How soundcloud and mixcloud (and even google) stop you from posting

[antifmradio]

Ok so i own a website (online radio station) and it has MANY songs from artists, labels, release companies and so on.
While i do pay into a royalty to STREAM this media
that does not allow me to post its information to the web (however my streaming server does that automatically on my domain)

So what does this have to do with say SOUNDCLOUD?

You go to soundcloud,
upload your new hot mix
and they decline it from being part of their pages.

World, say hello to companies like " AudioLock.NET"
notice i said COMPANIES (plural) there are many of them.

Take a look here
http://173.194.10.102/transparencyre...tifmradio.com/


Youll notice that TOOLROOM RECORDS notified these people to make sure that GOOGLE
does not allow the listing or search results, tied to my domain name, if any media is part of their label.

Many times you do a google search, and at the bottom of the page youll see a COPYWRITTEN MATERIAL REMOVED notice. right?

well this is what its all about
and even soundcloud has accompanied this movement to make sure they are not liable for the sharing of files.
Now i have to wonder why YouTube hasnt done this?

Ok so there it is in a nutshel (because my lunch break is over and i dont really have time to explain more)
so if there any questions, go ahead and HIT REPLY
but dont reply with something like TIESTO or HARDWELL because the djtechtools server would then be removed from google since youd be filesharing HAHAHAHHA

[Bruiser Smith]

I'm not one to judge, but this seemed like a whole ball o crazy. Not sure what exactly you're trying to say - Google bad? Soundcloud bad? Copyright bad?

I'm all for HULK SMASH, but wat?

[SlvrDragon50]

Nah, I agree.

I have absolutely no clue what he is talking about.

[bluegrassdj]

^^ lol

[Dohjo]

nice1 m8

[JZed]

Oh no I've gone crosseyed!

[Combo Meal]

cliff.. notes?

[antifmradio]

cliff.. notes?

basically im saying that there are companies like "AudioLock.NET"
(there are MANY of them)
and they have a contract with say Toolroom records, Nervous records, UNK records and many other release labels,
telling AudioLock.NET to scan the internet for a specific set of titles, labels, artists, releases.
Each time one of these links are found, they investigate it to see if its a LINK on a website.
They dont care if its a sharing link or just a link to information. They only care that its a LINK.

Once the link is found, AudioLock.NET notifies GOOGLE to REMOVE THAT search result from its listing.
Also in the cases of Soundcloud, when AudioLock.NET finds a link on its pages, AudioLock.NET tells Soundcloud to keep removing those links.

[antifmradio]

here is aother example
i just searched for "Denise Rivera & Dark Matters - Take Me Home (Sir Adrian Jibberdee Remix)"
because its playing on my radio station

and i got this google results page
https://www.google.com/search?q=Deni...x-a&channel=sb

at the bottom of the google results page you see this message
"In response to a complaint we received under the US Digital Millennium Copyright Act, we have removed 1 result(s) from this page. If you wish, you may read the DMCA complaint that caused the removal(s) at ChillingEffects.org. "

apparently the website "ChillingEffects.org" had the song listed on its pages (just like soundcloud)
and because of a complaint, that result is removed and so is the page from the chilling website.

[bluegrassdj]

so you're saying this delete-all-links approach is affecting even those who pay royalties and should be able to post stuff?