Sony Demands Removal of Open-Source Indie Short ‘Sintel’ From YouTube [Updated]

“Sintel” © Blender Foundation

Sony Pictures has demanded the removal of the CGI short film Sintel from YouTube due to a claim of copyright infringement. One small problem: they don’t actually own anything in the film.

Sintel, a film by Colin Levy which has been featured before on Cartoon Brew, was created by the Blender Foundation, the non-profit organization which promotes the free, open source 3D software Blender. The crowdfunded short was made using entirely original materials, and was licensed as Creative Commons Attribution 3.0, which means that anyone can freely share the movie.

The removal of the film is most likely the result of a faulty DMCA take-down request, but it speaks to a bigger and more troubling issue: corporations today have unprecedented control to wipe independent creators off the Internet. Years of your hard work can go down the drain due to the actions of a single nitwit who works at a powerful company.

This is the scary reality of the 21st century where everyone is guilty until proven innocent. Not only is the majority of entertainment controlled by a handful of media conglomerates, but even the content they don’t produce or own is subject to their approval. Corporations today can scrub anything from the Internet on a whim without recourse to the creator, and they aren’t held accountable for their actions. Both Sony Pictures and Google’s YouTube should be ashamed for their flagrant abuse of the law.

UPDATE #2 [Monday, 3:15pm ET]: YouTube has restored the official version of Sintel on the Blender Foundation’s YouTube page, effectively confirming that Sony’s claim was without merit. So, let’s recap:

No explanation to the content owners about why their film was removed.
No apologies to the filmmakers.
No compensation to the filmmakers for lost revenue.
No legal repercussions for either Google or Sony.

Here’s the film—for now:

UPDATE #1: On Twitter, @MediaGoblin points out that this is not the first time YouTube has inappropriately removed a Sintel-related video from its site.


  • http://mattjordan.com/ Matt Jordan

    This would be a great time – and a great reason – to donate to the MediaGoblin campaign. http://mediagoblin.org/

  • JamScoBal

    What part is infringing copyright? This makes no sense! Do they feel threatened by Blender?

  • DC

    There’s gotta be a way to hold them accountable and get an apology for this type of behaviour. Someone at Sony went through the take down request process, and someone at youtube agreed with it. If I was the film’s producer, I’d start making calls and taking names…

    • etoven

      I think the problem is this.. A take down request is ridiculousnessly easy.. Just sign into your partner control panel. It take about 5 minutes to do and I don’t think any humans review it, just Google servers. So video’s start coming down in minutes sometimes.

  • fredinandus

    This is really sad.

  • Shuckleberry Hound

    If Sony doesn’t own anything in the short, why would they even want to take it down, let alone have the right to? Did I miss something in the article explaining this?

    • http://www.justingoran.com/ Justin Goran

      The problem with YouTube is Google is paranoid. Google is paranoid of lawsuits and don’t want companies suing them for hosting copyright infringed material, what is their solution to this? two things: Flagging and Content ID, and the biggest problem is 99% of this stuff is handled by an automated system so stupid stuff like this happens.

      Any company can submit a copyright claim on any video, even if they don’t actually own any copyright in the video, the automated system assumes they are right and take the video down (because like I said, Google is paranoid, better be safe than sorry).

      If the creator of said video submits a counter-claim saying they DO own the copyright for that video, only THEN will it be seen by a human and judged accordingly. This goes back to as Amid says in the article, Guilty until proven innocent, which is how things roll on YouTube (and everyone hates it).

      Content ID is even MORE automated, where any audio or video is matched with the audio or video of a video uploaded and some automated responses happen, either the video is automatically taken down, or it stays up and the company just siphons off the ad revenue for them-selves. This has been a huge issues for videos that fall under Fair Use in copyright law.

      Keep in mind, legally NONE of these companies have this “Right” to do it, there is no legal backing to it, it is just Google/YouTube wanting to cover their ass from legal issues so they give companies WAY too much power.

