Reference: From HTML'S MAGIC article, 'A Fun Copyright'
From: YouTube Service [mailto:email@example.com]
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2013 11:12 AM
To: CBS Legal Online Enforcement Subject: Re: [#1196198064]
New Copyright Counter-Notification
Description: Image removed by sender.
We received the attached counter notification in response to a complaint you filed with us. We're providing you with the counter notification and await your notice (in not more than 10 business days) that you've filed an action seeking a court order to restrain the counter notifier's allegedly infringing activity. Such notice should be submitted by replying to this email. If we don't receive notice from you, we may reinstate the material to YouTube. If you have any questions, please contact firstname.lastname@example.org. Sincerely, The YouTube Team Counter-Notification as follows: Videos included in counter-notification:
Display name of uploader: MrSilvestris
I contend that I have not violated copyright, and I am exercising and implementing my Fair Use rights. I swear, under penalty of perjury, that I have a good faith belief the material was removed due to a mistake or misidentification of the material to be removed or disabled. I consent to the jurisdiction of the Federal District Court for the district in which my address is located, or if my address is outside of the United States, the judicial district in which YouTube is located, and will accept service of process from the claimant.
Mr.Georges Paul du Berger
Help center • Email options • Report spam ©2013 YouTube, LLC 901 Cherry Ave, San Bruno, CA 94066 YouTube - Videos from this email
RE: [#1196198064] New Copyright Counter-Notification Inbox Ellis, Chris
Montreal, Saturday, January 19, 2013
From GP duBerger
RE: [#1196198064] Copyright Counter-Notification
To whom it may concern
To refresh my memory concerning Fair Use, I extracted this item from Wikipedia which does no harm putting it here so that I can put into focus my position as compared to the position of those you represent in this matter, that I consider was expressed in the guise of simultaneously being "generous" while being defensive, which makes for creating interesting new equivalences by this way of expressing things, that can only be properly represented in a visual form, as a replacement for the original masks of 'Tragedy and Comedy' and turning them into new masks, representing: 'Defensiveness and Generosity' without having to alter the original visual object itself. Re: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Item: "Fair use is a doctrine that permits limited use of copyrighted material without acquiring permission from the rights holders. Examples of fair use include commentary, search engines, criticism, news reporting, research, teaching, library archiving and scholarship. It provides for the legal, unlicensed citation or incorporation of copyrighted material in another author's work under a four-factor balancing test."
The first and most important factor discussed here in this reply to your letter to me and its offer is: "not to supersede the use of the original work."
"Fair use tempers copyright's exclusive rights to serve the purpose of copyright law, which the US Constitution defines as the promotion of "the Progress of Science and useful Arts" (of which I claim to be doing and is, apparently, what you are defending too, which is achieved through the following), "to stimulate creativity for the enrichment of the general public""
You will note that those particular videos featuring various 'Star Trek' clips and reedits in the A/V form, I uploaded on You Tube; they are embedded for articles that discuss philosophy and complicated physics and thermodynamics with analogies using metaphors that everybody understands, which all the Star Trek screenplay writers have inadvertently or purposefully included in their media and then ultimately were produced into various audio/visual mediums, and I contend that CBS is not the owner of any philosophy, or the future, that is contained inside any Star Trek media, and if so, they will have to prove that they own any kind of philosophy, pertaining to my own discussions, on my website, that involve philosophy, the future and technology which CBS cannot deny that they themselves make use of, to sell the stories they own.
Of course, by the time we argue this point, we will be old people and there will a "New Generation" who will not be interested in such things.
To fully appreciate the value of the Star Trek material, rather than just viewing the videos alone from You Tube, because there is no mention of any of my articles in your letter to me, via email, that created the need for Fair Use, of which the video clips are supposed to exist in that manner, I direct you to the articles at HTML'S MAGIC and their embedded video's respective locations.
