paid for the ad clicks. Thanks!

    • http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/DYMQ74VK55RPNRARHMDV5UNFEE V2Blast

       Joke's on him, I didn't watch the video to begin with.

  • IonOtter

    Well!  If this was genuine Nerd Rage, then wow.  Have fun banging your head into a wall.

    But if the above was all just sarcasm, then well done sir!  You got me to raise my eyebrows and back away slowly!

    In the meantime, it looks like there's plenty of good advice in submitting a counter-claim, so don't mind me if I sit here with some popcorn.

  • http://www.blagoplanet.com Thomas Bodetti

    Yes, on the youtube terms of service, you know the ones that no one reads any content you upload to youtube can be used by youtube and its assigns, advertisers, ect, (not verbatim but close) so be ware because anything you post to youtube is no longer yours. Now you do have a case that you are the copyright owner and your video has been illegally blocked, but they can use it with or without your permission, just another one of the ways that Google is Screwing up the Internet with Trash.

    • imadick

      you're wrong
      from the youtube TOS (
      http://www.youtube.com/t/terms ): 6C: For clarity, you retain all of your ownership rights in your Content.   . . . it does say that they can use the video for promotional uses BUT: The above licenses granted by you in video Content you submit to the Service terminate within a commercially reasonable time after you remove or delete your videos from the Service. 

  • DJ MichaelAngelo

    Brian -  apparently you're not too familiar with how the entertainment industry works.  Your "open letter" is so profoundly naive, it actually makes me concerned for you.  Do you think Jay Leno actually PERSONALLY called up YouTube and directed them to remove your video?  Like he has the time to sit and watch the 80,000 new comedy videos per day, just to target yours?  I don't know if that's narcicisstic or just plain foolish, but either way it's OBVIOUS to anyone with a lick of sense that it's NBC's lawyers who deal with YouTube copyright infringement cases.  Yes, they dropped the ball on this one – big time.  But to try and pin it on the host of the television show himself is about as mindlessly inaccurate as blaming Barack Obama after you trip & fall on the White House lawn.  It just doesn't make sense.  The "top dog" of any organization is so far removed in the chain-of-command from the people who actually DO the dirty work, which is a VERY simple fact of business and especially the entertainment industry. 

    Brian it's also pretty clear you aren't too familiar with The Tonight Show, because literally 2-3 times a week they feature a comedy segment that incorporates "public domain" YouTube videos and other internet content, for which the original authors don't get paid a dime, nor should they.  Again, you really REALLY need to educate yourself more on how the business world works, and espcially the chain of command in the corporate world.  Jay Leno has 100's of employees on The Tonight Show, but even THEY are not responsible for your YouTube video being taken down – the guilty parties you wanna go after are the NBC lawyers.  Instead of your whining & carrying on for paragraph after unbearable "woe is me" paragraph, you really oughta explain to people the TANGIBLE steps you've done to try and fight this take-down notice – i.e. filing an DMCA copyright claim rebuttal, etc.  Good luck – I think you'll need it! :o

    • BarryBlamalow


      That was the sound of this article going straight over your head…

    • Steve879

       YouTube isn't public domain…

    • fredfnord

      Possibly you aren't familiar with the phenomenon of arrogant people on the internet who haven't the faintest fucking clue what they're talking about and yet are incredibly condescending to everyone in sight… but if not, you're certainly doing an amazing job of embodying that tendency, sight unseen.

      You clearly don't understand either humorous exaggeration or public domain, for example, but you seem to feel quite justified in lecturing people at length about both. That sort of thing never ceases to amaze me.

      • billstreeter

        Perfect response, thank you. 

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/BQI7SSC4MCTOJ2MGP5IOA62Y5E Gary

        Do you mind if I plagiarize the entirety of your reply?  Seriously, nicely done!

      • IhateDisqus

        Of course he doesn't mind.  It's on the internet now so it's "public domain."

        – DJ MichaelAngelo

      • OldJagMan

        Humorous exaggeration, public domain, no, probably I don't understand it. Are you telling us that the "open letter" was just a humorous exaggeration of the facts and the personal attacks on Jay Leno is acceptable in the public domain.
        No! I don't understand: Yes I do wish that those who don't understant would not post. (I grant myself this exeption)

    • chrissss

      "…apparently you're not too familiar with how the entertainment industry works. Your "open letter" is so profoundly naive, it actually makes me concerned for you."

      Yeah, it's totally crazy how a normal everyday person doesn't understand the complicated ins & outs of a specialized industry! I know I took "Entertainment Law" in high school, so I'm good to go.

      • sandyvc

        The kid who wrote what is likely slanderous claims to be an entertainer so, yes, he bloody well should know something about the ins and outs of his own profession. Exaggeration it is, humorous it is not. It reads like a middle school kid wrote it for other middle school boys who imagine themselves to funny. This indicates to me that they are so badly educated that they have not even read any of the great comedy and over the top exaggeration by actual writers, say like Twain. The net is simply crawling with this kind of thing: I got dissed but did nothing about it but whine. 

    • sandyvc

      As I read through this article I was struck by several things. I found the entire post  childish. It is like reading something by a snotty middle school boy. His little "script" with Jay and staff was rude to the point of being slanderous particularly calling him a homophobe and racist. Keep your day job little man you are not funny. There are thousands of kids like you posting rage filled drivel that they think is amusing. The very idea that Jay Leno is personally responsible for this is ludicrous. He is just a highly paid employee turning what writers create into something some people find funny. He is not the head of NBC. 

      I do think it is unfair for the writer to be ripped off and his work made unavailable but I also see no indication that he ever did anything about this other than whine. If he did it should be in the article. If they blew him off we know he would write more childish insults and self aggrandizement common to professional whiners. What NBC or their IT flunkies did was wrong and this article was also wrong. Why did it take so long for the video creator to do anything about this? Why does it appear that he has done nothing but snivel and lob insults at the wrong target? Why is he so ignorant of the entertainment industry and copy write law if he is, as he claims to be, an entertainer. Let's hope his live performance is not as stupid as this. 

      • John Consiglio

        I'm curious as to why you choose to find more fault with this article than with NBC.  Certainly he could have worded what he was trying to say better, but the bottom line is that NBC took gross negligent action that caused him to have his video removed from youtube and having him marked as a thief on Youtube's website.  I'm sure those IT guys you're talking about just rubber-stamp every video picked up by content ID without even looking at it, and that is absolutely negligent.  Of course, this is pure conjecture, but one thing is for sure, the IT guys had to first confirm that NBC owned that content and that they wanted the offending video removed, and then after it was kicked back to them again had to re-affirm ownership, at which point the video stays blocked.

        Maybe the problem he is having understanding the copyright laws is because those laws DO NOT ALWAYS APPLY when it comes to Youtube and Youtube's functionality.  I've posted this link in this thread already, but I'll post it again (the flow chart makes it real simple to understand):


        He did not have the option to file a counter DMCA since no DMCA was filed in the first place, as it isn't necessary for some partners with Content ID to file DMCA to get Youtube to take down a video.  It's ridiculous.

        That being said, we honestly don't know what he's done up until now.  For all we know he could have tried multiple times to contact NBC, Youtube, attorneys, etc.  To just assume he didn't is ignorant in itself.  It's probably better not to assume one way or the other when the facts aren't presented to us.

