This is not the first time Lynda has lied and bullied fans who question her endless piracy, bootlegging and criminal stalking. Last year a fan raised the question of her piracy and bootlegging on the Great Big Sea Online Community Forum on Facebook and Lynda told a range of lies and half truths to justify her activities on YouTube. These discussions were recorded in another post copied below GBS Online Kitchen Party, Fan Behaviour and Copyright...A discussion and response published on 6 February, 2016. There are other instances of her bullying fans throughout the years into submission on her blog Between The Rock And A Hardplace.
First of all Lynda accussed me of having a fake Twitter account. I have been using the same Twitter account for over 5 years and joined in 2012 and have over 8500 tweets. I don't have Facebook except as a log in for other sites and to do research on the musicians and artists I like and fandoms. It seems okay for Lynda to have a deviation of her real name on her account as Here is not her last name but not me. Elizabeth is my real name. It is my middle name. Like Lynda I don't use my last name but my account is called a fake account while her account is a genuine account.
Lynda falsely accused me of allegedly cyberstalking. In order to cyberstalk a person has to be contacted electronically and threaten the person. I have not contacted Lynda in nearly five years since I first wrote to at her blog and objected to her bootlegging and piracy and she tried to bully me as she has done other fans. She threatened me by trying to get me blocked from my Internet Service Provider and fired from my employment as she believed I was using a computer at work. Those incidents are recorded at the beginning of my blog in 2012. I have not contacted her on any of her social media accounts or any of the places where she posts including Facebook and Twitter until yesterday. I have not contacted any people she has contact with on social media under my Twitter account or other accounts. Fans are free to watch her videos she posts and contact her and they are not hasselled by me. I have tried to educate myself and others about bootlegging and piracy through research. If Lynda knows I write about her and her bootlegging, piracy and fan behaviour in the fandom then it is because she has actively sort my blog posts out.
Secondly it seems okay for Lynda to discuss the fandom at length on her blog Between The Rock And A Harplace and invite people to comment over the years but not for me. I don't invite people to comment or discuss what is happening in the fandom on my blog nor do I discuss these observations with anyone anywhere else. While she is entitled to an opinion on her own social media pages and the fan pages I don't seem to be entitled to mine on my choice of social media, my blog.
Thirdly Lynda has a long record of manipulating copyright law and YouTube policy to make excuses her piracy and bootlegging. Lynda has implied that sharing bootlegged and pirated videos on social media are with permission which they are not. Alan Doyle has not responded to her endless Tweets and videos sent to him to his official Twitter account in over three years. He has on occassions shared other people's shares of her videos but this is not consent according to copyright laws. Alan Doyle to the best of my knowledge does not have copyright to the music he produces even though he has the right to perform it.
After checking the YouTube Terms and Conditions again Section 6 Your Content and Conduct Part D states "You agree that the content you submit to the Service will not contain third party copyrighted material...unless you have the permission from the rightful owners of the material...or you are otherwise legally entitled to post the material." Part F states "Youtube does not permit copyright infringing activities and infringement of intellectual property rights on the Service." Lynda states she has permission but despite repeated requests for proof of permission she has never produced any permission documents on her Facebook, Twitter or YouTube accounts that she has permission to record videos before at events or after the event.
To the best of my knowledge YouTube does not send out 3 rd party copyright notices as stated by Lynda. The Content ID function provided to major organisations allows them to search YouTube and locate content. If the Content ID choose to contact account holders will be sent a notice of the options of what will be done including blocking or monetising. Because the Content ID holders do not send notices does not mean they approve of the content. The only reason Lynda has not monetised her account is that it increases the likelihood of it being issued with copyright infringement notifications.
Lynda has been uploading bootleg and piracy onto YouTube and making thousands of alleged false declarations about rights and permission she allegedly does not have. Lynda has a history of nastiness, bullying and ostracising those fans from fan sites like me who question her crimal stalking and endless photography, bootlegging and piracy. She manipulates the copyright laws and policies of social media sites to suit herself as she believes after many years that no one can stop her. Rather than waste resources searching YouTube and be on the end of her nastiness copyright holders have decided to ignore her activities rather than try and bring them down and use other strategies to minimise loses for recorded material.