For Video Entitled: 'Star Trek TNG Cogito Ergo Es'
can be found at:
A Manifesto: Upon Modern Philosophy "Cogito Ergo Es" Part 2 @
Which is my attack against existentialism, existential literature and existential causes, which I contend are poisons undermining all humanity, because they are not thermodynamic and therefor should not be taken seriously, philosophically or otherwise, and this story I constructed in the "language of video and audio" I demonstrate the differences between Humanism and Existentialism; and since there are no scientific demonstrations of self-aware computer-generated beings that people can identify with, that exist, with present technology, which can be considered a quasi-physical representation of an existential object; I therefor represented, instead, from different episodes of Star Trek TNG (credits at the end) that do have this idea germinating, where the conflicts and resolutions between the physical and metaphysical, with illusory based photonic beings, robots and human beings concerning intricate matters of self-awareness, provided an excellent opportunity for the imagination of the student of philosophy, physics and thermodynamics to conjugate, and these particular episodes of Star Trek were a natural choice to demonstrate this. The story itself that was created from my editing work doesn't belong to anyone since I created it for this purpose; of already existing elements, and merely changed the plot in an existing story to create, express and exploit a new concept, in the manner of Aristophanes who is the father of comedy, that does not have any other means to introduce itself, and then this idea could be used by anybody, in the future, to create new types of plots in new dramas and can even be good for producing new mathematical proofs, if we want to go that far, by introducing The Zeroth Law of Thermodynamics and its physics in people's lives that are all available in Nature through open systems, where people no longer need to be limited to closed or isolated systems anymore, that I also contend are the root cause of so many unnecessary problems that are created unnecessarily everywhere in society.
Prior to the Video 'Cogito Ergo Es' and its introduction, I wrote in the manifeto, this statement:
"..........On the perfectly practical side: If someone asks you "what do you do?", even a notary or a policeman, you tell them that you are a businessman. That says everything in one word, but means absolutely nothing at the same time, necessitating the person who asked you what is is that you do to describe what kind of businessman you are and depending on the situation you can give any reply you want and never be a liar either, regardless of what you say, because their question was based on a different premise that demands a conditional statement as an answer which itself is deceitful, presumptive and gives that person, asking the question, too large a control of the conditions which he includes in the query, which are conditions he has no right to having or to impose in the first place, unless they have some true authority to ask such things which can, then, be held accountable because someone would be responsible and not an idea that is responsible. One eliminates, by this method, the abusive aspects of any type of power by not giving it away or by not receiving it, for free, in the first place. Notice here that this applies to any physical process in physics or any process that involves living things, and in philosophy (both physical and metaphysical) and yes, this includes people and their societies and religious beliefs.............."
After this there is the introduction to one of the videos in question (you will need the Mozilla Firefox browser to look at the video).
For Video Entitled: 'Star Trek TOS Attack of The Zetarians .wmv'
which is located in:
'Extreme Cold ' @
Here I'm not showing what specific part because this involves much larger issues so this essay must be read from the beginning, where a reader will naturally fall upon it.
Description: This is my history on thermodynamics. I created this video reedit because it is the only footage I could find anywhere that deals specifically with Pressure and Matter and its importance, yet pressure is never discussed in thermodynamics or in physics except arbitrarily sometimes, as 'Kinetic Energy' because of an over emphasis on the Second Law of Thermodynamics and none is given to the Zeroth Law of Thermodynamics which is the point of the article and is the foundation of my entitled work, where among other things discussed we find that pressure also exists in open systems too and not just in a closed or isolated systems.
Here we may argue successfully that if ignorance of the law is no excuse, it can then be argued that ignorance of Nature's Laws is also no excuse and would be recognized as fair use since this fulfills other "factors", cited as part of the justification of what is considered by your law makers in the United States as 'Fair Use'.
For Video Entitled: 'Star Trek Voyager: Chaotica and Queen Arachnia, 'Multiple Dimensions' .wmv.'
'Einstein, The Media and Acceleration Part 2' @
This article attempts to rehabilitate Albert Einstein whose reputation is under attack by unscrupulous intellectuals who are as well attempting to give Einstein's theories a ludicrous quantum mechanical interpretation, were both Special and General Relativity are only pure Classical mechanics and the video in question here is part of this discussion, where in the part the video clip is located, we embark on the simple idea of multiple dimensions which as you know is very difficult to describe to the layman. Nevertheless it is necessary to attempt this for the sake of this essay that involve parameters of the Universe covered by General Relativity.
Despite its humorous connotations, it is very effective in getting people to appreciate that there may be more dimensions than the ones we only know or think about, or are actually discussed by theoretical/particle physicists who seem to be more concerned with things like time machines, reverse entropy, fabrics, 'memory of the future', strings, dark matter and god particles et cetera; which I consider equivalent or inferior to the childish fantasies invoked by the characters of Chaotica and Queen Arachnia, Captain Proton and Death rays etc.rather than Theorists actually describing anything practical for the future, and is amply described in this article/essay with other things, too, from both the commons and private source entities in various media and is being used for this same purpose, since I don't limit myself to the Star Trek universe, because it is not big enough .