        As far as singling out Jay Leno, he's probably hoping one of Leno's PR guys will notice and do the right thing.  All it would take is a phone call to the YT partner rep and this issue would be resolved.  The writer might have thought this was an easier route than pursuing litigation.  I probably would have done the same thing (albeit in a less abrasive manner).  Anyway, my point is that Leno's people deserve more of the brunt of most of these comments than this guy does.

      • BM1

        Your obviously a paid shill or a uninformed troll with nothing better to do!  No one really cares about your thoughts on this matter so get back in the kitchen and shut up! 

        The author has every right to be upset over this matter and I bet if it
        were your intellectual property that was illegally stolen/deleted you wouldn't
        be so civil either!

      • sandyvc

        BM1. If I had been ripped off I would go through the proper channels and only after that failed would I possibly take my grievance into a blog space where only a few people would ever see it. I was clear that I think it was unfair. Were you in such a rush to rant at me that you did not notice it? Of course he has a right. And I do too. If you do not want people to comment then don't post where they can. I also would not imply that the perpetrator, if Jay Leno even has any power at all over NBC, was a racist and homophobe. Even if true it is not germane to the subject and it is slander unless it can be proved by the accuser. What I expect to see is what he did to regain his rights to the video if he did anything at all. Without that he is not credible in laying blame. Nor does his childishly expressed anger and name calling give him much respect except by other boys who think posting on the net is the same as getting off your ass and doing something. Perhaps he felt this was a comedy bit and, apparently many did appreciate it. If this is comedy then there is no hope at all for good writers. I, btw, cannot stomach Jay Leno and have never considered him funny. He is about as funny as this article. 

        Once the software is completed and in place no human needs to look at it at all. The software can, as we all know, compare NBC's holdings to what is on YouTube. Having found them, the software itself can communicate with YouTube's software and indicate a NBC property needs to be denied. YouTube's software can then do so. No human needs to be involved. What could be done and may well be done is to have reports spit out to show what was found to either NBC or YouTube. It would be a name, date posted, date removed kind of thing because, frankly, they don't care if the property of others is scooped up. Corporations don't give a ratz azz about us so the onus is and always was on the person to seek justice rather than whine, get sympathy or scorn but no valuable outcome. There may be an employee whose job it is to look at the report but that employee would not have any information to indicate that the video does not belong to NBC. I doubt that Jay Leno has anything to do with this. NBC is a hellava lot bigger that Jay Leno. Given such automated checking by software and the way corporation trust such things it may be that no one even knows this has happened to him as they are not likely to read fringe blogs. I shall not head to the kitchen. I am much more of a computer geek than a char woman. A paid shill? Do you even know what a shill is? I wish.

    • Olro

      Dude, the letter was an exaggeration done for comedic purposes. Try having a sense of humour before getting sanctimonious for no reason.

      Also, I think everyone on here who isn't actually a lawyer (which I'm assuming is most people, since I don't think lawyers have tons of free time to go trolling around on silly Internet websites) should stop trying to show off knowledge most likely gleaned from Wikipedia on the ins and outs of copyright law.

      • Akivaddict

        I am a lawyer.  And I would just like to say… we use Wikipedia ALL the time.  #Don'tCommitCrimes

  • Duarte Molha

    NBC should have to pass all the content they air through the same content identification mechanism YouTube uses. Thus way when they blatently steal content that does not belong to them the screen would just show a black screen.

  • Lmao

    Nobody under 70 watches Leno and/or cares.

  • Sam

    anyone know a link to the video

  • Rosalie

    This is fantastic. I hope you hear back.

  • Thisisnotmyrealemailaddress

     You had a chance at this working until you called the man a racist.  It's pathetic how often people call other people racist these days, and somehow it's acceptable?  If I'm Jay Leno, I'm reading right along and starting to make a phone call to fix this for you… then BOOM!  I'm a racist now?  FU!

  • Joe

    Defamation case against Youtube and NBC? they falsly and publicly called you a thief therefore defamed you.
    As for Copyright, when you create an original work, and it is in a recorded format (the video as apposed to an idea) you are automatically granted exclusive rigts over your creation, you don't need to apply for copyright, it is yours automatically by right, so they cannot claim it is theirs becaus you made it.
    Take them to court, no matter how much money they pay lawyers no Judge would rule against you.

  • Mrmcgoo

    Meh, the video sucked anyway. 

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/BUSYAWMRBZOVHLEA566TYPDBKM D

      Meh, your comment sucked

      • the master

        meh, meh, your comment sucked more.

  • Brando_calrissian

    The process for NBC/Universal to have their content protected on YouTube is an automated computer process that applies an algorithm to a video file of the show. That generates a unique ID that is stored at Google.  If someone tries to upload or has already uploaded the same video to YouTube, it will automatically be taken down, or tracked depending on the instructions of the content provider uploading the shit. And most of it is shit.  

    So, send a letter and a dvd copy or a link to you file at funny or die. Most of these big corps have their legal departments handle the administration of the content security.

    if not, then as they say, die, cuz you aint that funny.

  • Tank man

    You're going about this all the wrong way…

    …forget all that other schizzle… Just hire and tank and DRIVE IT INTO AND THROUGH JAY LENO'S STUDIO and as you get through the other side, stick your head out the top and say "HAR HAR" like Nelson Muntz from the Simpsons

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Esha-Smitts/100000628502865 Esha Smitts

    I hope they get the recognition and justice they deserve- their sketches are pretty damn funny!

  • http://www.facebook.com/BillyAnderson Billy Anderson

    I think that personally calling out Jay Leno because he is Jay Leno is detracting from the bigger issues that this situation presents regarding HOW this actually went down.

    I feel like the bigger issues here involve the over reaching policies that YouTube is carrying out without actually using any intelligent decision making, mostly due to pressure from major media companies. Take note people that this could happen to ANYONE, and there are quite a few folk posting viral/comedy/whatever videos for the main reason of supplementing their income via the hits/advertisements that come with folk watching your videos online. If NBC Universal is using a clip on a major television program (which is fully in their rights if YouTube gave them permission, see below) and then incorporating that clip into their anti-pirating bot programs, can NBC be held liable for any loss of income to the video poster, assuming the video is one that has opted in to making money based on hits/advertisements?

    This also sheds light on the fact (or at least reminds people) that once you upload a video to YouTube, they gain the right to a "worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free, sublicenseable and transferable license to use, reproduce, distribute, prepare derivative works of, display, and perform the Content in connection with the Service and YouTube's (and its successors' and affiliates') business" *** So YouTube presumably made money off of this video by licensing it to NBC, which in turn NBC then asked them to take it down due to unintelligent anti-pirating bots. YouTube then took the content down without actually looking into the situation personally. All of these actions were due to policies created to avoid having major media content stolen without payment and do little to nothing to protect any consumer level concerns.

    I don't know the answers or proper reactions to any of these questions or points but I hope this article gets more press and sheds some light on YouTube's blanket, unintelligent anti-piracy policies.

    *** YouTube Terms of Service – 6a

  • Timmy

    I made a movie recently and the distributor wound up being a total shit-bag. One of their many horrible attempts at getting our movie out there was to give it away for free on YouTube. They didn't tell us about it, so when our camp found this random YouTube Channel that had our movie on it, we raised a stink. And the main producer gave YouTube a take down notice. 

    He was wrong though as it was actually authorized by our piece of shit distributor, and YouTube got really ad at him and made him jump through several hoops for a false take down notice.