      This has actually lead to cases of corporate censoring of bad reviews of products, or even companies that have no copyright claim in ANYTHING just randomly going around and claiming videos (there is a big case of Nintendo actually copyright claiming all videos relating to a certain video game series because a new one in the series was coming out and they wanted to be the top of the search results)

      False copyright claims on YouTube is a HUGE issue, and needs to stop, either a law for repercussion on companies that abuse systems like this or YouTube changing the system for something better and more human with companies having to PROVE claim first instead of assuming claim.

      Problem is YouTube will never change because they have no reason to, what competition do they really have? none, so time and time again they abuse their users and exploit them for any profits they can while trying to keep the media giants happy to keep the money flowing in from advertisers and avoiding getting sued.

      • Jürgen Erhard

        “Google is paranoid”.

        You misspelled “Google is bound by the DMCA”. Yes, they put in an automated system. Because anything non-automated would cost at least millions! People seem so often to be unaware of the scope and size of Youtube.

        The DMCA demands stuff being take off the second you receive a complaint. No questions asked. Then it’s blocked two weeks pretty much no matter what.

        • http://www.justingoran.com/ Justin Goran

          Oh I’m totally aware of the massive scope of YouTube and how them having to respond to every DMCA take down request by person would cost millions and require an army of people.

          But the fact remains that the current system is broken, far too exploitable and just all around destructive to the creative environment as a whole and really needs to be changed.

      • GS

        Youtube has competition from only one site. Vimeo. Support Vimeo.

        • Marvin

          Blip.tv is another alternative to YouTube, but the ads, oh the ads!

          • wyruzk anon

            - this is the standard process when dealing with youtube; your video gets removed, you ask to have it restored, it gets restored (i guess)
            - they just want you to believe you are under their power
            - break free from the ordinary acceptance of the satatus quo
            - they will only continue the same, unless they have a reason to change; just have all your videos point to this:
            http://youtu.be/CXDDgvkGZKM

      • tetridae

        They’re not paranoid, they’re bound by law and would have to pay lots of money if they did not follow the law. They are just taking down stuff to protect their own economy.

    • Mabus

      Anyone can file a DMCA request through youtube. You yourself could literally do it, falsely of course, but that’s the problem with youtube.

    • shayneo

      Apparently Sony use Sintel on their 4K show-real (I dunno, for testing projectors). Which means the film is obviously in some sort of internal database that the takedown bot was accessing.

  • OldManPar

    This will only end when a creator can sue and win damages for automated removals such as this.

    • Jordan Lloyd

      The law doesn’t matter, this isn’t a legal issue, this is an issue with Youtube’s own policies. When you upload a video to Youtube, you are under their law.

    • Gregg Lebovitz

      This will end when people decide not to put up with it. Until then, blaming Google is like shooting the messenger. Suing Sony for false take down notices would require a lot of resources that most of us don’t have.

      A much better approach would be to form a well funded PAC and lobby individual legislators to revamp the DMCA. Perhaps a change in the legislation would make it a crime to misrepresent an organization in a false take down notice (i.e. individuals who claim to be Sony). If you are going to enforces a copyright law in such a draconian way, it would be a no-brainer to include laws that targets those who abuse it.

      The foundation could also address false take down notices by legitimate companies. Rather than flood the courts with individual suits against false claims the foundation might collect information on every take down notice and aggregate false ones into a class action lawsuit. This would encourage companies like Sony to be more diligent about their claims.

      Of course, all this would require the financial commitment of millions of individuals and a lot of organization. Anyone want to volunteer?

      • DC

        Only one volunteer needed, Youtube, who could totally implement a monetary penalty for claim makers whose claim proves to be false. Monetary estimates could be a mix of pre-take-down view count assessment, post-claim-dismissal view count assessment as well as certain heuristics. I dont see large corps having a major issue with this except for those that do large blanket sweep violation claims just to suppress competition.

