Well that's the best on this clusterf**k

[Sascha Franck]

maybe this as been already posted...anyway....pretty painful to listen to if you ask me.

Well, DØVYDAS isn't exactly known to be the grooviest person on earth already, but the presence of Turra is pushing the rest of any groove over the cliff. Seriously, this is "E funk minor highschool band jam" at its worst (and I'm talking german highschool bands, which are possibly the worst in that genre, with the audience clapping on beats 1 and 3...).

 

[Orvillain]

To answer your question: I think he is performing covers.

Then why didn't he credit any artists?

And I honestly don't get what the problem is with performing covers on social media if all the other use cases are fine.

There aren't any problems with it. But he wasn't performing covers. He was stealing, because he was clearly trying to pass stuff off as his own creation. Nobody else does that when they perform covers, or critique or review songs, or create lesson videos revolving around other people's music.

I've been schooled above that it's OK and best practice to just use any composition for youtube without asking and let the right holders and content ID sift out the unlicensed material.

If you're going to do anything with anyone else's content, you should first of all seek permission. If you can't get permission, you should at least credit them.

How is this essentially different from that in any shape or form?

It is so incredibly different that....

Perhaps I'm dense,

.... yes. Perhaps you are.

but I don't see a meaningful difference, there.

If you don't see a meaningful difference between -

A: Taking a song or part of it, recording your own version of it, and then saying "I wrote this"
B: Taking a song or part of it, recording your own version of it, and then saying "Here's my version of XYZ's song"

Then I really don't know how to explain it to you otherwise. You might physically be incapable of understanding it.

And I'm not ever trying to be provocative.

I wish you were. I really wish you were. May God have mercy on your soul.

 

[woody]

A: Taking a song or part of it, recording your own version of it, and then saying "I wrote this"

Can you point me to an instance where he explicitly states this?
I have not seen one yet.
If I watch Troy Grady's video on this matter, his accusation exhaust itself in "He's nodding at the end of his videos!".

 

[Sascha Franck]

A: Taking a song or part of it, recording your own version of it, and then saying "I wrote this"

Let alone he's not even exactly "recording" it but pretending he did. I mean, sure, he did - but in the end it's not his playing but editing tricks.

 

[Sascha Franck]

Can you point me to an instance where he explicitly states this?

When you lift someone's work, you gotta say it. And even if it might not necessarily be a legal obligation in some parts of the world, it's an ethic obligation all over the world (maybe not in yours, though).

 

[Orvillain]

Can you point me to an instance where he explicitly states this?
I have not seen one yet.
If I watch Troy Grady's video on this matter, his accusation exhaust itself in "He's nodding at the end of his videos!".

The requirement is to actively and persistently state the opposite. IE: He should've been saying "I didn't write this" which is what you are doing when you credit someone.

The lack of credit is a tacit statement that it was his creation.

 

[Chocol8]

Woody hates YouTubers so no amount of logical reasoning, legal education or anything else is going to sway him from his beliefs.

 

[SillyOctpuss]

Can you point me to an instance where he explicitly states this?
I have not seen one yet.
If I watch Troy Grady's video on this matter, his accusation exhaust itself in "He's nodding at the end of his videos!".

You're being purposely obtuse.

 

[woody]

Woody hates YouTubers so no amount of logical reasoning, legal education or anything else is going to sway him from his beliefs.

I'll admit here that I'm no lawyer, but I'm pretty confident that the argument: "Not explicitly stating the opposite is an admission" won't fly in court.

Make of this what you will.
I was asked, I addressed the questions, I'll shut up again.

 

[Chocol8]

I'll admit here that I'm no lawyer, but I'm pretty confident that the argument: "Not explicitly stating the opposite is an admission" won't fly in court.

Make of this what you will.
I was asked, I addressed the questions, I'll shut up again.

You are 100% wrong about that. It’s not even a grey area. If you credit the artist, YouTube pays them royalties and it is all legal. If you do not, it is IP theft. It doesn’t get much more black and white than that.

 

[Holden Afart]

@woody sounds like he's the asshole in the vids that the op posted. No reason to defend such a piece of shit otherwise.

 

[Ed DeGenaro]

You are 100% wrong about that. It’s not even a grey area. If you credit the artist, YouTube pays them royalties and it is all legal. If you do not, it is IP theft. It doesn’t get much more black and white than that.