    Now I might not be a lawyer, but it seems like the peacock gave you a very false take down notice. I think their whole account should be suspended.

  • Oromis957

    God dammit people listen to yourselves… "Dude, you can just go to Youtube and file a complaint and they'll put your video back up."  Okay yes, he can do that, he probably already fucking knows that.  Its the principle of the matter. If we as normal everyday citizens of the United States of America cannot copy copyrighted material, or else risk getting sued for thousands of dollars, why is it okay for NBC to do said act?  I'm pretty sure he doesn't give two fucks about the video getting taken down, its the fact that it was taken down because of Copyright Infringement when it was his video in the first place.  Seriously stop pointing out the obvious.  

  • Happyphace

    Theres one thing you can do, send this page to Conan O'Brien hahaha

  • Happyphace

    Theres one thing you can do, send this page to Conan O'Brien hahaha

  • lakawak

    You sure showed Jay Leno!

    Don't quit your day job, if you have one, becuase you are not a humorist or in any way a comedy writer. This "open letter" was written like a couple of high school kids staying home (again) on a friday night laughing HYSTERICALLY at how funny they are, when they are the only ones laughing.

    • Mail

      I thought it was well done.  I can't help but picture you sitting at your computer laughing hysterically at the post you just left.

  • Bigcity5

    With you on many points, but don't address your bitch to Jay, theres no way he found the video and made a decision to screw you. Also, if you then make the insinuation that Jay was a racist comment because a friend says he was, you lose any credibility for your stance. Leno was never a racist comic, nor, as others have suggesteed, was he well known for taking bits – he never was. Keep your complaint to the facts of your specific issue and only use facts, and you'll be much more honestly supported on the rational specifics of your just argument.

  • Johnnyrockets749

    Jesus dude relax, you should be grateful some dumb video u made got on national tv in had millions of views because of it, did u ever think to change your approach? Maybe not write a mean spirited email that presumably burns the bridge to the same show that provided you with a level of exposure that actually had your friends (who probably could give a shit about your stupid vid's otherwise) calling you and excitedly telling you they saw you on TV? I bet a bunch of people got you all pumped up to write this stupid article, and theres probably a bunch of people high fiving you for jumping on the "Bash Leno" train, but all I see in your article is a blind cynic who doesnt have a f'ing clue….Oh, and by the way, I'm a Letterman guy.

  • me

    I feel like I'm throwing myself out there as a guy who grew up in Bexley.  I liked Mayor Madison, hell, I delivered his Dispatch for all of three months on Main Street, but…Who cares?  Jay and his people fucked up, so what?  Does this mean it needs to be broadcasted everywhere online?  Who Cares?  

    I have no personal love for Leno, I grew up watching Letterman and Carson and even after the fallout from that debacle, I still watched Letterman and Leno, alternately.  But I grew up in Bexley, the other side of Main Street and Drexel.  I rode my bike down Columbia and Parkview wondering who it was that lived there, 'cause it wasn't my family.  

    My point is that this article is about nothing.  Some kids got pissed, so let's sue.  I grew up around the younger version of these kids and they knew better than to be pissants and shit where they eat.  I'm nearly a generation on and the next one apparently knows nothing.

    • John Consiglio

      Are you 12?  First of all the video was used without his permission, but he doesn't even care about that.  Secondly, the Leno skit where his video was shown was posted by Leno's people on Youtube.  Then, content ID went ahead and identified this guy's original video as an illegal copy of Leno's original….and they took down the 'real' original video, wiped it from his Youtube account.  And what, he's supposed to just let that go?  What the hell is wrong with you?  I don't know how your parents brought you up, but when someone steals something of mine you better believe I'm going to make some noise about it and try to get it back.  When it happens to you you can go roll over and take it, I just can't live like that.

      • me2

        Are you 11?  First of all, did you even read any of his campaign literature?  Second, Leno fucked up (which I already granted to him).  But third, see my first point.  He isn't lacking for money or funding or anything.  To quote you, What the hell is wrong with you?  I didn't just look at this video, or the transcript, but I looked at where he came from and what he has done/is doing.  Here's your noise, and if you're libertarian, that's nice.  Otherwise, get your facts straight and do some research.

      • me2

        I'm reading back over your response and what I'm able to take away is this:

        I don't know how your parents brought you up, but when someone steals something of mine you better believe I'm going to make some noise about it and try to get it back. 

        Yeah, I'm gonna get pissed, and probably file a complaint, and perhaps, depending upon what it is, maybe actually get angry.  But I worked for it once, and I know I'll have to work for it again.  

        The last sentence, though, let me quote it again:

        When it happens to you you can go roll over and take it, I just can't live like that. 

        When me me takes takes it, I'll be sure to let the elected officials know.  Wait.  Maybe he wasn't elected.

        Perhaps you have a vested interest somewhere other than Bexley, OH?

  • me2

    This about sums it up:


    A good libertarian would have attended Ohio State.

  • http://www.facebook.com/bevan.r.miller Bevan Miller

     If you want to mount a challenge you could try starting a legal fighting fund on Kickstarter. I for one would be happy to donate. I think you'd be surprised how many people think that Leno is a shill and a putz!

  • Joe

    Nobody cares, you didn't even write a funny rant. This video and song was terrible anyway. Make a good one, maybe you'll get some sympathy.

    • Joe

      Sorry I was an asshole for saying that. I  am going to blow my head off with a shotgun now.

  • Bob & Cheryl

    Reading all this about the video is more funny then the video was. But I agree that it is copyright infrig. and if you are the producer and writer and have all the proof. It don't matter if its 1 day or 3 years later. You found out about it and long as there is no statue of limitation I say GO FOR IT and get your money and your rights back where they belong. If you were in the video and your friends and stuff there are the people that can prove you also made the video and you own the rights to it. All this talk doesnt mean anything. Just get a lawyer take them to court and fight. Plain and simple.

  • Bob & Cheryl

    and P.S.
      I dont know about all this DMCA and the terms of YT but if they are allowed to give NBC the rights to use it, thats fine but that doesnt give NBC the right to claim the video as theirs or have you banned from being the owner. Stilla Lawyer would know all the legal stuff and where to take your claim or claims… Seems to be more then one to me at this point….

  • http://twitter.com/businessplanssa Trevor Marc Ray

    Hi there.. There is an online service we have called Myows – stands for My Original Works - you should have uploaded your video to our site… if you had known about it at the time that is…. to have been able to prove ownership of your material. Your story is similar to many of our members.. however times have rapidly changed and technology is now on our side to make sure that owners of original work don't get steamrollered again.

    Please check us out… http://www.myows.com

    We even have tools like a contract generator for you to assign rights and terms of use to give your copyright some actual commercial application to benefit you as well!

    Have a great day!


  • http://www.petersaxemusic.com Peter Saxe

    I gather that it wasn't specifically your campaign video that NBC blocked from youtube, it was the Tonight Show footage that surrounded the showing of your video.  Of course, The Tonight Show showed your video, justifying it as 'Fair Use" since they used it to make commentary.  You can see Fox, MSNBC showing campaign video in order to make commentary about it.  They never get permission for the showing Your rights haven't been violated, since you tube won't block you from simply uploading the pure campaign video.  I might contact NBC, and request permission to re-use the portion of the segment where Jay Leno comments on your video.  You are not going to win a copyright claim, but you might be able to negotiate a legal use of the NBC-owned portion of the segment.