        • Gregg Lebovitz

          I disagree youtube will not volunteer as they have a financial stake in complying with DMCA. The law is written such that carriers (and content hosting providers) can exempt themselves for DMCA by responding to take down notices.

          I believe a better solution would be either the EFF or a similar institution focusing on false take down notices. The injury to an individual is small compared to the cost of litigation. The injury to a class of individuals would justify the cost of litigation.

  • Frumph

    There’s a place to submit a counter-copyright removal notice to reinstate the video because yeah, like you said; stuff happens and big companies can get over zealous with just a hint that it’s their material (his brother’s friend who lives on the couch said it was sony’s)

    https://www.youtube.com/yt/copyright/counter-notification.html

    • cresshead

      if it’s googles fault then google should promote sintel as the top search result on youtube for the time it’s been pulled.

  • Chester

    What happend to Google’s “don’t be evil” motto? Anyways, if we’re lucky maybe we this will catch on and increase support for blender and open source. Revolt and donate to their next film the Gooseberry Project! http://gooseberry.blender.org/!

    • Sebastian König

      Right on! Sony’s move, be it by accident or not, just shows how important it is to fight for free software, creative commons and open source! Project Gooseberry is a great chance to change the movie and software industry for good! So everyone, even if you’re not a Blender user, support Project Gooseberry to help develop a better way to produce and distribute movies! http://gooseberry.blender.org/wp-content/themes/gooseberry/

  • Hobbesruls

    Producers get money from investors and even the big studios reduce risk by getting investors to back films. Successful independent productions generate interest from investors and such money away from the conglomerates, which they don’t like.

  • Googamp32

    I think that Sony should just stick with making video games. They have NO IDEA what their doing when it comes to film.

    • Riku Ruohomäki

      I don’t know. I think Spider-Man 1 and 2 were OK.

  • Peter Boos

    stop buying sony product we can BAN them too !!!

    • Wayland

      I have more useful advice: stop using YouTube, really. Its draconian rules just can’t be accepted by normal people.
      Let’s move to Vimeo, Dailymotion, Metacafe – anywhere, just don’t let YT become the only way to watch videos on the Internet.

  • Josh Strawbridge

    it is an entirely baseless claim. all the assets in the short were created to be used in the short. it’s not machinima nor does it use any sort of engine from a game system. it was entirely created in blender, a 3d modeling and animation software package.
    even the soundtrack was entirely created just for the short.

    • http://www.phoinx.info/ Phoinx

      Astonished by people not knowing about Sintel and Blender (Foundation) and blindly being inclined on defending Sony…

      • GS

        Maybe people used Sony laptops to make it? ;)

        • JellyJoe

          haha yeah with a Vaio toaster

          That was funny, I doubt that very much, tho.

          Sony is good at cloning Apple design but their hardware is a toy.

          The idea of rendering multi-layered textures, heavily displaced models and multiple particle systems in a Vaio, sounds like trying to win F1 Montecarlo with a Corvette-shaped plastic pedal car for kids.

          Sony computers would be perfect for Mission Impossible: this computer will self destruct by spontaneous combustion within 5 seconds.

  • SpaceAje
  • http://www.turtledustmedia.com Nick Butler

    Does anyone have access to the file Everyone should upload Sintel to their Youtube in support!

  • duggarbaby

    huh…?

  • Mats Edvinsson

    I think that if suing incorrect copyright claims will become possible it would mean that companies doing stuff like this would have to be more careful and then there would automatically be less cases.
    As for the problem with there being no international court, i dont think that is a problem.
    If a company can sue sobebody/another company from another country for infringement why would the same not work for the person getting harrassed on false grounds?
    Besides, it’s not like there has’nt been “cross-country” crimes before so the internationality-issue should not be different than it has been before.

