Oh really oh man that's awesome

I think that happened around 85.

I know where you were going but hey, no chance of calling Quincy Jones a "racist" for that. The generation snowflake is always present. He said, Oprah Winphrey from Chicago, a talk show host...

Stevie Wonder as well, those recordings are magnificent.

No kidding!

nobody knows

She got all the money.

She became Snake-rah

The Streetbeater!

He definitely had appreciation of the level of greatness he was interacting with.

He should have been.

a 72-year career with 28 grammys, 80 grammy noms, 7 oscars, and an emmy. Quincy is industry royalty 🤴🏾

Have you kids met Keanu?

She wasn't known then I miss those days

Also Beat it video

Also Billie Jean video

John Landes who made American werewolf in London directed thriller

FEMALE, no woman.

@@irisbaez1972 What?

And a rerun of _The Six Million Dollar Man_ at 1 AM!

Yes! I do the same.

(#4 lol) Trailers are still copyrighted material owned by the production company. Commercials are too. In order for Letterman (KZfaq) to show that clip, they'd have to get permission from Amblin Entertainment. Some may say "well they showed it back in 1985, so they already got permission". No they got permission to play a clip on network TV in 1985 and for that time only, not indefinitely. So with that, they'd have to reacquire a license to present the movie clip on KZfaq. "Fair Use" doesn't come in to play because Letterman (youtube) is making money off clicks (so it's a commercially produced video, not educational), to which they'd have to give portion or all of this particular video's income to Amblin Entertainment. Hence why the clip is not in the video. Side note: "I don't own the rights to this video" or "no copyright infringement intended" notes that some people put on their KZfaq videos NEVER protects them from copyright infringement. What ends up happening is YT puts ads on their videos and gives the money to whomever owns the copyright of the copyrighted material. And if the owner doesn't want it up there regardless of the income, YT automatically flags it and removes it. Garth Brooks is a good example of the latter. If you try to post a video with any of his songs in the video, YT will flag it and tell you to replace the song with one of their recommended songs or take down the video.

one other side note: copyright protection isn't always about greedy musicians and labels getting more money. A lot of it has to do with protecting how your work is being used. A fairly recent example: regardless if you love him or hate him, Trump was sued for copyright infringement by both Neil Young and Eddy Grant for using their songs during his 2020 run without getting permission from the labels and artists. He tried to claim Fair Use but it didn't apply.

@@goatcheese4me thanks for your thoughtful replies. I was aware of some of the things you mentioned, but not all... so thanks for sharing your knowledge. as per copyright infringement and commercials... IMO it literally seems counter productive to prevent people from sharing them when they are specifically meant as an advertisement.

@@goatcheese4me oh also jsyk! from my experience you can't even post a video to youtube with copyrighted material even if it does fall under fair use. years ago I made some YTP dragon ball videos... I thought if I don't monetize, etc I could make some videos as a passion project... after making some pretty popular videos my channel was deleted and I kind of gave up even though it was fun. I really do feel the content I made wasn't twisting the message or tone of the show in any way, just rearranging scenes etc. i would have been more than happy if the company let me keep the videos up and they could monetize it themselves... but they chose to shoot me down. I'll be honest... it sucked. i admit I'm not the most creative... I kinda do rely on existing media to create what I enjoy most. like... when I was a kid, I used to draw the local baseball team symbol on everything. (Toronto Blue Jays) ... was I committing copyright infringement? My ideal future would be one of certain copyright protections, of course! I argue the system is currently allowing copyrights to last far too long. like... the episodes I was using were from the 80s... so the company had 30 years...

@@christophermiller3031 Copyright protection, I believe, lasts 70 or (75?) years by default, so shows from the 80s won't be automatically converted to public domain for another 30-40 years. And bear in mind that authors/companies have the ability to reapply copyright to material, so it could go longer. I don't know why YT rejects some work because what you did seems like it would fall under parody protection and would be free from copyright infringement, but I'd have to see the work. Also, I'm not a lawyer, but I routinely deal with licensing stuff doing video production, and I've had a lot of conversations with lawyers, so I'm just regurgitating what I've been told (hopefully correctly).

nevermind, just found it on the donz page kzfaq.info/get/bejne/kJOAm5d8utmcdKM.html

oh no, actually 60 seconds!!