    • John Consiglio

      That's incorrect.  His original video, the one without any part of Leno's show attached to it, the video he uploaded years before it was even on the Leno show, was the one that was picked up by the Content ID system and wrongfully claimed by NBC as their copyrighted material, and his original video that was subsequently taken down.  The content ID system saw that his original video matched parts of the NBC footage (because the NBC footage had the clip from his video in it) and gave NBC the option to affirm ownership of his original footage, or let it go.  NBC decided to affirm ownership of the footage and the poor guy's original video that had no Leno stuff on it whatsoever was deleted.  That's what happened.

      • http://www.petersaxemusic.com Peter Saxe

        Sorry, John. That wasn't clear from their description.  Okay.. then youtube needs to be approached with the facts.  The conflict is with youtube.

  • http://www.facebook.com/dougmeade Doug Meade


  • derekniceman

    OK, you all argue very well, but the truth is you're all WRONG!! Mike, I'm an attorney and here's the reality: From the minute you posted your video up to youtube, it became PUBLIC DOMAIN. This means, in legal terms, that anyone can then use it for there own purposes, REGARDLESS OF PAY!! NBC is a major corpration, they know this. If they had to pay for every single video they show on there channel, they would go BROKE! I'm sorry this happened to you, but you need to realize that it is a complemenet that a company as big as NBC, decided to use your video. You should be flattered, and move on with your life. Jay Leno is a hardworking person, and he has no time to be going around making sure that their not hurting people's feelings when they play a video. My suggestion is you need to keep creating things and keep putting them out in the universe where it can be appreciated by all. If you're looking to get money, you need to do some work that earns a paycheck, not from funny videos. 

    • MartiniShark

      So if the video is public domain how does Jay/NBC have any right to deny access, especially from the very creators of such? If Jay had rights to use the video Mike should have every right to do the same. Instead he's being prevented from access because Jay used it for a secondary market.

      • Derekniceman

        The thing is that once an item has gone public domain, that gives NBC/Leno the rights to use it. Mike has realeased those rights upon giving the video up on youtube. 

      • John Consiglio

        By Derek's ridiculous logic, that means that once NBC puts any snippet from the Leno show (for example) on Youtube, it becomes public domain and I can copy it, upload it, and make money from ads placed on the video.  Furthermore, since NBC loses all of their rights when they post their show on Youtube, I can copy NBC's video, say that mine is actually the original, and have their video that they uploaded first taken down…..

        Now, does anyone think that makes any sense?  Videos do not become public domain just from being posted on Youtube, that's an absolutely ridiculous notion.  If it were true there would be no need for DMCA notices or Content ID.  C'mon people use your heads.

    • John Consiglio

      Please remind me not to use you if I need an attorney.  When you post something to youtube it DOES NOT become public domain.  Do some cursory research, even type in 'does posting a video to youtube make it public domain' and you'll find out quickly that you are dead wrong.  Probably because you know very well that you are not an attorney (at least, I hope to god you're not).

      • Derekniceman

        I'd have to recheck the law on that one, but I'm pretty sure it makes it public domain. Regardless, the fact remains that NBC retains the rights to use the video HOW THEY WISH. Sometimes the law isn't fair, but until they change it, that's the way it stands. 

    • http://twitter.com/PaulAtredies1 Paul Atredies

      i think you missed the point. the point was that NBC blocked their video on you tube as if the content was theirs, which it isn't. just because they aired the clip on TV doesn't give them the right to block it for others to view on you tube.

      • Derekniceman

        True, although the basic fact remains that NBC retains the right to use the video HOW THEY WISH, and it's not Mike's or anybody's authority to tell them otherwise. The law may not be fair, but that's the way it stands as of now. 

    • IhateDisqus

      You are a bad lawyer.  YouTube is not public domain.

      I could list 20 more cites and I could cite the law.  You need to learn more before you start running your mouth on the internet — or stop making false claims about your legal training.

      • Derekniceman

        Look, and I could cite 20 more that contradict the ones you posted. The reality is it depends on how the law is interpreted by the courts, and as it stands now, the law is in there favor. I'm not saying it's fair, just that the law on this issue is very complicated. 

        • tc

          I don't think Derek is a lawyer. Most lawyers can spell 'messenger' and 'their'. I think he's making it up

      • IhateDisqus

        derek — you don't know the first thing about what you are talking about.  Please stop.

      • Derekniceman

        Hey, no one ever said the law was pleasant. Don't shoot the messanger!

      • IhateDisqus

        I am shooting the messenger for getting the message wrong, not for delivering an unpleasant truth.  Give me the case cites you are worried about.  Simply posting on YouTube does not make something public domain.  Saying that it does is spreading misinformation.

      • Derekniceman

        I can't even tell whose side you're on with this. Regardless, the facts are there, and you can feel free to research them if you like. End of discussion. 

    • Marc Turpin

      Derek, although your spelling is atrocious, especially for a lawyer, I have to admit that you are the one who is correct on this issue. NBC/Jay Leno had every right to use the video once it was posted to youtube and became public domain. 

      • John Consiglio

        For the last time, video submitted to Youtube DOES NOT become public domain.  Secondly, this isn't about Leno using his video on his show, the issue is about Youtube's content ID system recognizing portions of the original video this guy posted and matching it to NBC's Leno show excerpt and deeming that the original was a copy of Leno's excerpt and removing the original video (which by the way, was made years before Leno put it on the show).  That's the real issue here and that's what the original poster is upset about, and rightly so.

        From Youtube's TOS:

        "You also hereby grant each user of the Service a non-exclusive license to access your Content through the Service, and to use, reproduce, distribute, display and perform such Content as permitted through the functionality of the Service and under these Terms of Service"

        "Through the functionality of the service".  That means that if someone sets the option to allow people to 'remix' their video then any user can do so through Youtube's remix functionality.  That does not mean that anyone can just screen capture or download the video with some video downloader and re-upload it to their own channel, or show it on their late night show.  Now, granted, people do this all the time because they know that 99% of the time the person is going to be happy about the exposure and won't have the money to pursue it legally even if they wanted to, and because it might fall under 'fair use'.  But the posting of a video to Youtube does not make it public domain.  If it did, there would be absolutely no need for DMCA notices or Content ID on Youtube, since everyone would have a right to post everyone else's work.  Don't you see how silly that sounds?

      • IhateDisqus

        Ugh.  Your stupidity burns.  It's not "public domain."  The copyright-holder (ie the author) gives a license to YouTube to play the work on YouTube's video player, but that is not a license for anyone in the world (ie NBC) to lift the content from YouTube's website and play it on national television.  From YouTube's terms of service:

        Section 5.B "…You shall not copy, reproduce, distribute, transmit, broadcast, display, sell, license, or otherwise exploit any Content for any other purposes without the prior written consent of YouTube or the respective licensors of the Content. YouTube and its licensors reserve all rights not expressly granted in and to the Service and the Content."

        Section 6.C "For clarity, you retain all of your ownership rights in your Content. However, by submitting Content to YouTube, you hereby grant YouTube a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free, sublicenseable and transferable license to use, reproduce, distribute, prepare derivative works of, display, and perform the Content in connection with the Service and YouTube's (and its successors' and affiliates') business, including without limitation for promoting and redistributing part or all of the Service (and derivative works thereof) in any media formats and through any media channels."