    • GW

      I looked it up. You can sue somebody from a different country but you have to do it in that country. My best source is Yahoo Answers so it could be wrong. Assuming it’s correct though, I’d say that there’s plenty of use for an international court system. I
      t’s not easy to sue somebody from a different country because you’d either have to fly over for your court dates or get a work visa. If it’s not easy to sue somebody from a different country, then false copyright claims will continue at much the same pace. The best way to break through this is, I think, with a legal system that applies to anybody suing somebody from anywhere else, which means that an international court would need to be established with video conferencing and international legal standards to allow for efficient legal trials.
      At the very least, we need videoconferencing to allow for trials that might not otherwise take place. The frequency, if nothing else, of these sorts of international disputes demands a system that can evaluate them more frequently and effectively than the current international system we have now.

      • shayneo

        It would depend where the the offense was deemed by the court to have happened. In this case since it involves the DMCA mechanism, it would be pretty clearly the US, although its possible that european courts might see themselves as a legitimate venue since it affected european users of youtube. The aim is not to actually let it go to court but to try and push for an out-of-court settlment. I’d say the blender foundation would be on solid ground to ask for some compensation for slander of title.

      • David Addams

        Suing in another country has to do with something called “Personal Jurisdiction.” Put simply, the person being sued has to have enough connections to a country to make it fair for that county to assert jurisdiction over them in court.

        Sony is an International Corporation. Personal Jurisdiction isn’t an issue. They can be sued in any country they do business in .

        (Then there’s Subject Matter Jurisdiction. That has to do with where the events took place. Here. that would be the YouTube servers, Which are probably in the U.S.)

    • shayneo

      You actually can, its called something like “Slander of Title” and its definately not allowed in most countries. In fact in some its actually a criminal rather than civil offense. I think its just a civil offense in the US unless its intentional and fraudulent. In this case, its likely just a screw up so its just a civil matter. The blender foundation would do well to push back and demand compensation.

  • MaskedManAICN

    I work for a small sports network, posting clips of sports events on YouTube and more. And this doesn’t surprise me. I’m always bumping heads with people who think they own something- but they don’t. And YouTube have a very itchy trigger finger and will always yank things down.

    I believe YouTube isn’t acting maliciously, they just don’t care to man their systems well enough to response to small parties. My company is big enough that we get we actually know people to call. Without a person to call, yer almost s.o.l.

    • BurntToShreds

      They can’t man their systems well enough by way of fact; 100 hours of footage are uploaded to youtube per minute. Yes, minute. There needs to be an automated system in place that catches some things that fall through the cracks. That said, the system could (and should) definitely be improved to eliminate abuse.

  • arnaud_couturier

    Intolerable. I already buy not much from Sony, but this will make me pirate the next thing I want from them, and for my friends too. Period.

  • Jon Brumbaugh

    This movie wasn’t even made for a profit!! This is such an unjust act. The real purpose of these open movies are to showcase not only the artists’ talent, but also the power of blender. Someone is threatened by a group’s ability to pull together such a great short with limited resources because it makes million dollar films look silly. The money made by these corporations barely go to the creative artists who make them. They don’t want to see the little guy flourish because it makes it harder to rope in creative people to make movies for them for less cash. *coughlifeofpi**coughcough*

  • Jesús Mario Camarillo García

    I feel too much indignation about this.

    Sony do not have anything to be part of blender foundation or sintel movie this is the good example of people who likes to do damage.

    There are not elements for this I ask for a retreat of sony and an apology to the blender community.

    Viva Sintel Viva Blender

    México is with Ton blender and the community

  • Tzs

    A big problem with that theory is that Sony had nothing to do with How to Train Your Dragon.

    • http://thebatsquad.com DJ03

      Or with SIntel, whatever, you get the point, it is an idiot taking this decisions, fact or truth doesnt matter. Their actions in this matter prove it.

      • lironmiron

        Of course, when some idiot in a company causes you harm while performing his duties, the entire company is liable. If you take your car to the dealer for an oil change and the mechanic melts the engine, you’d expect the dealership to take responsibility.

