Copyright issues are kind of a big deal on YouTube. There have been plenty of videos that have been taken down because the user didn't have the rights to the music used in the video. But this case is one of the most bizarre claims I've ever heard.

A user posted a video of him walking in the woods, with no background music. However, music licensing company Rumblefish claimed that the video had some of their content and was a copyright violation. The content in question? The birds singing in the background.

YouTube informed me that I was using Rumblefish's copyrighted content, and so ads would be placed on my video, with the proceeds going to said company. This baffled me...So I asked some questions, and it appears that the birds singing in the background of my video are Rumblefish's exclusive intellectual property."

Instead of pursuing legal action, the user decided to avoid the hassle and just delete the video.

So...let me get this straight, this company is claiming that they have exclusive rights to singing birds? What's next? Are they going to claim they have the rights to crickets chirping or dogs barking? This is absolutely ridiculous, and it's just a fraction of the kind of bogus claims that licensing companies try to pull on YouTube. Imagine how much worse these would be if SOPA had passed...