      • Derekniceman

        Ugh: "Informally, public domain refers to works that are publicly available; the formal definition states that it refers to works which are intangible to private ownership or are available for public use." I rest my case. BTW, Re: your negative comments about me, I have completed law school, and though I don't have full-blown attourney status yet, I do know what I'm talking about. Let's try to keep down the namecalling. 

      • IhateDisqus

        John — I agree with you in large part, although I think this is primarily about NBC and Leno using the video on the Tonight Show initially.  The second paragraph of your post makes that point.  It amazes me that NBC believes it can take other artists' work for its business purposes, while trying to use the law to shut down any use of NBC's works.  

        They get away with it, not because it's legal, but because most people posting on YouTube don't have in-house legal departments available to pursue claims for copyright violations.  I love corporations and capitalism, but different rules don't apply just because NBC is a big corporation.  The only way to make sure they are held accountable, however, is to bring suit in situations like these.  It's all they listen to.

      • IhateDisqus

        Derek — I'm an attorney that has been practicing for almost 10 years.  While I am happy you have completed law school — your last post shows that you haven't known what you are talking about.

        Public domain is a term of art.  It means material that is not protected by copyright or patent.  It does not mean anything available to the public.  If that was the case, it would mean that anything shown over free TV or in a public museum would instantly be "public domain," free for anyone to use at anytime.  By using your "informal definition" (which I've never heard, btw), you've only confused the discussion.

        You need to learn to be more precise with your words and your arguments if you want to succeed in the profession.  Good luck!

      • Marc Turpin

        Based on what you guys are posting about public domain, it sounds to me like you agree with Derek and me but yet still seem to want to argue. I'm starting to think this isn't about copyright laws but rather a personal beef with Jay Leno. I'm going to go on a limb here and say: old school Letterman fans?

      • Derekniceman

        IhateDisqus: Yes, but, and with all do respect, you can't simply sue a major corporation such as NBC for copyright simply because they used it on their TV show. There not stupid, and I'm sure they checked into the lagality of the issue before they did it. That's my point. Agree to disagree? 

      • IhateDisqus

        Marc — your reading comprehension skills are as strong as your legal knowledge.  No, we don't agree with Derek.  Derek thinks that because a video is posted on YouTube, it is public domain for NBC/Leno to use for free, without any approval from the creator.  We (and the law) disagree.  It's a copyright violation.  

        Derek — this is your worst argument yet.  "Because NBC did it, it must be legal."  That is insane.  The fact is, there are a whole bunch of decisions that get made everyday at NBC that slip by the lawyers.  Some of them give rise to claims.  This is one of those actions.  Frankly, NBC has probably been been sued about something like this before, but it settled out of court so you never heard about it.  And the only reason they continue to do it is because 99% of people think like you and assume it's (i) too big a hassle to sue; or (ii) what they did must be legal because they did it.

        If you both are trolling, congratulations.  You were successful.  Gawd, I hope that is the answer.  I worries me that someone out there could be this stupid and still giving advice.

    • MartiniShark

      I'll be willing to accept that much, but if it is public domain that precludes NBC from claiming any rights, and from denying anyone else from access or use — especially those who created such.

  • peterherz

    Idiots that wrote this apparently don't understand copyright law. Just because you remix copyrighted footage and they show it off to public, does not mean you own your product because of the primary materials (content) you used were undoubtedly property of NBC/Uni. It means they can summarily kill anything you create based on their copyrighted footage to make sure anyone watching 'Jay Leno' related footage on NBC is most likely watching the footage _they_ want you to watch.. not what _you_ want to watch. This is all about controlling how people spending their time more than the dollars remixed footage might turn up in form of advertising dollars, etc.  With all that said I'd have to agree what NBC did to you was uncool but not illegal.. if anything it was hyper-legal.

    • peterherz

      There is the argument of fair-use of copyrighted material you could use but not here since your thing was a skit/spoof and not being critical or discourseful about Jay Leno, NBC, etc. I think that argument is the basis for _all_ videos on YT that may or may not be copyright violators. Since anyone can 'comment' on a video, the argument can be made that they're infringing on your fair-use of media for commentary/critical review. But I think since your video seemed more like a spoof than a serious talk about NBC/Jay that is why they preempted you and banned it themselves after becoming aware and monetizing it a bit by allocating it to airtime on their network.

  • leno hate, not always great

    I am no leno fan, nor do I hate him, but if you think the man did anything more than show up and read the set-up off a cue card or teleprompter and then move on to other business, you are mistaken. Using Jay as a punching bag is actually more unoriginal than anything Jay ha ever done. It doesnt automatically get you in the cool kids writers club. You have to earn that by saying or doing something funnier than him at least once. 

    • jetch

      great comment!  could not have said it better!!

    • jetch

      great comment!  could not have said it better!!

    • sandyvc

      Excellent comment. 

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=610868763 John W. O'Brien III

    if NBC sent YouTube a takedown notice, you send youttube a counter notice….
    then NBC has to file a lawsuit in court to PROVE that they own the copyright, which they don't…

    here's the kicker….

    if you haven't REGISTERED the copyright with the copyright/patent office, you aren't entitled to legal fees, etc….

    • IhateDisqus

      Not true.  You can still sue for copyright infringement and recover damages, even if you have not registered.  Copyright protection is automatic upon the creation of the work.  Copyright registration only helps with the burden of proof to show you are the author.  It also give you additional damages.  But it's not the only way to recover damages or prove authorship.

    • http://GarySaid.com/ garylapointe

      I would think if you can show YouTube that you uploaded it before Leno did (which in the account, it says that) that this would be less of an issue with NBC and more with YouTube.

  • Ray

    Bummer issue. But don't you think passive-aggressive open letters are getting a wee bit played out? Why not just up and fight it or come up with an original plan at bringing light to the subject.

    Dear so and so,
    Thanks for doing ____ it was so very nice of you, even though "sarcastic dig at whatever so and so does." This was so kind of you. Smart ass comment about how the "kind act" was awesome because of all the annoyance it actually caused. Blah blah blah. Thanks again, I'm sure this isn't your fault, you're just super awesome at "insert sarcastic remark."

    • John Consiglio

      He has probably gotten nowhere with other methods of getting this resolved, so he's hoping that the media will pick it up and that NBC will help out and contact Youtube to help rectify the mistake that was made.  If NBC wanted to look like good guys that's exactly what they would do.  All it would take is a few phone calls and an explanation about the Content ID mishap and his video would be reinstated.

  • Joeblow

    Well, did he win the race?!

  • Jaredswilliams

    leno is not funny, at all.  ever.

  • thiswasterrible

    I CANT BELIEVE THIS! I CANT BELIEVE YOU MANAGED TO WRITE SOMETHING LESS FUNNY AND MORE ANNOYING THAN THE CAMPAIGN VIDEO! You have a point to be made, and what NBC (not Jay Leno) did was wrong, but the way you're throwing a very immature fit on a comedy website to gain attention for yourself is extremely cringeworthy. Hey, if more attention on you and your comedy because of this is the result, more power to you. I hope you get it. But this was article was so horribly dumb and its attitude was so immature that I couldn't even finish it. 

    • jetch

      thiswas:  smartest comment i've read so far!

