Re: "On the plus side, Warner has done something potentially
game-changing in saying that people can take Warner video content and
mash it up as they see fit."

I've just had my YouTube account closed, and videos removed as a
result of complaints by Warners. (Previously they requested a video of
mine removed that contained a single image from a Warner Bros film - a
shot of Doris Day in "Calamity Jane!)

YouTube emailed me at the weekend:
"This is to notify you that we have removed or disabled access to the
following material as a result of a third-party notification by Warner
Bros. Entertainment Inc. claiming that this material is infringing:

swingtime - the real tuesday weld: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUHd2ZL1oP0

The strange thing is the music is by a band I know, The Real Tuesday
Weld, who gave me permission to use the music track and the film
content is a couple of minutes from a film by Jacques Tati, - credited
and the seen by me as a tribute. The film is owned by the BFI (British
Film Institute) so in neither case has this anything to do with
Warners. So what is going on?

Assuming there is a 'slight breach' of copyright in the strictest
sense - are we not allowed to play with the toys we have spent so much
money on over the years? Can using a minute or two from a film that is
virtually in the public domain do any damage? Why can't they see it as
promotion? They are continuously bombarding us with trailers to
advertise their products, you'd think they would welcome the help.
I see this as control freakery of the highest order.

The video is still on YouTube's new owner, Google -
http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-867566750860222423

A paradox? I can see hundreds of videos on YouTube that technically
infringe copyright - why can't these multimedia giants cut us, their
customers, a bit of slack. It's like a pop star abusing their fans.
I've ended up thinking a lot less of YouTube and Warner Bros as a
result.