| by Kenneth Chase | 62 comments

Introduction to Intellectual Property: Crash Course IP 1

Hi, I’m Stan Muller. This is Crash Course and today we begin our miniseries on Intellectual Property. Hey, isn’t the entire concept of
Intellectual Property illegitimate? I mean, how can we justify locking up the world of science and arts so corporations, publishing houses and other gatekeepers can control what we know and what we think! Information wants to be free, man! Hey, me from the past! There’s a Stan from the past! This is great! Stan: Hey! Me from the past! There’s a Stan
from the past, this is great! Anyway. I can tell by looking at your vacant and bloodshot eyes that you’ve been up all night downloading Chumbawumba records over a
dialup connection. I remember those days, and I remember desperately trying to cling to any ethos
that justified your rampant copyright infringement. That is if you ever participated in such activities.
And even if you had participated in said infringing activities, the statute of limitations has likely
run out. I don’t even know what LimeWire is! [Theme Music] I like how this is getting started, because
Stan from the past raises some interesting points! There’s a good chance that he, and
a lot of you watching this video, might think about aspects of Intellectual Property as
outdated and pretty much irrelevant. Maybe lots of you don’t think of it at all! That line, “Information wants to be free”,
has been used to argue that current intellectual properly laws are outdated, over-broad and
generally awful. The quotation is attributed to Stewart Brand and he
said this to a group of computer programmers in 1984. “On the one hand Information wants to be expensive, because it’s so valuable. The right information
in the right place just changes your life. On the other hand, information wants to be
free, because the cost of getting it out is getting lower and lower all the time. So you
have these two fighting against each other.” The full quote, which you hardly ever hear, actually spells out the major tension between
intellectual property and technology quite well. And it did it more than 30 years ago, when
the digital age was just beginning. As information technology becomes more and more pervasive
and important in our day-to-day lives in the information society, information itself becomes
exponentially more important and more valuable. Paradoxically, as our information technology
improves, and as our computers and connections get better and faster, and sharing becomes
easier, we’re less able to control the copying and dissemination of this incredibly valuable
information. The law of supply and demand pushes down the information’s value.
This tension is nothing new. Technology, especially in the context of copyright
law, has always presented challenges. Socrates’s and Plato’s ‘Phaedrus’ bemoaned
the advent of books, arguing that they “will implant forgetfulness in [human beings’] souls;
they will cease to exercise memory because they rely on that which is written, calling
things to remembrance no longer from within themselves, but by means of external marks.” One way that humans have attempted to deal
with these new technologies, with varying success, is by passing laws. The scourge of the piano
roll was contemplated in the 1909 Copyright Act, the photocopier in 1976, and the Internet was covered
in the 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act. But we’re going to try to avoid this simplified
intellectual property versus technology binary. The idea that we have to choose between devaluing
the fruits of intellectual talent and labor, or devaluing the revolutionary information
sharing capacity of our networks, is wrong-headed. The more interesting and more difficult question
is how we can strike a balance; how we can incentivize and promote this revolution in
the way we share information, while at the same time incentivizing and promoting the
production of creative works and inventions by having respect for the human beings that
actually created them. The difference between today’s debates and
those that took place 100 years ago is that intellectual property pervades our lives more
and more every day. This is especially true for anyone viewing
this video. I know that about 90% of you view Crash Course in a web browser, so consider
the layers of IP in this very YouTube page. A lot of what you’re looking at is covered
by copyright. This video, for example, is covered as a motion picture work. The website
itself is considered a literary work. The Thought Bubble, the theme song, and the
video you watched right before this one, all have copyright protection. The software that
streams the video is also a literary work. The web browser you’re using is most likely
registered as a computer program, as is the operating system. Lest you Linux weirdos think
that you don’t have a copyright on your OS: You do. You’re just not enforcing it. Even your comments could be covered by copyright.
That haiku you just posted: “Who is this person?
What happened to Mr. Green? Dislike. Unsubscribe.” That’s copyright-able! When you agreed to
this [image of YouTube user agreement], you granted YouTube a worldwide, perpetual, non-exclusive license to use your content in any way they see fit. There are also patents in play here. There’s
proprietary video streaming technology, and many of the components in your computer are patented. But wait! There’s more! YouTube is a registered trademark, and if
you saw an ad before this video, there was most likely a trademark in there. This is
a trademark and under this sticker is an image
of a piece of fruit, also a trademark. And behind the camera, our most precious and
valuable mark, Mark Olsen. Mark Olsen, everybody! The search algorithm that got you here? That’s
a trade secret. My appearance in this video, and subsequent marketing of commemorative
mugs with my likeness fixed on each one- that implicates my right of publicity. If you’re watching this on an iPhone or an Android, there’s a whole other world of copyrights and patents that apply. When you start to deconstruct it like this,
it’s dizzying. But despite all this complexity, most of the time the system moves along with
a fluidity that sometimes makes it easy to put it out of your mind. Kind of like the