I think I'm on very solid ground to argue anything concerning my position on many "factors" which have actual substance, as deemed necessary by your own Congress which would involve the Star Trek television series, and I have additional arguments to bring forth; One of which would be about 'Premise', where I am perfectly capable of handling such delicate ideas and make them available, and easy to understand and show how important they actually are as regarding such issues, and produce evidence of anything, in anything, pertaining to this, that is also directly involved.
All that is necessary, for me, is to prepare and produce a method to show my proofs, write motions and briefs in a clean and simple method so as to not waste time with easy to obtain details if at such a point, anywhere, this is necessary for all parties concerned.
All my videos are of exceptional poor quality, especially those with Star Trek featured material, that were made lovingly with simple things like Windows Movie Maker and an old dilapidated computer, but science, art and philosophy is not concerned with such matters but is more interested in the quality of ideas that are being produced, and these were uploaded on You Tube by me, which I use as a video hosting service for HTML'S MAGIC and not as a social network, and not for the purposes of providing entertainment but, instead, for presenting instructive material using things people already do understand in pop culture and that can be used as tools to properly understand other things, so it cannot be argued that I'm being an iconoclast and impugning any material owned by CBS especially where I unveil a hidden meaning, that the drama itself, entirely, fails to represent where if these stories were handled by better writers, directors and producers; this would not exist. Then all I would of needed to do is provide an Url to this properly made Star Trek (concerning their own plots) to a place like Amazon etc.. After 50 years Star Trek only describes things such as good and evil but borrow an entire universe to do this where good and evil does not even exist in an Open system like the Cosmos.
CBS on the other hand never had any right to produce anything with the character 'Sherlock Holmes' without permission of the estate of Sir Arthur Ignatius Conan Doyle since the character is trademarked and that is still owned by the present administrators and custodians of this estate and the producers of the Star Trek TNG were not aware, themselves, that they were infringing while making a profit off this work. What's good for the goose is good for the gander in this case, and it's interesting to find that scripts to make television shows that include the mere mention of characters and things that are owned by others, adapted or are not entirely invented 100% are not scrutinized by any of their own legal departments prior to production with the same vigour as they do when they claim their already unverified material as copyrighted and use DRM as a tool for this verification and DMAC for its implementation for material and media that they cannot claim they own 100% anyway, because everyone from the single individual up to large media groups, borrows and adapts, whether knowing it or not, the works of others and anthropologically this is natural since we live in a society where people exchange ideas all the time with the things that exist that we can see and hear and everybody recognizes, where it is no crime to add some variety to anything whether it is copyrighted or not, so long as it is represented in some sort original creativity, or a difference in its creation is in the representation, of the new creation, is produced including that which creates new differences between them that can be developed to the point where they become real and unique entities themselves that can be copyrighted and trademarked and subsequently marketed in any kind of way by any kind of media group.
What CBS and others considers as media today is actually an entitlement, and this entitlement has nothing to do with the law because there are infinite ways to express the same idea or an infinite number ways to describe different ideas, in one way.
Generally, the way CBS is proposing and presenting their arguments, comes from a region of philosophy that is like saying : People can only look at everything , including reality, through television and other related electronic mediums and people are not allowed to use their own eyes to view everything around them, because media groups only provide information in that manner and claim through their own promotion schemes and advertising (News shows for example) as being the source of all truth and real information that can be trusted. When in fact, because of the nature of the Universe and thermodynamics, they must update the truth all the time thereby proving that they are insufficient and the human eye is more universal than the camera which, of course includes everything one puts in front of the camera to be represented later on television or any other media. What worked to bring down the tobacco industry with their outlandish claims in the past, could do the same in exposing the reality, and detrimental value of big media groups and possibly create new kinds of legislation that will affect them in ways they may not like in the future partly due to the fact that they all display remarkable aggression with very small matters where they will end up irritating the wrong person one day, who will change everything.
I can cite many examples, in history, that describe this.