  • RasteriZer

    The sad thing is, Sony will suffer no repercussions for this. It’ll just be an “oopsie, sorry”, and everything back to normal.

  • Zekey

    A similar thing happened to a friend and I. We had produced an animated short a couple years ago and uploaded it to youtube. Since we both had partnership accounts we turned on the ads at the bottom.

    About a week or so after we uploaded our film (which we worked very hard on), the views were going up very fast and our little film had gone viral. Suddenly some company called AudioFish or something claimed THEY owned the rights to the music in our film.

    Which was impossible because the music was composed and commissioned for our film by a friend of ours who is a digital musician. So we fought with Youtube to give us back our music rights (and ad money which was being redirected to audiofish).

    It took months. By the time we got our rights back the film had hit 2 million views, stopped being viral, dwindled, and we never saw a dime. All that money went to Audiofish, a company who exist solely to try and glean money off of unknown musicians on Youtube.

    Every morning I wake up now hoping some other video site (dailymotion, vimeo, veoh etc) will find a way of killing Youtube. It is fascinating how poorly Youtube and Blogger are run, considering how relatively competent the rest of Google’s services are. With the popularity of the network it is embarrassing how BAD Youtube is handled. It is jaw-dropping.

    And the rabbit hole goes deeper, too. This happens ALL the time on Youtube. And to make it worse, sponsors have been doing it as well. I have a lot of animator friends who have completely lost all control of their content and channels to Machinima, a very popular ad sponsor. And they have no way of fighting it or getting their channels back. They are forced to abandon their channels and make all NEW ones and re-re-re-upload all their content and start from scratch.

    Youtube is a malignant growth on the horrid little animal that is the internet.

    - zekeyspaceylizard

  • Toonio

    Yet another foot in mouth moment for Sony. Those guys never got the animation business and never will.

    I’d call to a Spiderman 2 boycott till they publicly apologize and give the Blender foundation a hefty donation for the whole trouble.

    My heart goes to the Blender foundation for busting their asses on creating such an amazing application, that have let many talented artists do their stuff without having to sell their souls to a crappy studio corporation.

  • JohnRed

    I can’t believe what I’m reading. This is how greedy corporations want to monopolize everything.

  • Jimmy

    What about vimeo?

    • http://www.roboraion.cz/ Tony Slacik

      I would recommend that. It also has much more friendly and open community. Surely go for it. However it doesn’t solve the problem. When you post some ultimate masterpiece, you can be goddamn sure, that someone will repost it to Youtube and we are back. Youtube will not dissapear.

      I think we might think a bit more about how to use Creative Commons to secure our copyrights. If there isnt a way, how to subscribe your work in some international impartial list on which base we can later simply decide who actually is an author. There is a big mess in copyright laws in general. For example in software patents, if i can introduce the case through the speech of Bruce Perens

      http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File%3A051118-WSIS.2005-Bruce.Perens.ogg

      In my opinion, we seriously need to re-think patenting and copyrighting system and law. Otherwise any kind of creativity will slowly die and dissapear.

  • Daniel Ruiz

    I´m not defending Sony, but I don´t think they’re out to get the Blender Foundation. They even share some of their technologies as Open Source, so I guess this is a big mistake they should apologize for.

  • Mabus

    I’m almost positive Sony didn’t actually do this themselves, I could be wrong though. Only because with Youtube it’s very easy to falsely DMCA copyright claim videos, even if you don’t actually own anything in that video, which is a big problem with Youtube.

  • Mister Twister

    And yet no one wants to do anything about this.

  • Chicken McPhee

    It’s important now more than ever to stand up for your rights, because if you don’t you’ll surely be trampled. And dare not offend anyone with your opinions, could be very damaging.

  • shayneo

    Sony use Sintel as part of their 4K showreel. My guess is some automated system thought sony owned it and fired off a takedown.