The good news is that fans across the fandoms prefer professionally made videos and recorded music to bootlegged concert videos. The number of hits on YouTube of legal videos verses her bootlegged versions are testiminate to that.
GBS Online Kitchen Party, Fan Behaviour and Copyright...A discussion and response. 4 Feb, 2016.
One of the things I love to do is read fan’s social media posts who raised issues that concern them at concerts and engage in respectful debate. Recently an Alan Doyle fan posted on the Great Big Sea Online Kitchen Party on Facebook about fan behaviour at concerts and using mobile phone devices and cameras to record bootlegged videos and take photographs. The comments were directed at regular Alan Doyle and Great Big Sea concert goer, pirate and bootlegger Lyndahere and her latest recording of new music by Alan Doyle and The Beautiful Gypsies on the American So Let’s Go Tour for 2016. Copyright and fan behaviour at concerts in the fandoms I write about have been discussed on many occasions on various social media sites.
As I don’t have an active Facebook account or a member of the Great Big Sea Online Kitchen Party I will respond here.
Fan creators like Lyndahere and others, definitely know and use their copyright knowledge when it is their own fan created material being created and distributed. Some seem to forget or manipulated the copyright law and knowledge to justify their actions, regardless of what the artists and musicians (or the venues) whose music they record and distribute and take photographs want. Most fans and that includes really educated fans seem to choose their right and need to watch a bootlegged video and respond on a social media sites, over the rights of the content creators to distribute their work how and when they choose. Whether they do this through ignorance, a lack of education, their need to participate in social media or they just don’t care, it is difficult to tell.
Despite the many discussions that have occurred over the years about fan behaviour at concerts and recording music and taking photographs Lyndahere and many fans continue to remain a law and a force all of their own twisting copyright policy and laws to suit their own needs. While I don’t have a YouTube account, I must admit it has been a while since I looked at their policies on copyright. So this discussion inspired me to look further into the points made in these posts. After doing some research I am certainly in a better spot about YouTube and their copyright policy. I am glad artists and musicians and music publishers now have greater facilities to track the copyright of their music and a choice about how their music is seen through YouTube’s Content ID and a range of other devices.
I certainly don’t support Lyndahere’s argument that bootlegging and piracy should occur in order to give people access to content from concerts they can’t go to for any reason. Fans who do go to concerts first priority should be to the other paying fans around them. Concerts are now where many artists and musicians are making their money which has been increasingly difficult with streaming from which they receive little income. Without making money and a profit many artists and music can’t and will not survive, just as any business can’t survive that doesn’t make a profit.
The fan response (the name has been deleted to protect their privacy)...
“I love seeing him in concert! I don’t love having the glare of phone screens while people record whole songs. It is really inconsiderate to all the other concert lovers behind the person recording. It is one thing to take a picture during a show but recording it when it will be put onto YouTube by people hired to video tape songs – usually better quality than a cell phone. Although it does not seem to be enforced it is not legal to tape/record concerts due to copyright laws. I encourage all of you to lie in the moment and enjoy the concert for yourself.”
Lyndahere’s reply states...
“All copyright holders can object to their content being put on YouTube, which will honour their objection to by taking down the video. Many copyright holders owners opt instead to allow their content to be seen on YouTube, the majority of them getting revenue from ads shown on the video. Since my YouTube account is not by my choice “monetized” any ads that appear on my videos therefore benefit the copyright holder (and YouTube too).”
“Second this video was made with a camera held at my own eye level – you’d have to be sitting in my lap for the glare to have bothered you.”
“Third, Alan has no “people hired to video tape songs.”
“And finally, there are many people who for financial, physical and/or family reasons, do not have the ability to go to many concerts or any shows and “live in the moment”. I encourage them, and you, to allow each person to freely choose for themselves what they do or do not want to see.”