I never knew that some of these videos would be so popular while creating them, and I never entertained the idea that this was because people were suddenly starved for philosophy, existentialism and thermodynamics. These things took on a life of their own and as a father to my "creations" (in the way Michelangelo thought of his statues as his children), I'm protecting my prodigal "children" from being executed, which seems that many facets of present copyright law have been extended to this and have changed the meaning and concepts of many words, contradiction its purpose by creating a new meaning for words themselves where if the meaning of the words in a book are changed then the work no longer is copyrighted because no one would recognize the literature anyway except by its "historic"title because the author typed the words in the manuscript that had only specific meanings and that no longer exists because now this applies to life itself, were in the past "to execute" something implied through its definition: to either begin something or end something where it can be argued (I think successfully) that certain parts of copyright impugns existence itself, by including life as something to be protected or not protected- but only in the way as described in copyright law and I can, with great amusement for everybody, demonstrate many examples of this new phenomena, in any sort of arena. A case in point, is for you to read this part of an article in Wikipedia where you will understand exactly what I mean which concerns the Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh of UPMC where we find that a children's hospital is actually putting children in grave danger and many deaths can easily be attributed to them by a clever litigator because of an all encompassing attitude involving copyright law which take precedence over human life and prevents protecting children from accidental poisoning in more effective ways and where the importance of a drawing is more important than a sick child. @
Further, my website is not a one page banner filled with advertising but contains an enormous amount of research and original material, written by me that needs borrowed material that is widely understood for the purposes of instruction and there is much to discuss concerning Thermodynamics and the Future which belongs to everybody, including CBS.
I believe that everybody's rights should be protected. Therefor in this spirit, I find that your offer is not fair and we should attempt to reach another sort of reconciliation with a new and better offer, or acceptance to the one I propose forthwith, further below, which you generously have provided, initially, in your email response to me delivered to you from You Tube that is perhaps more amenable and satisfactory to all parties concerned, since these three video clips are integrally part of written essays on science and philosophy, which is understood universally that such use of copyrighted material is 'fair use' since I consider myself an artist and a historian on science and art and that is what I write about, - science as per artistic philosophy.
Now let me describe, briefly, more practical things that concern both of us and what I suspect is the real reason why you are attempting to shut down these videos in particular because there is no shortage of Start Trek fan stuff all over You Tube and at other locations where you could spend your entire life finding them, viewing them and issuing take-down notices.
We both have a problem, which is unauthorized embedded versions of my video adaptations, everywhere on thousands of sites all over the world on pages that have nothing to do with science, art or thermodynamics, which to me, distorts the meaning of my own work and my intention and with CBS and You Tube, for obvious reasons. Unfortunately I have no control over this and when I originally uploaded 'Cogito Ergo Es'; more than two years ago, I removed it after 750, practically spontaneous views and re-uploaded it, and this time preventing embedding by others because I was shocked at how the thing was being used to promote other things after I googled what was going on. This had no effect as people just hacked a way to embed the new upload again, which are things that are beyond me as being capable of doing or controlling. So I just gave up and forgot about it after researching the phenomena.
Here is my proposal as the site author of HTML'S MAGIC.
1) I will immediately remove all the videos in question from the mrsilvestris channel to solve all our problems; After you retract your take-down notice. Not before. This is my only way to ensure that my channel does not get deleted by You Tube because you have inadvertently created three strikes against me in one action, and that's what it takes to get one's channel deleted. If there were only two strikes, I would have some leeway.
In the future, I would suggest that you only implement take-down requests one at a time giving the channel site owner a chance to "get the message" and rectify the problem according to the Media group concerned as I did when I had a dispute with Sony once and handled it in that manner and removed all their material including the stuff they didn't complain about, where I simply transferred everything to RTSP and everybody's happy.
Further, you readily admit that despite a request on your part to You Tube, a promised request of removing my strikes against me does not ensure or guarantee that these strikes will be removed at all (I'm surprised that you made such an empty offer), but I do know that they will remove them if you rescind your take-down demand and it is not clear whether if I remove them now, these strikes will no longer count after this business is over and I have not seen this as an option anywhere. No one, in all three parties concerned here, should put anyone's fate in anyone's hands.
2) I will also agree to not uploading any of these videos anywhere, with the exception of only using RTSP instead of HTTP or any other similar technology that may exist now or appear in the future, that is itself impossible to embed elsewhere, thereby preventing piracy and protecting the integrity of my work from the unscrupulous. A Blogger sub-domain only allows the maximum of 100 visitors at a time and increasing traffic slows down the ability to stream any video and further, my pages are very long and take much time to load on top of that, so this should discourage any covert activity involving this situation, where my site could not be used, only, for entertainment purposes.
I don't belong to any Social network and I don't promote my site or your videos but follow an entirely different philosophy that would take too long to explain here and is of no concern to anybody anyway.