Ok story time…a few month ago the drummer I’ve been working with for 15 years got some copyright strikes in vids of material of mine he recorded. With permission and credited.

Some fucking 3rd world Rap clowns claimed it as derivative of theirs. And it wasn’t apple to oranges more like motor oil to palm trees.

So no it’s nowhere near as logical as it should/could be. Or as folks chose to believe.

But the bottom line is this…ethics or the lack thereof

As for IP and copyright…anyone can cover any released work without permission as long as intent isn’t obscured by merely paying for the license.
YouTube is not a licensing clearing house like HFA.

Yet more importantly none of it matters legally since a backing track and/or guitar solo are a composition. For that it takes the melody, which literally is the tune.

 

[Ed DeGenaro]

You get rid of one clown faking and there’s no lack of one willing to fill those clown shoes.

44.701 Aufrufe · 20.584 Reaktionen | Guitarrista frustrado 🤷‍♂️ | Tiago Andree

Guitarrista frustrado 🤷‍♂️.

www.facebook.com

It really is music is mouse-click edited melange where the play through vids need to add a sheen of authenticity.
But then again folks watching AI porn…

 

[Orvillain]

I'll admit here that I'm no lawyer, but I'm pretty confident that the argument: "Not explicitly stating the opposite is an admission" won't fly in court.

It fly's in the court of public opinion, and really for a Youtube, that is all that matters.

 

[Ed DeGenaro]

It fly's in the court of public opinion, and really for a Youtube, that is all that matters.

Sadly it has a short lived memory, that said the guys that scream loudest about the “guitar community” are just as much click addicted clowns.

And then comes the justifying “I’ve been in the music biz for years” no you haven’t your a content creator

 

[Orvillain]

Sadly it has a short lived memory, that said the guys that scream loudest about the “guitar community” are just as much click addicted clowns.

And then comes the justifying “I’ve been in the music biz for years” no you haven’t your a content creator

Yeah fair points, and undoubtedly true. le sighhhh.

 

[HotRats]

I'll admit here that I'm no lawyer, but I'm pretty confident that the argument: "Not explicitly stating the opposite is an admission" won't fly in court.

Make of this what you will.
I was asked, I addressed the questions, I'll shut up again.

don't know about instagram but on youtube if you don't say that the content isn't yours you get the all the money....

therefore...I'll leave to you this one.

 

[HotRats]

No question about that.

My point is: Nothing about this case is really new or should come as a surprise.
As I tried to allude above, social media has a longstanding tradition to disenfranchise artists and creators out of their rightful royalties.
(I'm not gonna put meself in hot water again going more explicit than that.)
Second, instagram and other platforms are built around filters. Acting surprised in 2025 when you find out that social media content is edited and fake is...
Dunno.
Soo much of youtube guitar content has been fake for so long.
Most stuff on social media is not "authentic" in any sense.

I understand is that Turra is a confluence of sorts, where content creators feel the pain of being scammed themselves and creators feel the problems of the autheticity crisis of social media in 2025.

To me this is a "kill the messenger" situation. It's all been there for quite some time for everyone who wanted to see.
Watch what happens when the next Turra turns out to be an AI model and not even a real person.
Fully automated AI content guitar channels are coming.

1. being or not being surprised about somenthing dosen't change the nature of that somenting.
2. the "everybody does that" argument is the weakest possible argument.

things are simple here.
is turra a scammer? yes or no?

 

[JiveTurkey]

I kinda agree with parts of what Woody is saying. In so much as it's all fake and substanceless. I didn't recognize any of the songs he stole because I'm not into compressor pedal core. "It's like Cory Wong but insert 'differentiator that I could care less about' here!"

 

[HotRats]

I kinda agree with parts of what Woody is saying. In so much as it's all fake and substanceless. I didn't recognize any of the songs he stole because I'm not into compressor pedal core. "It's like Cory Wong but insert 'differentiator that I could care less about' here!"

there's nothing wrong in being substanceless, nobody is pointing fingers because of that.

creating videos where you fake your playing is not wrong per se. those videos are a form of entertainment for some people (I don't get it but that's me). he presented him self like a much, much better player that he is and that's ok. it's his life, his face, his reputation. I find it really stupid but who cares.

main point here is that he build his reputation and earned money stealing other people ideas.

the fact that he is also incapable of actually playing, let alone create, what he stole and that he also did other deprecabile things along the way is just part of the story useful to understand the kind of mentality this guy has.