The fan’s response...
"Thank you for the clarification of Copyright Laws Lyndahere. That is different to all that I have read. Alan has many videos of songs, several taken from state POV by band members, which to capture the energy and excitement of the kitchen party at the time. Please do not assume others have the luxury of concert attendance due to health, money or location, this can be a very special concert for them, once in a lifetime –as well as you- do not walk in their shoes. The video’s distracting and glaring were taken at eye level of the owners, keeping in mind that seats are on an incline, the light from the phones was not dimmed at all. This does impact the other viewers experience and ruin their moments – I just people to be considerate around them".
Lyndahere's reply states...
"Fair enough. And I’d ask for the same consideration for folks here. Do feel free to ask YouTube about their policies in regard to copyright holders".
I agree with everything the fan has said. The social and cultural interactions of fans at concerts and other live entertainment events have changed considerably over the years. Mobile phones and technology has encroached into every aspect of life. While the use of mobile phones and technology has become a way of life for young people, for some mature people these changes have been difficult to adjust too including myself. Despite venues developing policies many patrons deliberately or ignorantly fail to observe them and as a consequence their use has become a problem as patrons disrespect other’s rights to enjoy a performance without the interruption of a mobile phone or camera lights. This fan is quite right in that the need to use technology to record the event for after the concert means that other fan’s moments may be spoilt. I agree with fans taking photographs and even a video or two of their favourites for personal use. However, bootlegging entire concerts is in bad form and totally distracting for the patrons around them but also undermines the artists and musicians.
From my understanding and research on YouTube and copyright, Lyndahere has conveniently forgotten to mention that in order to load a bootleg video up onto YouTube users are required to have permission from the copyright holders to record at concerts and to post on YouTube. To the best of my knowledge users are required to state they own the material. I don’t think during the time I have been writing my blog and as a fan I have ever seen a social media post in which Lyndahere has asked Alan Doyle or Great Big Sea for permission to record a concert or post one of her thousands of bootlegs and pirated videos on YouTube. Their limited response to Lyndahere's thousands of social media posts and attached videos illustrate to me that only under a very small range of circumstances do they approve of bootlegging including personal use.
Lyndahere is correct in that copyright holders can ask for their material to be taken down. Because they don’t doesn’t mean they approve. I am sure agencies who managed artists and musicians have enough to do without having to monitor YouTube for breaches in copyright. Taking down bootlegged and pirated material may also make some fans very angry and the consequences of an angry fan may not be good for an artist or musician. Because bootlegs and piracy are loaded up onto YouTube doesn’t mean the account holders have the musician’s and artist’s approval. And because people get away with bootlegging and piracy doesn’t make it legal or right.
Lyndahere seems to promote the fact her account is not monetised. One of the interesting things I found about YouTube is that if an account is monetised then it increases the possibility of an account becoming involved in a review for breaches in copyrighted material. Advertising on Lyndahere’s account probably means there has been a match with content creators submissions for registered copyrighted music and they have chosen to monetise with advertising rather than choose another option. Advertising that appears may also mean YouTube has put the ad on and until a claim from the copyright holders, the advertising revenue goes to them.
Lyndahere seems to have also forgotten the YouTube Content ID feature which allows content owners to identify and manage their content . In an article from YouTube Help “What is a Content ID claim?” they describe YouTube’s Content ID function. Content ID is only available to established music publishers and others with substantial published material. Content owners can run scans against the Content ID database they have submitted to YouTube to detect if there are any works that contain any registered copyrighted music and issue users with notices. The content owners can decide what to do which may include mute (which means they block the sound and people can still watch the video), block (the content or restrict the devices, apps or websites on their content can appear), monetise (running ads) or track the viewership. If there is a Content ID claim then the video can’t be monetised.
