Are you referring to Keenan Cahill? Calling him an "ugly deformed girl" is really ignorant, by the way.

Observance is ignorance?

Who cares? Her cover isn't that good and that's what happens on the internet.

Lots of people can sing, even marginally so, and there's nothing special in that video.

Lots of people can sing, even marginally so, and there's nothing special in that video.

Who cares? Her cover isn't that good and that's what happens on the internet.

That's impossible.

As long as you give credit to the original artist, you can cover ANY song you wish, and she has not made any money off it, and therefore doesn't have to pay any royalties. If any company tries to own her music she can take them to court, and she will win even with the worst lawyer in the world. She said that the song belongs to Jeremy Soule and Bethesda, so she's set. She would only be brought to court if she took the credit for writing the song and released it for profit, then she can be taken to court (think Led Zeppelin)

Plus...it's just youtube....think about that ugly deformed girl that only sings other people's songs and has celebrities come on. She monopolized that and made money off it, and yet nobody tried to own her videos. Maluka on the other hand just recorded a cover without any profit, just for the sake of fun and sharing it with others (I think).



In other words, quit exaggerating, she doesn't need any help.

http://criminal-law.freeadvice.com/criminal-law/violent_crimes/extortion.htm

Its not extortion because they're not forcing her to do anything, and they didn't threaten her. They're simply abusing youtube's built in IP protection system to try and assert control.

They're only stealing her rights to advertising money generated by her videos, assuming she's even participating in an ad program.

She's a victim, yes. But not of extortion. She can still sue them for damages if she's claiming their actions have harmed her ability to advance her musical career or if she can successfully sue for the advertising money they've collected using the video.

3 pages and neither has the topic starter provided any source for this, nor did anyone ask for one. Very strange...

He only linked to the video. So?

Couldn't they be sued for fraud because they are trying to use something they do not own as a means of revenue?

...except that it was made, and lots of people like it

See this point of view a lot, from people who do not do anything.

On what grounds can they claim anything? Figured only Bethesda would be able to that and they have no motive to do so.

Could they cause harm if she chose to ignore them?

She refers to it a bit on her twitter. Pete Hines replied with his support at one point.

http://twitter.com/#!/malukah

The OP didn't explain very well.

You need to go do some research before making a post like this. It can, and does happen. The status of copyright and patent law is unfortunately very messed up and there are many corporations which make vast amounts of money purely off of actions like this. Symbolic Digital Movies is one of he notorious ones. I'm not sure what the extent of what they can get away with is, but at very least they need to be prevented from taking credit from and/or making a dime off of Maluka, Jeremy Soule and Behesda's work. The good thing is that hopefuly a counter suit on the part of Bethesda and/or Maluka will end this.

On what grounds can they claim anything?

One of her latest tweets seems to imply that the issue has been resolved.

Who cares? Her cover isn't that good and that's what happens on the internet.

One of her latest tweets seems to imply that the issue has been resolved.

Just thought I'd let you all know that Malukah has announced on Facebook that this whole issue is overwith; the copyright claim has gone.

thank god for that, praise the lord!! hallelujah!! my world was about to end................................................................................................................ yep........................................