  • https://vimeo.com/channels/wharton Brett Wharton

    It looks like it’s back up on Youtube. I’m guessing their mechanisms for reporting inaccurate flagging are working then? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HomAZcKm3Jo

  • David

    Don’t use youtube. They do more harm than good.

  • Max C.

    Either they’re making a movie out of it or they’re complete a-holes.

  • Cheese

    I must agree with Amid Amidi. What Sony and YouTube did was unconstitutional to the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Just because somebody or someone created an animated film and post it for free on YouTube doesn’t mean that it should be removed immediately due to copyright infringement. They need to show proof if they want to do something like that. For this case, they have no proof. It could be the work of animation “lobbyists” of the iron triangle…maybe.

  • Floyd Bishop

    Anyone can claim copyright infringement on YouTube. It is not exclusive to corporations. Someone downloaded one of my videos, and uploaded it as their own, putting a watermark on it and everything. I reported it to YouTube, and it was removed within the hour. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i91kwBYS2AY
    Many false take downs are resolved within a day, once proof can be given to YouTube that you are in fact the holder of the rights.

  • Jürgen Erhard

    It’s some idiot software in some computer, I’d assume.

  • Jürgen Erhard

    That perjury thing is even in the DMCA. But apparently, it doesn’t have any teeth.

    The way DMCA complaints work is: *Alleged rightsholder A complains. Company B takes down the content. Immediately (pretty much no choice there). Uploader C counter-claims. Two weeks pass in which A can counter the counter-claim. If so, it can(?) go to court. If not, which is the majority of such cases, the content is reinstated, and that’s *IT*. Nothing more happens.

    I suspect the perjury thing only triggers when it goes to court. No, I’m sure it does, no matter how it goes to court.

    Maybe you could sure false claimants even if the don’t counter your counter-claim… but who has the money to go head-to-head with a company the size of Sony?

  • Chris B

    Not entirely true. It’s not all cat videos and bloggers, Pendelton Ward / Cartoon Hangover are doing awesome things with Bravest Warriors and Bee & Puppycat for example.

  • Guillaume B

    Someone have done a request to delete this video. If you prove that all is done by you, and that is an attack, the man or company that have did that will pay a lot of claim damages. False attack are very repressed by google (youtube), but when someone ask to cut down a video they must do it immediatly before to understand the problem…
    So you can easily win just in explaining you.

    If Sony is big, blender community is also too
    We are with you !
    Good luck

  • dems

    On a slightly lighter note, the Blender Foundation are currently trying to fund a fifth open movie. Unlike the previous films, Project Gooseberry is a feature length production. In addition to donations from European film funds, the Blender Foundation are using the community to finance the project. Below is the link to an overview of the film:
    https://cloud.blender.org/gooseberry/

    I will further clarify Project Gooseberry and the Blender Foundation. The Blender Foundation are the principle developers and coordinators of the free open source 3D content creation suite “Blender”. A good example of artwork completely created in the software is Green Woods (http://blenderartists.org/forum/showthread.php?260277-green-woods).
    The Blender Institute (a component of the Blender Foundation) has made four short films using Blender and other open source software to help further develop and demonstrate its potential in the movie making industry. These films have been released under a Creative Commons licence which permits any person or company to freely use and edit any of the content from the films. These movies are:
    Project Orange: Elephants Dream (2006)
    Project Peach: Big Buck Bunny (2008)
    Project Durian: Sintel (2010)
    Project Mango: Tears of Steel (2012)
    Currently, in conjunction with a number of small Blender studies throughout the world, they are working on the production of the ambitious untitled feature length film “Project Gooseberry”. The chairman of the Blender Foundation, Ton Roosendaal, outlines the project here:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5CAAY-unN4
    If the initial community funding target (https://cloud.blender.org/gooseberry/) is not met, it is unlikely that the Blender Institute will be able to produce a feature length animated film with all of these lined up international studios.

  • thommie

    Finally someone said it.