Lyndahere states “Third, Alan has no “people hired to video tape songs.” When either Alan Doyle or Great Big Sea have taped at live venues paid out of their own pockets, Lyndahere has nearly always bootlegged and put them on her YouTube site in competition to official versions. That list is very extensive. It seems a bit hypocritical to be concerned about Alan not having a person who takes videos, when in the past she has bootlegged concerts and specials in competition to their official live videos they have made at their own expense. The good news on this front is that on nearly all occasions fans prefer professionally made videos to those of bootleggers.
In her final argue Lyndahere justifies her position for bootlegging and states “And finally, there are many people who for financial, physical and/or family reasons, do not have the ability to go to many concerts or any show and “live in the moment”. I encourage them, and you, to allow each person to freely choose for themselves what they do or do not want to see”. It is kind of unfortunate she has not given Alan Doyle or Great Big Sea the same courtesy of when and how their music is distributed.
Lyndahere’s attitude is fans who can’t attend concerts for whatever reason have a right to content. I am wondering if this is her attitude then why hasn’t Lyndahere and her friend and patron Christina Templeton provided disadvantaged people with free tickets to concerts. One of Lyndahere’s airfares and hotel rooms for a couple of nights out of St. John’s could provide fans with a lot of tickets to see Alan Doyle rather than bootlegged videos. I don’t think I have read where Lyndahere has provided someone with a free ticket and if she has only at cost. Also if Lyndahere was really concerned about the inclusion of fans, one of the best and cheaper things to do is respond to fan’s comments who contact her on social media and share their contributions. None of which she does and if she does only very rarely.
The fan response (the name has been deleted to protect their privacy)...
“I love seeing him in concert! I don’t love having the glare of phone screens while people record whole songs. It is really inconsiderate to all the other concert lovers behind the person recording. It is one thing to take a picture during a show but recording it when it will be put onto YouTube by people hired to video tape songs – usually better quality than a cell phone. Although it does not seem to be enforced it is not legal to tape/record concerts due to copyright laws. I encourage all of you to lie in the moment and enjoy the concert for yourself.”
Lyndahere’s reply states...
“All copyright holders can object to their content being put on YouTube, which will honour their objection to by taking down the video. Many copyright holders owners opt instead to allow their content to be seen on YouTube, the majority of them getting revenue from ads shown on the video. Since my YouTube account is not by my choice “monetized” any ads that appear on my videos therefore benefit the copyright holder (and YouTube too).”
“Second this video was made with a camera held at my own eye level – you’d have to be sitting in my lap for the glare to have bothered you.”
“Third, Alan has no “people hired to video tape songs.”
“And finally, there are many people who for financial, physical and/or family reasons, do not have the ability to go to many concerts or any shows and “live in the moment”. I encourage them, and you, to allow each person to freely choose for themselves what they do or do not want to see.”
The fan’s response...
"Thank you for the clarification of Copyright Laws Lyndahere. That is different to all that I have read. Alan has many videos of songs, several taken from state POV by band members, which to capture the energy and excitement of the kitchen party at the time. Please do not assume others have the luxury of concert attendance due to health, money or location, this can be a very special concert for them, once in a lifetime –as well as you- do not walk in their shoes. The video’s distracting and glaring were taken at eye level of the owners, keeping in mind that seats are on an incline, the light from the phones was not dimmed at all. This does impact the other viewers experience and ruin their moments – I just people to be considerate around them".
Lyndahere's reply states...
"Fair enough. And I’d ask for the same consideration for folks here. Do feel free to ask YouTube about their policies in regard to copyright holders".
I agree with everything the fan has said. The social and cultural interactions of fans at concerts and other live entertainment events have changed considerably over the years. Mobile phones and technology has encroached into every aspect of life. While the use of mobile phones and technology has become a way of life for young people, for some mature people these changes have been difficult to adjust too including myself. Despite venues developing policies many patrons deliberately or ignorantly fail to observe them and as a consequence their use has become a problem as patrons disrespect other’s rights to enjoy a performance without the interruption of a mobile phone or camera lights. This fan is quite right in that the need to use technology to record the event for after the concert means that other fan’s moments may be spoilt. I agree with fans taking photographs and even a video or two of their favourites for personal use. However, bootlegging entire concerts is in bad form and totally distracting for the patrons around them but also undermines the artists and musicians.