Basically you (CBS) put me in a situation where I have nothing to lose and it would be naïve for representatives of any media group to not consider all the options a person like me, who creates media specifically dedicated to the enhancement of humanity, has before him that no one has any control over; which can turn extremely advantageous for me. I can prove at anytime that I have no malicious intent and actually I would like to help you because clearly we all have something to complain about regarding these type of situations including You Tube and I don't see anything from my position of anything that may be considered personal against me. So I hope we can all agree that there is no malice intended by any parties involved here, in all respective fronts.
I hope that this will be satisfactory and if you feel you need to add something, please do so as I'm anxious to resolve this matter in a fair and expedient manner, where everybody's happy but with the conditions I have stipulated.
Regarding, the future and not just mine since this involves a lot of things and a lot of people who use visual mediums of expression, both moving pictures and not, to convey constructive, creative and informative ideas.
I'm working on a project that will scientifically eliminate this problem altogether, and this system will be acceptable to everybody and prevent piracy altogether. It will ensure that all artists, their projects and their ideas are protected since publishers themselves use obsolete and draconian systems and treat everything very effectively, only, as a consumer product or a form of fashionable consumption and never understand or exploit their inner meanings which exist in all things, where there are also other forms of value to consider that I believe should be exploited too by both private and free enterprise, which everyone with a new idea can benefit from this new system and would protect the work of artists and their ideas and unique concepts, and all within a system that does not exist yet that will be easy to implement universally.
Finally, I notify all those concerned that this correspondence is being transferred by me into the public arena and all activities involving this matter is being published on my website for everybody's benefit as a resource in providing an example for others of what one may expect if they are in a similar situation.
This can be found @
I await your response.
Re: [#1196198064] New YouTube Copyright Counter Notification
From You Tube Copyright Servicecopyright@youtube.com
to me January 25 2013
In accordance with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, we've completed processing your counter-notification regarding your video:
This content has been restored unless you have deleted the video(s). Your account will not be penalized.
The YouTube Team
(personal Comments) Click to magnify. So I had to start the counter-notification thing again and we'll see what happens. This is harassment by CBS and this demonstrates to everybody, who reads this, that harassment is considered a legal instrument by, supposedly, highly educated lawyers who have no other recourse or resources to argue a case and they get payed for this?!**?. This is not law, this is bullying.
These people think and act like perfect machines or they think I'm an experiment in some lab that only exists in their minds. If that is so, then I'm anxious to see my name on some scientific or law journal somewhere one day. It will be an interesting day in court, if it comes to that, when I bring my open system arguments, that are based on Nature, against their arguments based on closed or isolated systems.
The world is run by insane people, because it is only the insane who think they need to run and control everything.
Sunday January 27, 2012
After a second request from Rebecca Borden of CBS who desired to have a telephone conversation with me (despite my earlier expressed objections to have any phone conversations in the first request), I "climbed up the pole" and called her Sunday afternoon at her office number and we did not arrive to any agreement worth anything but the highlights of this conversation I put here. The details, themselves, which she relates of the reasons why CBS thinks I am "infringing, were stated to me in a non sequitor manner as to lessen their value entirely, which is the first time I ever saw a lawyer give away his rights, by way of lessening the value of his position. I had to remind her twice that she was giving away the initial rights of CBS by the logic she was using, which is why they did not make sense to me and I call them, here, "Non Sequitor". She was also sneaking in distinctions but using them in a broad manner, and burying them in subsequent nonsense to establish her weak arguments in a way she probably thinks, I think a judge would take seriously, where I had to interject, where again I had to remind her what she was saying could mean anything and was herself impugning the law and peoples rights, by making her implied position more amenable which is excellent logic if you are a child and wants his parents to buy him a new toy. In court, I think things are handled differently.
Tomorrow is the deadline (apparently, as she told me, regardless of any new counter notification and the temporary reinstatement of the videos in question; this was an error on You Tubes part (citing something called Columbus day (whatever that is) or something to that effect) where she accused You Tube of "breaking the Law", so no one from CBS is making friends at You Tube either with that attitude.
One crucial thing I did learn (which I wanted to know) was their concern at how popular (over 250,000 viewers) of Star Trek TNG 'Cogito Ergo Es' was, which I mentioned in my first letter to CBS, is my existential play on self-awareness and the importance of life itself, which is a story I put together that is not owned by CBS but by me, of which my copyright to this story I have given away to be governed by the Creative Commons, on the stipulation that you cannot make money out of it. I told her that this is MY Audience not theirs, since it's not their story anyway and Star Trek itself is just a vehicle as anything else could do the job so long as there was holograms, robots and arrogant captains of spaceships in the scenario.