  • http://tresportfolio.tumblr.com/ Tres Swygert

    I agree with the point you made about independent filmmakers versus corporations, as technology continues to give people options to view content and create them as well.

    Not just Sony, but I also believe other companies are noticing that the most innovative ideas are being done by indie storytellers, and there are many viewers willing to support and back the project up. Even to the point where it would deem it more successful than the big corporation’s products.

    Animation is starting to feel so limited as of late on cable and in theaters with their way of storytelling, that YouTube and Vimeo provide that great outlet for new voices to showcase their identity. Should it continue to grow, Cartoon Network, Disney, Sony, and other companies will have a tough time competing these properties and their fan base, if they do not do something like how Sony did recently. I do hope that the group that created Sintel will look into combating those claims and unfair harassment by Sony. Big name companies need to see that they can lose in a great way in the long run, if they continue doing these kinds of actions.

  • Harry

    The biggest problem is that there’s no consequences what so ever in false copyright claim. Current system is simply broken since is just support the mass production false or wrong claims. It’s for the bigger corporation more like better safe than sorry since there’s no real sorry for them in wrongful claim. If the failed claims had even slight monetary or other consequences, I bet that the number of false claims would fall. Nowadays these claims are used to block competition or shut down criticism, like what we have seen in last year with game critic channels in Youtube.

  • Republican Exodus

    I think if you submit a false take-down request, you can have your channel removed from YouTube.

  • Rafael Espericueta

    Can’t Sony Pictures be sued for copyright infringement for having it taken down against the wishes of its creators? Hit ‘em with a big one!!

  • Brian Ragle

    This triggered my persistent yet have-no-time-to-explore interest in 3D modeling and film. In the meantime, I uploaded Sintel to my YouTube page, with complete attribution and a link back to this page and to Sintel’s own page. Google immediately blocked it and I filed a dispute. If Google receives enough of these kinds of disputes, surely someone, somewhere is going to take a closer look.

  • Ed

    Corporations are a Government created entity that would not exist without Government allowing them to. All cities that are incorporated are subject to all sorts of non-sense.

  • 127wexfordroad

    Wow, thls is outrageous.

  • Scott Jenkins

    Let’s all land on Sony’s Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/SonyP

    And on their Twitter feed: http://twitter.com/sonypicture

    Let them know that stealing isn’t acceptable. #FreeSintel

  • thejikz

    I took the liberty of revising the poster to match existing conditions…XD Did I miss anything?

  • Scott Jenkins

    Send tweets with #SonyPictures and #FreeSintel. If enough of them go out, someone will take notice.

  • http://thegraphictraffic.blogspot.com/ Thomas Sigwalt

    After seeing a masterpiece like this makes me feel happy and hopeful for a future full of wonder and creativity. However, the issues that YouTube has been having has shown that it is hard to be creative. If you try really hard on something only to end up with your video bring taken down and a possible lawsuit, that is very sad.

    This is what makes me scared to add any of my own works on YouTube. I have been working on some simple animations and I want to post them on YouTube so people can see what I have made. But, if after I work on an animation for weeks only to have YouTube take it down and tell me not to do that again… that is a bit intimidating.

    I know that YouTube is still new at being an important media source, but as an important media source we, as consumers, expect a higher quality of product and service. When a person is clearly copying work that is not their own then punishment is justified. But if a video is taken down just because a business says “copyright infringement,” then I think that is wrong.

    I am no expert on the matter and I will not pretend to believe I know enough about what is legal on YouTube and what is not. I am not a lawyer. I am just a simple artist with a passion to create and a sinking feeling that I won’t have a place to post it.

    Look at my YouTube page here:
    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCm3InAEZXW5dNW-YhonzHBw
    I don’t have anything on right now but I will be posting videos soon.

    If you wish to follow me in between videos I have a link to my blog on a graphic novel I am currently working on:
    http://thegraphictraffic.blogspot.com/

    This video made me remember an incredible art work. Check it out here:
    http://www.deviantart.com/art/Green-Dragon-392101725

  • Cheese
  • Hew Hamilton
  • Rodan Thompson
  • ikas

    so why did sony really ask it to be taken down ?