internal functioning of your digestive tract. But it’s there. Always there. Gurgling and churning
and functioning. Did anybody order lunch? Now most of this fluidity and seamlessness
is borne on the back of hundreds or thousands of lawsuits, many of them against Google,
thousands of pages of intricately complex contracts, and hundreds of millions of take
down notices. The point is that none of us, or very few
of us, can go about our daily lives without being impacted by intellectual property. It’s
only when it hits home, like when you receive that cease-and-desist letter from a trademark attorney
for opening a restaurant called Burger Queen, or digital rights management software stops you from listening to your iTunes downloads on your Zune. Maybe your YouTube video gets taken down
because of that T-Swizzie song in the background (that’s what the kids call Taylor Swift). Maybe you get a letter from your internet
service provider, informing you that someone using your account has downloaded every episode
of Game of Thrones and that if it keeps up you may be fined or imprisoned- or beheaded!
That’s when it flares up. Flare up! God, are we still on the digestive
tract metaphor? Somebody get me a Tums. Tums, by the way, registered trademark of the GlaxoSmithKline
group of companies. Most of us encounter IP only on its borders. We hear horror stories about the motion picture and recording industry suing grandmothers. We watch those unskippable FBI messages warning us about the consequences of copyright infringement, or we complain about paying thousands of dollars per pill for medicine. We tend to encounter intellectual property
law in places where we, as users, are basically being told ‘no’. And being told ‘no’ over
and over again is irritating, especially when these “no’s” don’t seem to make any sense.
And they’re really irritating when they come with threats of fines or imprisonment. So in this course we’re going to focus less
on enforcement and the “no’s” and more on the part of intellectual property that often
says ‘yes’, ‘sometimes’, ‘maybe’, ‘it is certain’, or even ‘ask again later’. I’m speaking, of course, of the “Liquid filled
die agitator containing a die having raised indicia on the facets thereof”, registered as patent
US 3119621, which you might know as the Magic 8-Ball. Before we get too far, we should probably
define intellectual property. This is going to get pretty abstract, so let’s go to the
Thought Bubble. The theoretical definition of intellectual
property would begin by saying that it is: “Nonphysical property that stems from, is identified as, and whose value is based on an idea or some ideas.” There has to be some element of novelty; the
thing that we describe as intellectual property can’t be commonplace, or generally known,
in the society where it’s created, at the time that it becomes property. You can’t claim that
you invented the wheel or that you wrote Moby Dick. Even though the source material for all IP
is social — the inputs are our education, our human interactions, and basically all the
sensory data around us that we take in — the thing that we call ‘IP’ is the product of
us putting together all these social inputs into something that we’re gonna call “the
idea”. “Only the concrete, tangible, or physical embodiments
of the idea are protected by intellectual property law.” The idea has to be fixed into a form and location in which humans have access to it. That could be a novel, or a logo, or a liquid filled die agitator containing a die having raised indicia on the facets thereof. Thanks, Thought Bubble. So in its purest and best form, IP is the propertization of intellectual effort and talent. In its most corrupt and worst form,
intellectual property can be, and has been used by the propertied and powerful to protect
concentrated markets and broken business models. At its very worst, it can be used a a censorship
tool. Intellectual property differs somewhat from
real property like cars or houses because it’s limited in duration and scope. For example,
copyrights last for the life of the author plus 70 years. Copyrighted works can be copied under the
fair use exception for certain personal or publicly beneficial uses. Let’s say a book
reviewer quotes long passages of a novel, then pans the book. It’s likely the author
of the book wouldn’t grant permission for this type of use. But we want to encourage
informed public discourse. So there’s a good chance it would be found to be a fair use. Patent laws carved out a limited experimental
use exception that permits minimal use of a patent for amusement, to satisfy idle
curiosity, or for strictly philosophical inquiry. Again, the patent owner probably wouldn’t like this,
but the law wants to encourage individual tinkering. Both these limitations exist to
serve the primary objective of intellectual property: that’s to promote the progress of science
and useful arts by increasing our stock of knowledge. So in this series, we’re going to focus on
the 3 main branches of intellectual property: copyrights, patents, and trademarks. We won’t
have time to get into some of the lesser cousins of the family like trade secrets or the right
of publicity, but all of these are included under the umbrella of intellectual property. So in the coming weeks we’re going to try
to get at some of the nuts and bolt of what intellectual property is, because like it
or not, IP is only going to become more and more relevant as our lives become more and
more digital. So regardless of what or how you feel about
any aspect of IP, it’s probably a good idea to have some basic knowledge of it. It doesn’t
matter if you’re a consumer or a creator of protected content or both. Is understanding
IP going to help you? You may rely on it. See you next week. Crash Course: Intellectual Property is filmed in the Chad and Stacey Emigholz here in sunny
Indianapolis, Indiana, and it’s made with the help of all of these nice workers for
hire. If you’d like to help us make Crash Course
in a monetary way that doesn’t imply any ownership in the final work, you can subscribe at Patreon,
a voluntary subscription service where you can support Crash Course and help make it free
for everyone forever. You can get great perks, but the greatest perk of all is the satisfaction of
spreading knowledge. Right? So thanks for watching. We’ll see you next week.