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/VFY7DPHC64SL7NTS5MJ6NS7OXU Jimmah


  • Snoop0x7b

    DMCA provides for damages for false takedown notices. Talk to a lawyer, that should be a very easy case to win. They may just give you money and retract the claim so you go away. 

  • TheSpirit OfLight

    to the original author of this article and claimant protagonist:

    dude, just use http://www.rutube.ru  and never none of your vids will get removed (unless it is some hardcore porn)

  • AvalS

    You must pursue justice.  The network pays for Leno's program.  The buck stopped there.  You never received a dollar; permission was not requested, etc.  Now, they must pay beyond what they could normally have expected to pay.  The word plagerism comes to mind.  All work is covered under copyright from the time of origin and you obviously can prove it is yours. 

    You must do this not only for yourself but for other artists.

    Be not afraid to demand justice!

    • jetch

      avals, you've been watching to many movies. 

      you know nothing of which you speak!  may the force be with you, grasshopper

  • jetch

    Brian, you're gonna try to make a name for yourself by saying "leno stole your video"??? really?  jump on the blame leno bandwagon with conan, huh?? sorry, you're not conan.

    stop being such a puss.  wipe your face, blow your nose and put your big boy pants on.  here are the facts.
    1) you made a political ad.  doesn't matter what ulterior motives you had, it was a Political Ad. no different than an ad from obama, romney, palin, santorum, etc.  they are NOT protected as works of art.
    2) you said yourself you and your friend were excited to see your little ad on leno, as you should have been because it's a national television show and if you wanted to get noticed that will do it.
    3) leno himself has nothing to do with contacting youtube and banning your video. that's between corporate big wigs at nbc and youtube.
    4) your making it about "leno stole your video" is just ridiculous and makes you look stupid.

    seriously dude, time to grow up.  your problem is with youtube. no one else.  their system incorrectly flagged your video when it should not have.  it's an automated system.  the solution should be to simply contact youtube and show them that it's your video and they unflag it.  the fact that this isn't happening means that youtube isn't doing their job!  so why didn't you write this post about them? because everyone would just look at it as a stupid mistake.  saying "leno stole your video" sounds more catchy, but it's not true. 

    and uhhhh calling someone a racist in the 80's??  really?  just throw that out there right? no proof, just say your friend told you???  not cool.

    • John Consiglio

      Youtube certainly has a problem with their flawed content ID system, but someone in Leno's camp who handles the Youtube channel had to manually affirm, and then re-affirm ownership of this guy's video.  That makes it a problem with Leno and his people, not Youtube.  Youtube's content ID system doesn't just automatically remove videos.  The claimant is asked to affirm ownership of the video, and then it goes back to the person being claimed against, and he has the opportunity to say 'no way, that's my original video'.  Then it goes back to the claimant and they have the opportunity to release the video back to the person's account, or re-affirm ownership and have action taken (either removing the video or placing ads on the video so that the revenue goes to the claimant).

      Read this to get a better idea of what I'm talking about.  Yes, Youtube is flawed, but Leno's people did the wrong thing too.  http://www.fairusetube.org/youtube-copyfraud

      • jetch

        by "leno's camp", do you mean nbc???  yes, i agree that nbc contacted youtube and so they are partially responsible.  but their's is a stupid mistake, which youtube ought to correct, even without nbc's "approval".  it was a real political ad that clearly is not nbc's property.  brian (the author of this post) should not have to get nbc's agreement that the ad was his.  brian should be able to easily prove it's his, right?? so what does it matter what nbc says?? 

        youtube is the one that's letting bureaucracy get in the way of common sense.

        now, once again regarding leno.  i personally don't care for him, his show or his jokes.  he is an employee of nbc, high-priced, but still just an employee (like conan was) and we all saw how they treated him.  please don't tell me leno is activly invovles in searching youtube of comedy bits that aired on his show.  nbc has lawyers and all sorts of people to take care of that kind of thing.  leno writes his (lame) jokes with his writers, goes onstage and delivers his (lame) monologue, chats with a few (lame) celebrities, then goes home to his cars.  i'd bet cash money on the fact that he knows nothing about this and brian is just naming him because it's "cool" to dump on leno.

    • John Consiglio

      Jetch, you're missing the point.  What NBC did wasn't a 'silly mistake'.  It was an egregious negligent act.  They confirmed multiple times manually that content that belonged to someone else actually belonged to them.  Not only that, but they chose to have the video taken down as a result.  That isn't a silly mistake, it's gross negligence and it could be costing the real content owner money.  What's even worse is that I'm sure they do this with every video flagged by content ID, rather than actually look at the video in question.  They figure that would take too much time, and hardly anyone would have the money to bring litigation even if they wanted to.  This is NBC being a grossly negligent bully, and they deserved to be called out on this.

      Of course Jay Leno personally has nothing to do with any of the decisions, but this guy is probably hoping that one of Leno's PR guys will notice this rant and try to make things better.  It makes perfect sense and I would have done the same thing (afterward following up with litigation).  He's not doing it to 'dump' on Leno, he's hoping for a rectification of the problem while exposing a bully (NBC and/or the Leno show) and a flawed system in the process.

      He's perfectly in the right.

    • IhateDisqus

      jetch — you are clearly not an attorney and you are wrong on a couple of levels.  First, political ads can be copyrighted works.  It does not matter why they were created — only that they are tangible artistic works in a fixed medium.  Second, the song the guy wrote within the ad may also be copyrighted, which was violated when the song was replayed.

      I think your point is that people don't normally sue for copyright violation of political ads.  That's true for two reasons that have nothing to do with whether they are "copyrightable."  As you point out, candidates normally want to get their message out, so they are not going to sue for copyright violation because they want the press.  Second, the fair use doctrine will protect some display of the copyright work in reporting or commenting.  Here though, it appears that Jay and NBC just ran the video without commenting for the video's own humorous value.  That is likely not fair use (although it would probably be the key issue in any lawsuit).  

      In short, there is a real claim here, notwithstanding that this was a political ad.

      • jetch

        ihate: i don't remember saying i was a lawyer.  should i infer by your statement that only lawyers can comment on this post??

        if there is ever a reason to claim "fair use", its for a political ad.  you can say all you want about "political ads can be copyrighted", but good luck winning that case in court!  there's theory and reality, and since we're not in a classroom, i'll stick with reality.

        In reality, he'd have to show damages, so what damages can he *prove*??  a rinky dink political ad (not intended to make money) on youtube is played on a nationally televised talk show where the host says "i loves that song".  tell us again what his damages were? and not some vague "lost ad revenue" or "potential job opportunities", give us real numbers. you can't. 

        there's a reason nbc's (not leno's) high-priced lawyers allowed the show to play that video, it's because they KNEW it was perfectly legal.  but if you're so sure that there's a "real claim here", why don't you pony up and pay for brian's legal bills?? i'm sure he'll win so much money, that you'll make your money back.  up for it??

        as an employee who most likely got approval from nbc's lawyers before he did anything, leno is not responsible for brian's problems, which is ultimately my argument.  

        flat out claiming that leno stole his video and that he heard leno was a racist seem more lawsuit worthy than anything leno did.  yes, leno probably couldn't prove damages, but it would cost brian tens of thousands to prove it.  given this, i stand by my statement that brian needs to stop crying and work with youtube to get his video back online.