  • Tony Ross

    SINTEL is back on Blender’s Youtube page!!! Cartoon Brew, and all others, Thanks for getting the word out. It appears Sony has dropped their claim… we’ll see if they apologize https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRsGyueVLvQ

  • the7thson

    Looks like it’s back up on BlenderFoundation’s channel on YouTube. I’m watching it right now.

  • Alexander Richards

    Sorry it not, You need to be under oath to be guilty of purgatory.

    If you try hard you might win on a claim of Libel

    • Henry Cohn

      Actually, I believe that you need to be under oath to be guilt of perjury, but only God can judge if you’re guilty of purgatory.

      • Alexander Richards

        Proof that a spell checker is not a cure for dysgraphia 8)

  • Taco

    This stuff happened to Ex-Disney AUS animator Adam Phillips too: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10202608211499854

  • AJ

    I was in trouble once for using some music in my video which matched third-party content. The funny thing is, they were from the list provided by youtube as “free to use content” ! so stupid!

  • Lucas Martell

    I had the exact thing happen with my film Pigeon: Impossible. It turned out to be an honest mistake made by an intern at a distribution company, but that just goes to show how broken YouTube’s system is for handling these problems. The real issue is that it took 3 weeks to get it back online and our views never fully recovered. That is totally normal for most DMCA takedowns. Fortunately, Sintel was resolved quickly because it was a large company and a very public CC project, not to mention the publicity the story has gotten here and on the Blender website. Sadly, this happens all the the time, and there’s no recourse to expedite the process. The DMCA requires Google to wait at least 2 weeks to verify that no lawsuit will further block the video. I’ll gladly lend my voice to the cause if someone has the time and resources to try to fight this problem.

  • Willy West

    My guess is that Sony planned to take this and claim it as their own for either a movie or game.

  • Richard Løvehjerte

    People tend to forget that YouTube is a free service for uploading and displaying content. It’s not public property. If you don’t like the the way Google makes money on the site, fuck off and upload it somewhere else. Maybe google could explain themselves but any other demand is just ridiculous. Compensation for lost revenue? You gotta be kidding me.

  • Daniel Ruiz

    How expensive can an apology be?

  • jmahon

    well I doubt we have much say in this beyond general outrage, so I’ll take this opportunity to say that Sintel is fantastic, a major favourite, and I wish those who modeled faces for the more major studios would take a page out of Sintel’s book- realistic, yet obviously caricaturized, but not overtly trying to emulate 2D concept art that doesn’t work in the 3D world without becoming amorphous blobs.

    I hope there’s some sort of explanation from Sony why this is happening but I guess I won’t hold my breath.

  • Uberjannie

    Never heard about that problem. What OS + browser are you using?

    • http://KyleJohnston.Net/ Kyle Johnston

      I’ve experienced similar issues with Vimeo across Windows, Mac, and Linux on various hardware with various browsers for years. Even at it’s best Vimeo is never as smooth as YouTube’s normal.

  • JWLane

    Few will read this now on such an old thread, but I have to say that this is especially biting. Blender is a white hat outfit if there ever was one. Media corps must hate them for being so competent, skilled and most of all – generous.

  • dinkster

    Sony hires goons to trollop through youtube and slap any videos they don’t like with boilerplate cease and desist. Since they don’t have an incentive to be accurate, they don’t self police.

  • Joel Schlosberg

    Blender Foundation chairman (and Blender creator) Ton Roosendaal hasn’t heard anything yet from Sony or Youtube: http://www.blendernation.com/2014/04/11/ton-roosendaal-ask-me-anything-today-1500-1800-utc/#comment-1332015124

  • Blapidoup

    You can buffer the video, or even download it if the user let you do it (or download it by another means). But the buffer solution work 100% of the time.