Dag Odenhall

Jul 7, 2017, 8:12 pm Reply

The death of author plus 70 years length for copyright is just ridiculous. Make it five years from publication or something sensible like that. The author would still have protection during the initial surge of demand on release.


Jul 7, 2017, 11:40 pm Reply

when you wait so long for stan , and hes just stan ??


Jul 7, 2017, 9:39 am Reply

Holy cow… I totally forgot about Limewire

The Studying Erudite

Jul 7, 2017, 4:36 pm Reply

i have copyright over that:
HSJSHjshbbdjsjsllalwjwhshshhshsui2iijajsjsjwwjjsjs^jzjsjsjjsjdh)@hdhhhdshjsjs([email protected]&-jzhdhd^hdhdhsjakslsbjslajsjshhshshsjskls.

Amun Atum

Jul 7, 2017, 3:18 am Reply

Everything should be free on the Internet.


Jul 7, 2017, 9:19 pm Reply

I usually enjoy these clips. This one began by implying that anyone saying, that copyrights and patents are inherently wrong and/or limiting towards society as a whole, are stupid potheads. It wasn't particularly pleasant for me and frankly I expected more from you.

Polaris Léon Mábus

Aug 8, 2017, 4:11 am Reply

Our definitions of what intellectual property is are different which matters. A individual can copyright there own intellectual & physical property data. As for my property without payment is stealing which means that any internet provider or company providing a service on the internet or phone that I use have legal terms they have to o bid by regarding what is know as intellectual & physical property data. Email, twitter, face book, apps, games, you name it.

Sawyer McBride

Aug 8, 2017, 6:30 am Reply

Lol, I like this guy

Blue Vega

Aug 8, 2017, 2:22 am Reply

This video is a TUMS, FESTIVAL!.

Suzanna Guinn

Aug 8, 2017, 4:36 pm Reply

I am currently a HS senior and I am considering becoming a IP lawyer. What are the downsides and upsides to the particular area of law?

Anna Castro

Sep 9, 2017, 2:19 am Reply

Already love him.

Justin Hill

Sep 9, 2017, 8:33 am Reply

Follow our copyright laws…or you can move to Hong Kong where the copyright laws are almost non-existent.

artpoint.paradox aMARYca

Sep 9, 2017, 11:13 pm Reply

Derek Savage needs to watch these videos.

Frank Parise

Sep 9, 2017, 3:50 am Reply

There is Stan and he is from the past. Lol

Martin Kunev

Oct 10, 2017, 5:03 pm Reply

to summarize: Legally, intellectual property exists everywhere around us.


Nov 11, 2017, 4:55 pm Reply

Warnng. The words "magic 8 ball" will be used 12 times per episode, for every episode of this series.

Reuben Stern

Nov 11, 2017, 8:36 pm Reply

That patent clause might be useful… I might learn C++ and reverse engineer some AI. explains how AVE get's away with his BOLTR videos too.