      • John Consiglio

        Jetch, (why can't I reply to Jetch's reply? I hate disqus as well), this same very thing happened to me and I was all ready to bring litigation and had 3 lawyers (referred to me by the EFF) that were prepared to represent me pro bono. I had ad revenue statistics from the past 2 years that showed that the removal of my video could have cost me $20k/year or more. So yes, he might be able to sue for damages if he had ads on the video to begin with. Whether he did or not I don't know.

        If you read the article, he indicates that he didn't even care that Leno used his material. He only had a problem when his own video was claimed by NBC and NBC affirmed and then re-affirmed ownership of the video causing it to be taken down. He's not whining about Leno using the video, he's whining about NBC saying that the original material this guy created belongs to them, having the said video taken down, which, and even worse, leaves a message that paints this guy as a thief! Anyone, and I mean anyone, would be upset about that and want to take action. I don't consider it whining at all. We don't know what actions he took up til this article, maybe this was the last ditch effort to make something happen without having to hire an attorney which he might or might not be able to afford.

      • IhateDisqus

        Jetch –

        1) I am not saying only lawyers should comment on this thread.  I am saying only lawyers should speak definitively about what they think they law is.  In this case, you think you know the law, but you don't.  You are wrong.  Advertisements (political or otherwise) are copyright protected.

        2) With copyright infringement, you do not need to show damages.  There are statutory damages that can be awarded for copyright infringement.  Its the same reason that Metallica can sue and get money for an illegal download.  Do you think Metallica (or any record label) would ever sue if the only think they could get was damages of their profits on a per song basis?  

        3) You are absolutely wrong that a lawyer at NBC necessarily looked at this and decided it was legal.  Stuff like this slips by the lawyers all the time in corporate America.  It is what keeps people like me employed (normally representing them after the screw-up).  Just because a company is big, and has lawyers in-house, does not mean that everything they do is correct.  In fact, here, they very well may have made a calculated decision that it would cost more to try to get approval than the risk of running the work.  This may be because they think they have a fair use defense.  But more likely, its because they assumed that most people are like you and won't bother to sue them to protect their copyrighted content.  Its a fair business decision, but it does not make them legally right.

        4) I agree with you that this is not about Jay Leno.  He's the host of the show, so I see why he's the focus of the piece, but he likely was not the one making the final decision.  To the extent I say that Brian might bring a lawsuit, I have assumed this whole time that the litigation would be directed against NBC and the Tonight Show's production company.  The focus on Leno is a red herring.

        5) I also agree with you that he should "stop crying."  That is what I am recommending — stop crying and sue.  The law provides a recourse for NBC's action.  Either use the recourse or stop complaining.  What angers me is people that want to claim that corporations have all the advantages, but then refuse to use the same tools that are available to corporations.  I guarantee that if Leno made a video and David Letterman played it, no one would be surprised (or accuse Leno of crying) if NBC sued CBS for copyright infringement.  It should be the same for Brian.  He has the same legal rights as NBC would in my example.  He should use them, and not just rely on a passive aggressive open letter.

  • Deidzoeb

    Youtube is sloppy like that. I suspect that they have some kind of software that looks at every copyrighted movie, tv show and song from the last 10 or 20 years, and compares it with videos that average citizens upload to Youtube. If part of it matches, then they assume the big corporations own the copyright, and average citizens must be violating copyright. And they don't care if it's wrong or which honest people get burned, because most of the time the system works. Youtube sucks.

  • http://www.facebook.com/TheFckingLiar Liar Angelspit

    Irvine 2012

  • Sam

    Blaming Leno for this is f***ing ridiculous. You think part of his job description is telling YouTube which videos belong to the Tonight Show and which ones don't?

    Also, regarding your video being "stolen": Wake up and smell the time we're living in.  You know that thing called the Internet where you posted that video?  Well, when you post videos TO SHARE WITH THE WORLD, if it's good – and apparently yours is good – other people are going to also share it WITH THE WORLD, and I'm assuming that since you had millions and millions of hits, The Tonight Show wasn't the only place where it was shared. So if that's "stealing", then is it also stealing when The Soup or Attack Of The Show or The 11 O'clock news or Conan O'Brien or Jimmy Kimmel show viral videos?  THESE ARE THE TIMES WE'RE LIVING IN.  IF YOU DON'T WANT SOMETHING SHARED, THEN DON'T POST IT.  Also, you act as if this glitch/mistake with NBC – or in your eyes, Jay Leno – happens everyday.  If it happened with any regularity, I think we'd be hearing a lot more about it.  IT WAS A MISTAKE, DUDE.  NOT EVIL JAY LENO OUT TO GET YOU.  Get a brain.

    • lisa


  • BM1

    Looks like the Jay Leno/Tonight Show has a history of robbing others of their work


  • You're all stupid

    You people are all stupid. You do know this was just a ploy to get you to advertise the website "Funny or Die?" It's not real. Duh.

  • Conan O'Brien

    While we're at it…he kinda stole something from me in 2009 as well. I want in on this!

  • Olro

    Slightly different arena, but when I worked for a gaming company that wanted to incorporate theme-appropriate videos found on YouTube, we had to reach out to each video owner, affirm that all content was original, have them sign several legal documents, and submit all that to the lawyer for review before their video could be used. (Oh and we didn't have them yanked from YT afterward.)

  • Jordan

    I wouldn't put this past Jay Leno since he got Conan fired and stole his time slot. Jerk!

  • Mollo

    I agree with you that you guys were screwed over. But don't call it on Jay Leno. He likely has no idea what's going on. Address the letter to NBC. Not Leno. 

  • http://twitter.com/ablestmage ablestmage

    I've had two similar problems — I sold one-time rights to two British companies to play the music and video of one of my videos, and shortly thereafter got takedown notices sent to me through YouTube that I was infringing on one of the company's copyright.  It was remedied, however, by simply replying that the British company was actually licensing the material from me.  In another case, I had made a movie-style version of the Mass Effect 1 cinematics and dialogue.. and seemingly randomly, got a copyright infringement notice about one part of the 26-part series, which contained a long bit of dialogue.. which a rapper named Caesar Cypher had lifted from the game itself and used in his album (and a lengthy portion, no mere sample) to establish his moniker.  It was resolved, because his publisher didn't know that he'd lifted the audio directly from the game =P

  • DanPavelich

    Speak with an attorney that specializes in entertainment law. Also, Jay is a known theif…Letterman was doing his "funny headlines" bit decades before he was even on the tonight show.

  • MaxDWolf

    "First off, my intention is not to fight you on this. You have more cars
    than I have dollars, and so I know I don’t stand a chance legally, and
    on top of that, I don’t really understand how legal stuff works."

    Oh come on. It's not rocket scientist. File a counter notice. Or at the very least, get a lawyer. NBC has no legal footing here.

  • juliet


  • http://twitter.com/travis_chambers Travis Chambers

    I found this article because I am the creator and owner of "The Real Meaning of MPH." MSN ripped the video and put it on their homepage for two days. I have text messages with the guy at MSN that did it and I told him to take the video off and he did. Then the media frenzy continued to grow and he put it back up. My video got 5 million monetized views totaling $30,000, but I'm positive MSN homepage's version got at least 2 million views, the math on that is around $12,000 so yeah wtf. Can I sue? Does anyone know?

  • ebp283

    These celebrities want to believe they're royalty. If the video is rightfully yours, kick his ass! I mean, I know he has a million lawyers on his side … but that doesn't make him damn royalty. Where's his guillotine when I show the lowest form of respect?

