Has anyone been banned for using Perform yet?

[Freyt]

Go back to my image in page 3. You have

A) Yoshida's explicitly mentioning XIV only.

B) Your quote already says, and I bold: " You may record and share your performance of the FINAL FANTASY XIV original score excluding the songs entitled “Answers”, “Dragonsong” and “Revolutions” or original songs and/or melodiesusing the performance actions in accordance with this Agreement."

Gotta admit when I've missed something. Doesn't happen often, but the truth is the truth. I DO believe there is a misunderstanding, but what you pointed to in the agreement does limit that possibility. I haven't seen/heard Yoshida saying that. Maybe he did, but unless he said "not any other Final Fantasy titles" or something like that, I don't think I would be convinced. The agreement states both "you may not"s and "you may"s, and other Final Fantasy or Square Enix titles aren't listed in either, but it again is implied when the "may not" describes third parties, of which Square is not a third party.

I'm sure you believe whole heartedly that you're right, and I don't yet believe that I am/was wrong, but if it's any consolation I'm not as confident as I was before.

[Claviusnex]

Copyright laws are based on individual countries so for example a copyright for Japan is only enforceable in Japan and a copyright in the US is only enforceable in the US. In the US the "Fair use" sections of copyright law will frequently result in the legal use of copyrighted material without the owners permission and against their desire. What really appears to be going on in this case is the licensing agreement which comes under contract law. The Material Usage License is what governs the how an entity may use SE copyrighted material when it is for other than those that come under the "Fair use" provisions of copyright law. I think SE is somewhat skirting the legal process usually used to decide these types of matters (i.e. the court system) by claiming copyright infringement to YouTube even when it is clear there is no infringement nor violation of the license. I also feel their ability to get away with it is due somewhat to the DCMA making hosting companies reluctant to fight back and making it hard for individuals to push back as well. The only way I see for the users having their videos removed to handle this is to appeal to YouTube and request the specific information as to what SE is claiming to be infringed and where that is stated in the license agreement. With that a person should be able to prove that SE is wrong or modify their video to conform.