From my understanding and research on YouTube and copyright, Lyndahere has conveniently forgotten to mention that in order to load a bootleg video up onto YouTube users are required to have permission from the copyright holders to record at concerts and to post on YouTube. To the best of my knowledge users are required to state they own the material. I don’t think during the time I have been writing my blog and as a fan I have ever seen a social media post in which Lyndahere has asked Alan Doyle or Great Big Sea for permission to record a concert or post one of her thousands of bootlegs and pirated videos on YouTube. Their limited response to Lyndahere's thousands of social media posts and attached videos illustrate to me that only under a very small range of circumstances do they approve of bootlegging including personal use.
Lyndahere is correct in that copyright holders can ask for their material to be taken down. Because they don’t doesn’t mean they approve. I am sure agencies who managed artists and musicians have enough to do without having to monitor YouTube for breaches in copyright. Taking down bootlegged and pirated material may also make some fans very angry and the consequences of an angry fan may not be good for an artist or musician. Because bootlegs and piracy are loaded up onto YouTube doesn’t mean the account holders have the musician’s and artist’s approval. And because people get away with bootlegging and piracy doesn’t make it legal or right.
Lyndahere seems to promote the fact her account is not monetised. One of the interesting things I found about YouTube is that if an account is monetised then it increases the possibility of an account becoming involved in a review for breaches in copyrighted material. Advertising on Lyndahere’s account probably means there has been a match with content creators submissions for registered copyrighted music and they have chosen to monetise with advertising rather than choose another option. Advertising that appears may also mean YouTube has put the ad on and until a claim from the copyright holders, the advertising revenue goes to them.
Lyndahere seems to have also forgotten the YouTube Content ID feature which allows content owners to identify and manage their content . In an article from YouTube Help “What is a Content ID claim?” they describe YouTube’s Content ID function. Content ID is only available to established music publishers and others with substantial published material. Content owners can run scans against the Content ID database they have submitted to YouTube to detect if there are any works that contain any registered copyrighted music and issue users with notices. The content owners can decide what to do which may include mute (which means they block the sound and people can still watch the video), block (the content or restrict the devices, apps or websites on their content can appear), monetise (running ads) or track the viewership. If there is a Content ID claim then the video can’t be monetised.
Lyndahere states “Third, Alan has no “people hired to video tape songs.” When either Alan Doyle or Great Big Sea have taped at live venues paid out of their own pockets, Lyndahere has nearly always bootlegged and put them on her YouTube site in competition to official versions. That list is very extensive. It seems a bit hypocritical to be concerned about Alan not having a person who takes videos, when in the past she has bootlegged concerts and specials in competition to their official live videos they have made at their own expense. The good news on this front is that on nearly all occasions fans prefer professionally made videos to those of bootleggers.
In her final argue Lyndahere justifies her position for bootlegging and states “And finally, there are many people who for financial, physical and/or family reasons, do not have the ability to go to many concerts or any show and “live in the moment”. I encourage them, and you, to allow each person to freely choose for themselves what they do or do not want to see”. It is kind of unfortunate she has not given Alan Doyle or Great Big Sea the same courtesy of when and how their music is distributed.
Lyndahere’s attitude is fans who can’t attend concerts for whatever reason have a right to content. I am wondering if this is her attitude then why hasn’t Lyndahere and her friend and patron Christina Templeton provided disadvantaged people with free tickets to concerts. One of Lyndahere’s airfares and hotel rooms for a couple of nights out of St. John’s could provide fans with a lot of tickets to see Alan Doyle rather than bootlegged videos. I don’t think I have read where Lyndahere has provided someone with a free ticket and if she has only at cost. Also if Lyndahere was really concerned about the inclusion of fans, one of the best and cheaper things to do is respond to fan’s comments who contact her on social media and share their contributions. None of which she does and if she does only very rarely.