  • http://twitter.com/Rockfish8 Chris C.

    Wow,I would not be worried about that steaming pile of feces

  • Realz

    I think the biggest issue here is that none of this is funny in the slightest so why anyone would argue over it is beyond me!

  • Mary Lawson

    i live in Germany. I have been through hell and pain, When my husband turned against our marriage and sent me away, he said that he never wanted to see me again because he was having an affair outside with another woman. I was finally confused and so many thoughts came to my mind,when a friend finally advice me to go and visit a spell caster. As i was searching for a spell caster to help,I was scammed four {4} times by some who claimed to be real spell casters until i found the real and great spell caster on Google search who helped me and solved all my problems concerning my husband who left me since 7 months and after that a friend also complained of her husband too,So i linked her up with the same spell caster who helped me too,and the problem was also solved by the same spell caster oldreligoin@gmail.com . Whao!! the real and great spell caster is here,all you need to do now is to contact this same address whenever you are in any problem.

    Mary Lawson

  • Johnny Hansen

    I´ve uploaded an audio with an only photo of my band displaying on YT. The music was written by me, I did the vocals, and play the guitar. Some crooks from an "organization" called IODA claimed they had the rights on it. I´ve got room for self defense, so I explained that I was the author e one of the guys on the photo, and those crooks didn´t pay for the recording, pressing or distributing the record of my band, but YT didn´t buy it. So, if these fake jedis as IODA want to shut down the video, they´ll be able to do it, and that´s it…

  • Mendi Mayhem

    I'm not getting the information I need. Did your friend get elected or not?!?!?

  • Christopher Riser


  • Gloria

    Take me off your list!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    • Anni98

      OKY DOKY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Travis Chambers

    How about this? VH1 just aired my video, the Real Meaning of MPH with 9 million views on national television for their Top 40 Viral Videos without paying us. How about that one,

    • William Ray Walters

      Was your wife a good sport about that? I mean, she's hot, so who cares how smart she is, right? I wouldn't. And why isn't my video 'How to see through clothing' on that viral video show? lol it has 38 million views.

      • Travis Chambers

        She was an incredibly good sport. There is a lengthy back story but in short her and I loaded it to YouTube to show her brothers without smart phones. It was discovered 3 months later with no promotion. I don't know why yours isn't on the show, I wonder if it's because yours is more of a tutorial format which is not normally associated with viral, even though your video is viral. I think your video went very viral inside the YouTube ecosystem as well as a recommended video, especially because you posted it in 2009 so it's had a long time to accrue. Ours was a national news story on the homepage of MSN, featured on Good Morning America, etc…

        • William Ray Walters

          Yeah I know, I wasn't really being serious. My video isn't really 'viral' at all. Viral videos get a bunch of views in a relatively short period of time, usually through social media and sharing. Still, my video didn't do too badly. It got 15 million views by the two year mark and another 20+ million since. At one point the video was getting 100,000 views per day for a long period of time in 2011. Months.

          As far as your litigation is concerned, companies like VH1 know very well that most people won't want to shell out thousands of dollars to bring it to court, so they take advantage of the little guy on a regular basis. Not much you can do.

          • Travis Chambers

            For real. You are getting paid for those views right? It's $2k-$5k per million views depending on how bad advertisers want your type of video. If you aren't already a part of a Multi-Channel Network which gets you paid more for your views I can introduce you to mine.

          • William Ray Walters

            Yeah, I've been getting paid for those views since 70k views. Unfortunately, at that point in time I was independent (still am, no MCN) and the more lucrative preroll video ads were not available to IVP (individual video partnership) videos at the time. The static ads only carried between a .75 and $1.50 RPM ($750-$1500 per million views). That was that way up until late 2011 when they gave everyone the trueview prerolls which carried the RPM range that you mentioned and even more in late 2012 since it was an election year. October RPMs were ridiculous. I made $460 in one day on that one video, it was sick.

            Now things have fallen off considerably though. In April of 2012 they opened the floodgates and allowed pretty much everyone who uploaded a video to be a partner. This had a diluting effect on the advertiser market and eventually would result in lower RPM. This year compared to last year is like night and day for me and many others. I never signed on with an MCN although I've been approached by several, most recently Fullscreen which offered me a great deal which I turned down…which one do you use?

    • Travis Chambers

      So I actually consulted a lawyer. Lawyer wanted $500 flat rate for a cease and desist letter (SERIOUSLY? I can write one myself), Then to file a Complaint, the total fees to research, prepare, file and serve the complaint would be about $3000. To initiate the litigation, they request a $5000 litigation retainer and ask that I replenish this amount monthly upon receipt of your invoice. Yeah I'm thinking no. Disclaimer- I did sign a contract with VH1 but didn't receive payment yet and the video has already aired. Lawyer said there's nothing I can do about this. I know VH1 will pay me, just weird they didn't pay before it aired. Technically, they could just not pay me and I would have to send a cease and desist, file a complaint, or pay $5k litigation retainer to get my $900. Isn't media law just so great? Yikes…

  • ari

    jetech — you are dead wrong. Political ads can by copyrighted works of art. There is no exception for political ads. There are a number of organizations that will help artists find pro bono (free) legal counsel. One in Chicago is the Lawyers for the Creative Arts.


  • julius rosen

    My question is , Why wasn't the originator notified first and allowed to respond ?

  • dave

    So what happened? this was a long time age.

  • sahin

    Thank you kindly for presenting and offering this terrific section. The situation is likewise enticing. I feel the need to know


    some different informative content concerning this post. So please give me this news instantly. I unfailingly can be attentive to you..

  • apik

    If the roles were reverse he would be getting sued by NBC. Yhank you.

  • nightshawks!

    Leno is just another example of what moneys does. If he had none, he wouldn't even have friends. I would go visit this chinned pig and cave a hole in his skull with a claw hammer. Leno, you're a pig dog. Too bad your mom and dad were brother and sister.

  • wildan

    You should sue NBC and Jay Leno for copyright infringement. Seriously. There are a number of organizations that will help artists find pro bono (free) legal counsel. One in Chicago is the Lawyers for the Creative Arts. not one in your home town, there may be lawyers in other cities (like Chicago) that will take on a case like this in Ohio. http://www.noteber.com/2013/11/jasa-pembuatan-blog-murah-berkualitas.html

  • papa

    A letter to the World Wide Web will really get you the answer you want, well done.
    If the song has a copyright you should know exactly what to do as a musician if not you need to learn. I've had music stolen by big companies like NBC before and used without my consent, knowingly I've had 4 tunes stolen and broadcast.
    Trying to sue will get you no-where and is bad advice that could cost you a lot more than you make back. The use of the music on the show will not generate you that much money even if you were paid for it. You should join a collection society (BMI, PRS) and register your work, that way you will start to show some proof of ownership which is the first step. You need to show ownership.

  • papa

    Its not the first time NBC have screwed musicians

  • sandyvc

    They may not have known this in 2008. Many people use the Internet and have no clue what is going on. They do not know how it works. They do not know how software is created, what its limitations are and why. I doubt many people know what a bot is or how it is possible to search content even though they may use 
    Google search on a regular basis. They know how to do the more menial things but they do not know what geeks and developers know. Heck, many people in software development companies are ignorant of how the product they sell was created. I have seen so many help desk people who only have a canned response and become agitated and even rude if they do not have a canned answer.