GPY 777

Nov 11, 2017, 4:42 pm Reply

pleas writ every thing you seed it

Declan Gibbons

Nov 11, 2017, 11:52 am Reply

hes so funnny

Mr Temporal

Dec 12, 2017, 3:27 am Reply

Its Stan… He's real… I finally see his face!

Round Square

Dec 12, 2017, 5:52 am Reply

Why is this juvenile trash in my recommended? Anyway, there is no evidence that IP promotes new ideas, and quite alot of data suggesting it serves only to prevent the discovery of new info.

Marsha Creary

Dec 12, 2017, 2:55 am Reply

I saw someone make a comment about employers who work for Disney. They said that their contract specifies that they own all intellectual property and they also referenced perpetuity. Are you familiar with that type of contract?

Kevin Teixeira

Dec 12, 2017, 2:48 am Reply

Legendas em português, pelo amor de Deus


Jan 1, 2018, 6:12 pm Reply

this was extremely, extraordinary unuseful.

Diana Bondarenko

Feb 2, 2018, 5:31 pm Reply

great video that has helped me with studying for IPIP, thank you!


Mar 3, 2018, 3:37 pm Reply

Rambling on


Apr 4, 2018, 2:42 pm Reply

I always pause to look at all the fun facts when they play the theme song.

Domingo Salandanan

Apr 4, 2018, 11:53 pm Reply

Zyra I think walaka.g Pat tense ha …miss u

Domingo Salandanan

Apr 4, 2018, 11:59 pm Reply

You torb epi ha…a .modifging a certain word attive to basic woev…..vullshit

Ronak Vachhani

Apr 4, 2018, 9:11 pm Reply

Your lecture was very good but can you tell me the exact difference between ownership,inventorship and authorship in intellectual property?

Aniri Richar

Jun 6, 2018, 8:09 pm Reply

…technology- is – magic trickeries that – last – longer – than – catholic notes & – men – has – less – chance – of – avoiding – distopia – $ince – robots – are – programmed – by – whom ?…keep – on – egnorin'- the – fortunate that – bio – mesure with …Cameras – that – looks – at – old – & – young – people 's – even – nose – hair…? – to – control – what – 1 – can – wear – eat – breathes – forget – what – 1- saw – without – the – joys – of – tasty – aqua – vita … looking – foward – pleasing – your – ??- ones ,- sensous – kisses , – it – all- be – controlled. ..??
Throlls – saying – not – true – it's – all – for …???…


Jun 6, 2018, 6:48 am Reply

Life +70 is ridiculous. Period. It's all about publishing houses, and has nothing to do with protecting author's rights. Even if the artist is alive, 10-20, max 50 years should be the limitation before things go into Public domain.

Also, copyright and digital media is completely unfair to developing countries, because 1)access to media is limited (Netflix, Vimeo, Spotify, Amazon, for example are usually technically region-blocked unless you use a VPN; still worse, Paypal is unavailable to creators) 2)If developing countries have access (Itunes for example), the prices are usually HIGHER than they are in the US, in countries where wages are as much as 10 or 100 times lower. 3)The regional DVD system is completely completely outdated in a digital, internet world, with many companies just not even bothering to release their work in in certain regions. 4)Unstable internet means that like, if I want to show this video in my class, I have to download it, and every time that Youtube updates their security, I have find a new way to download, just to share a simple video with my class.

All of this in addition to the fact that access to digital media, like access to SMS services or cell phone coverage, is usually hyper-inflated in price to begin with. While I understand that an Avengers movie costs hundreds of millions of dollars to make, a digital, DRM-free copy of a movie shouldn't cost more than $10, an album, shouldn't cost more than $5, a book, probably no more than $7 or $20 in the case of a textbook maybe. I guess I'm okay with DRM for movies limiting me to one copy of something, but it should still be in a format I can move and use with my own player. Generally though, DRM is easily broken.

Anyway, yes, intellectual property laws are important…however, the way the laws are now don't protect creators as much as they do media corporations. The Public domain as a concept has been destroyed by Life + 70, and these laws are more about greed and consolidating capital than they are about rewarding creative energies and creators who can't afford lawyers.

Drew Cochran

Aug 8, 2018, 5:33 pm Reply

the levels of self awareness is palpable. i love it

Rin pham

Aug 8, 2018, 2:11 pm Reply

valus person?

