Prior, these restrictions were not imposed and the author or more likely studio or more likely even still some subsidiary of Alphabet, Inc. let it slide, though this is not up to them, matters of lawfully protected free expression. It would appear it was only after calling attention to certain treasonous undertones (see our highlight above) the video was flagged. As usual, not direct but by proxy.
Oh, and no notice was given. I was made to find out for myself, by grace of vigilance ..
-Paul Simon
Normally, withstanding a copyright flag, I am able to simply delete the track. Why not so in this case? Strange? No, just simply as expected. More BS. More politically motivated censorship? Yeah.
BTW - all citations properly notated, not unlike a radio station, notwithstanding. Why in this context are others permitted to re-broadcast but I am not permitted to re-re-broadcast? Rules for thee, but not for me?
-Paul Simon
i; a man, claim ALL FOUR in this the public square (requiring only one in the scope of this right not limiting other right, Sony Music Publishing, Youtube, LLC, Google LLC, Alphabet Inc. as applicable) - per God-given right of free expression as Supreme to these enumerated rights, though not limited hereby. That would make this censorship also wrong with damages accruing daily, would it not?
“Happy birthday to you, happy birthday to you, happy birthday dear freedom, happy birthday to you.” Now and every day.
Pattern of Abuse:
The reader is reminded that the content of the video was about physics (factual), while the background usage of the music taking a back seat to the educational, informative, transformative as to critique / interpret, with the cited music playing in the background being secondary & small beside the greater focal point of the video (and again physics), having no perceived effect upon the owner’s bottom line (I also paid for and even promoted the ā-jed album (AGED Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster) while the re-broadcast entity is seemingly permitted to continue with bias), and though not limited by the narrow context of copyright assumptions which have been around much less time than Our Creator and while the subject of the critique per the content of the video involves the music but is not consumed by it. Notwithstanding being happy to remove but provided no option therein in spite of normal protocol while only recourse being to enter into a cattle trough jurisdiction with a pattern of bias, partiality, abuse. Something tells me the owner of the work, having fallen off some would righteously say, had nothing to do with it.
“Graceland,” the irony being not lost on me..
UPDATE: within only a few hours of posting my last, the video appears to be back up. This is wonderful, as this particular video is very special to me, and “dates matter” as far as being first to new concepts. This news brought tears to my own eyes. Thanks to whomever or whatever helped me, and especially thank you YHWH. My building testament is truly more magnificent than fiction, and some days I am just in awe of how lucky I am in spite of all the heartache.
God bless.