I could easily say that the story itself would of sold itself but they don't see it this way. Further I told her that if ever I built upon my own essay and went further I wouldn't need to use Star Trek anymore because visitors and readers would already understand the preliminary stuff or perquisites to begin a new even broader examination but we have to start from somewhere and as in everywhere else, we begin with things that everybody understands or are familiar with and pop culture has some very excellent potential to do this if one stops treating or thinking of people as stupid or with narrow tastes. I don't care about what people think about pop music or pop culture, I care about what people are looking at and I, the artist, just comes around and tries to get people to see or hear those things, that they immediately recognize, and give them something else or something different, that invokes an entirely different feeling, or claim it will improve their lives and I'm not charging anybody for it because I, MrSilvestris and HTML'S MAGIC are not a business. To her, things like Star Trek is just a consumer entertainment product, that's it, that's all, which is something to hear from the "horse's mouth" itself and made the whole exchange worthwhile because now it's finally official: According to CBS you are just a number on some spreadsheet somewhere. None of your feelings, perceptions or ideas mean anything whatsoever to a media corporation. If they could take away the air between you and your television set and sell it back to you, they would. They do not serve the community, or mankind; they serve themselves.
Think about that the next time you watch television or peruse any media, and I would like these lawyers from CBS, tell that to any egotistical actor, director or producer anywhere, who think they are artists and actually believe they bring a new quality to drama, just to watch fun. The production cost would be Zero and the entertainment value would be priceless! Just put them together in a room and roll the cameras and no prompting or scripts are necessary either.
Finally she refused to back down even if I dispensed with my fair use rights of the videos in question and never post them on You Tube again after they remove their DMAC take down notice but I reserve the right to re-post them in my articles in RTSP or some other nonembedable form, or in some form of object somewhere in a server that can only be accessed from HTML'S MAGIC: She told me that was not good enough as even a hundred visitors at a time on my site is enough to "infringe". Since they created three strikes against me unnecessarily, since it's only one they are really bothered with, and You Tube is more than less a machine than actual people running her, the lawyer's offer is therefor "mute". You do stuff on You Tube, the You Tube way not the CBS way regarding any protocols in legal matters and you do not deviate and there are no rosy letters from CBS or anyone else that will change anything. I asked her why my videos? when there a millions right now that are not taken down by you and guess what? She told me 'CBS issued over a million take down notices for just Star Trek stuff". I told her, "how does CBS plan to handle 6 billion people who will do what the hell they feel like" where each new take down notice, generates a hundred new postings elsewhere so math does not fall into their equations either which should stimulate a few blood vessels and their next board meeting.
This lawyer might be excellent in certain things but she has no qualifications to discuss creativity or anything creative in the slightest bit, nor is she capable (or will not) examine anything below the surface yet she claims, on behalf of CBS, that they are the acme and absolute apex of thought concerning such matters and nothing else exists or should be considered which I will make sure they do not pull off a stunt like that if this ends up in court. I hate telephone conversations and Telephones; They foment more concerns and problems than they solve.
On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 4:23 PM, Borden, Rebecca <Rebecca.Borden@cbs.com> wrote:
Dear Mr. Du Berger,
I refer to our conversation today about the three videos which appeared at these URLS on Youtube:
In order to resolve the CBS copyright infringement notice to YouTube along with your outstanding counter notice identified as #1196198064 by YouTube, I confirm that CBS is willing to send at 10am EST on Monday a request to YouTube that the 3 strikes be removed from your account, provided that you agree :
- To withdraw the counter notice and remove the Videos from your YouTube account no later than 2pm EST Monday January 28; and
- Not to repost the Videos on YouTube.
In making this offer, CBS maintains its assertions of rights in the underlying content comprising the Videos, and while we continue to object to any re-posting of the Videos or any other videos which contain unauthorized reproductions of content from the Series on YouTube or any other locations, in an effort to resolve this matter quickly, and without waiver of any rights of CBS, we hope this will resolve the assertions of copyright infringement on YouTube and the counter notice you sent to YouTube.
SVP/Associate General Counsel
51 West 52nd Street
New York, NY 10019
phone 212 975 3610
YouTube- Videos from this email