Gabriella Swan

Oct 10, 2018, 3:09 am Reply

this series literally is saving my life

Captain Khan

Oct 10, 2018, 3:36 pm Reply

Superb excellent explanation thanks for sharing great video…!!

Jana Khabouri

Oct 10, 2018, 9:08 pm Reply


Fabrizzia Corsini

Oct 10, 2018, 1:52 pm Reply


Jimmy Cañosa

Oct 10, 2018, 12:38 pm Reply

Who cares about Mr. Green? This man got nice dimples.

Joseph Wright

Nov 11, 2018, 8:36 pm Reply

Love the FF VII reference with Cloud Strife…that made my day 🙂


Nov 11, 2018, 5:49 am Reply

Was that hot dog stand a School of Rock reference..?
I sincerely hope it was.

Tyler Barker

Nov 11, 2018, 7:23 pm Reply

Intelectual Property.. its kind of seems like a made up think.. to create a think tank. Like do you know how many catergories or Vocabulary words i could make up or put together, to create think tanks.

I choose to just know people how there intrests and abilities. ( a base ball field as many positions, a basketball team does too, different sizes and different abilities, all put together) its make a intellegence community or team. Thats what was needed. The cool thing about it is, it put everybody else who "bought into the think tank deal, like actually paid for it contracted it" Its put them to work for us, Americans. I seen the FBI logo, on a Intectual property website or contract for example, I heard thepresident talk about "Intellectual Property" for example. It means they bought into the "deal" they got sold.

Heres the stradedgy for hacker or somebody taking over inteclectual property.
I say "cool" , you believe in intelectual property, Im gonna make you stick to that.. until your realize it sucks and holding you back, its causing you problems. Put them in there own think tank, then make them hate the think tank.. Boom i conquered intelectual property and the people who made it, along with the people they sold it to, along with the contracts and work they have to do to try to keep up, they have to do work, to keep up to speed.

That is why is so important be honest, get your abilities out there,in writing in media, so you can expose the con artists… you get a following from it, its a good thing. A natural progression.

Whats the difference between Intelectual Property and a Entuerpuenuer … nothing really its the exact same word meaning, so why resell entuerpunuer influence, as "intelectual property"..

Trump Fires in California the ones burning up the cities and state, Is that that "Intellectual Property"? if i see it on T.V.? a little flame map of the fires that say "Trump FIre" we can make intelectual property believers or professionals "think" about it, put it in there tank. Trump Fire.. Alls we had to do is say it.. write it or type it.. The people he contracted to use Intecetecual Property stuff is going to be used by us, they will make it a "thing" for us for free Presidential Intellectual Property TGB the way i mean it..
They can fight to make it a "thing" if they want, maybe take it through congress a couple times.

Just be "American" its comes with all the good stuff… American intellegence is pretty awesome too. TGB the way i mean it. You guys called A.I. for awhile, i started developing it, American Intellegence TGB the way i mean it


Nov 11, 2018, 12:05 am Reply

Can you please do a Crash Course Law?

Patrick Andrews

Dec 12, 2018, 4:02 pm Reply

3:00 balance the need to incentivise sharing of information and incentivise production of inventions(?) These two things are not really in opposition. The first doesn't need an incentive. The second is based on the idea that nobody invents things without a profit in mind. This is a specious argument, made by lawyers (who never have ideas) in support of their business. Companies need to start paying inventors without involving lawyers (whose only function is to create conflict).


Jan 1, 2019, 8:50 pm Reply

It's Jan 1, 2019… it's not that sunny, Stan!


Jan 1, 2019, 7:29 pm Reply

Intellectual property is bogus. Property rights are derived from our self ownership (which has it's own philosophical reasoning). You cannot believe in individual property rights and intellectual property at the same time.

Intellectual property espouses that if someone has an idea first, then they own that idea and all of it's effects and productions. It means if you have the same idea of any sort in your own mind, that the "original" person who thought it now owns a piece of your person. It means that if you open your mouth to sing, someone else owns the sounds coming from your labor.

Well, this is very clearly not true. Just because you listen to a song does not mean that the performer owns a piece of your person. And just because you sing a song does not mean the original performer now owns your labor. And in the same way if you copy digital bits in the same order as that in a sound file on another computer, that person does not own part of your hard drive.

