This could have a broader scope than just music, but as this is about reviews of music I thought here was a good place to put it.

Yesterday I was made aware of a copyright claim made agaist a reviewer of mostly prog rock on You Tube, Darren Lock. Darren who is also a musician, and appears to be a published reviewer in other areas, was reviewing the current set of King Crimson vinyl box sets. The reviews were a mixed bag, some positive some not so. Darren had obtained the box sets with his own money and did not play any music. The reviews featured an unboxing and discussion of the box sets.

Yesterday DGM, via a representative filed 23 copyright claims against all of Darren Locks King Crimson reviews. This was done, according to Darren to shut him up, because DGM are not happy with his views. During a live chat about this, Darren also mentioned that the representative of DGM, has a personal grudge against Darren.

Now here is the thing, if a review is subjective opinion, is factual, contains no copyright material, or audio, has no defamatory of liablous material how can it be pulled by DGM, on what basis? Reviews need to be what they are, good, bad, or meh.

Frankly I am disgusted at DGM and King Crimsons actions. Censorship, using a You Tube TOU rule falsely to shut up a reviewer should not be allowed, particularly when they are not breaking copyright laws or any other laws. Shame on you DGM, shame

Darren earns a small living through his You Tube channel which helps him support his daughter who has special needs. This attack on his channel, has basicaly left him unable to run his channel, and according to ths now gone live stream - did he pull it, or another copyright strike, I don't know - he will probably have to close his channel.

I for one will never buy new again anything from DGM or KC again.

Darren Lock - https://www.youtube.com/user/vrooomuk/videos

What do forum members think?