IP is just another government farce–a mafia style monopoly. It flies in the face of the non-aggression principle. It is hardly different than the first apple farmer preventing a second apple farm from opening on the other side of the country–just because the apples look nearly identical.


Jan 1, 2019, 8:15 pm Reply

Nonphysical property: well there is no such thing. Considering that all data is stored, used, or manipulated in some physical form. Be it a hard drive or groups of neurons in a person's brain, ideas are real physical property. It is hard to imagine that just because someone had a similar grouping of neurons first that they now own a piece of your brain. In the same way it is quite plausible that just because someone arranged bits & bytes in a particular order for a piece of software or a sound file that they now own a piece of your hard drive.

And if it is true that they do not own your brain or your hard drive or in fact your singing voice or artistic pen strokes then it is nothing less than assault under monopolistic intent should they extort money or use force or threats of force to impede on your voluntary and peaceful interaction with other people.

That is why IP is illegitimate. It is poorly disguised form of government mandated monopoly.


Jan 1, 2019, 8:18 pm Reply

The primary objective of intellectual property law is to stifle innovation and prevent competition so that lazy business owners, writers, artists, or programmers can monopolize a particular product for their own monetary benefit.

Donna Marshall

Jan 1, 2019, 5:47 am Reply

10 minutes of my life i will never get back. Idiot video

Andrew Zhou

Jan 1, 2019, 6:15 am Reply

who is paying the people that worked towards the intellectual property, and where would that money come from? IP couldn't be free, it could have open access, maybe with bunch of ads and pop-ups……
What about the stealing of intellectual property, which occurs frequently in places the laws surrounding IP are not accurately defined and properly defended/enforced. Like Chinese web novels for example. Some of those "original authors" that copy almost entirely off someone else's work, changing a few words and lines, and character names. Also some of those fan fiction writers, that literally just follow the plot line of the story they're doing a fan fiction on. 
When those fakes are made into movies and television shows, and the interests of many people, including powerful ones, are tied onto the same boat, who's going to defend the original IP, who would defend the author. 
It is not in anyone's interest to rely on the morality of other strangers, and gamble what they might have invested a lot of time, or even their whole life into.

Amber Arias

Jan 1, 2019, 8:22 pm Reply

You talk to fast and mumble. It is really hard to understand what you are saying.

Gustavo Schötz

Mar 3, 2019, 4:04 pm Reply

Very nice! A lot of insights and a brilliant delivery! Thanks a lot!

Gustavo Schötz

Mar 3, 2019, 4:06 pm Reply

Very nice! Thanks a lot for so wonderful insights and brilliant delivery

Alex The JPEG

Apr 4, 2019, 1:20 am Reply

YouTube could learn a thing or two in this crash course

Untidy Echo

Apr 4, 2019, 2:30 pm Reply


Brooke Nelson

Apr 4, 2019, 8:58 pm Reply

stan is real…


Apr 4, 2019, 3:20 am Reply

Long winded .im out.. just get to the dam point.

Michael Klein

May 5, 2019, 4:53 pm Reply

So as confusing as it sounds, I am creating training COURSES (multiple videos) that are on one of my websites where those who want to learn the subject pays my business, i.e. me a fee to view the video(s) on the course as an On-Demand. Therefore, do I copyright this, can I copyright it, do I set up a trademark, what?

Roj Eagle

Jul 7, 2019, 3:35 pm Reply

Thank you, fat Matt Damon.

Tracy-allen Ezechukwu

Jul 7, 2019, 4:25 pm Reply

I am still confuseddddddddddddd.?????
Even the thought bubble hasn't helped me understand the concept fully. Why are we so conplexxxxxxxxxxx????????
I give up. For now though. ?

Michael Kelley

Sep 9, 2019, 8:58 pm Reply

Foundation Communities intellectual prioperties and property keeps being harassed and taken advantage of for being played with in front of a 9/11 memorial in turn playing with myself because it doesn't know who actually tampered with the memorials and uranium threading ! They are responsible for knockig out several of my teeth because of their 9/11 memorial and airplane recordings and swallowed money and bullets mental illnesses ! And they need help and are ashamed to ask for it sying it is myself or the dead saying it.

Eli Alizadeh

Oct 10, 2019, 6:27 pm Reply

i love ur content. BUT CAN U PLEASE TALK SLOWER!! my brain cant keep up

Leave a Reply