Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

“A company is copyright-claiming every video I have ever made”

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 320 posts

Re: “A company is copyright-claiming every video I have ever made”

#251

Post by tobias2014 »

TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #27
caymanjim wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's quite possible that the musician doesn't actually own the rights and was never allowed to license the music in the first place. They may have negotiated some deal (handshake or formal), but musicians normally don't own the publishing rights to their own music; the label does.

I've just listened to the music and it sounds like it's sample-based - in which case there may be a problem if ProleteR didn't clear the samples. This isn't MumboJumbo's fault in any way. But if there are samples and they're not cleared, there's a legal issue. That does not - of course - give WC the right to steal 25% of the value of MJ's work just because YT says they can.

With his recent tweets it looks like this exactly what has happened!

Re: “A company is copyright-claiming every video I have ever made”

#252

Post by robocat »

apocalypstyx wrote: post #67
hedora wrote: post #35

In fairness, the franchise or manager (not McDonalds) was at fault there. They had the coffee machine set higher than standard McDonalds temperature, and had they been repeatedly cited by inspectors because it was a safety violation. The burn led to hospitalization.

>The burn led to hospitalization. 3rd degree burns over 6% of her body with lesser burns over 16% of her body. (Her labia were fused together.) And required extensive skin grafts to treat. While in the hospital she lost 20% of her body weight and was left partially disabled for 2 years following the incident and retain not-insignificant scarring. >They had the coffee machine set higher than standard McDonald's temper…

> She originally only sued for medical costs; McDonald's offered $800

Plaintiff sues the Defendants in the amount of $125,000 for physical pain, mental pain and anguish, and loss of life’s enjoyment during the pendency of treatment.

Liebeck initially approached McDonald’s with a demand of $20,000 to cover her medical bills, future medical expenses, and lost income. McDonald’s countered with an offer of $800. (Gerlin, Andrea. “A Matter of Degree,” The Wall Street Journal, September 1, 1994). As trial approached, Liebeck’s settlement demand increased to approximately $300,000.

Re: “A company is copyright-claiming every video I have ever made”

#253

Post by sam0x17 »

icebraining wrote: post #241
sam0x17 wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But if Google's lawyers took a stance on this, they could use precedent to set defined rules for what actually counts as fair use and all these claimants would be fucked.

Google doesn't get to decide what counts as fair use.

Right, but the contentID system essentially _is_ them deciding what fair use is.

Re: “A company is copyright-claiming every video I have ever made”

#254

Post by robocat »

nate_meurer wrote: post #92
apocalypstyx wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The burn led to hospitalization. 3rd degree burns over 6% of her body with lesser burns over 16% of her body. (Her labia were fused together.) And required extensive skin grafts to treat. While in the hospital she lost 20% of her body weight and was left partially disabled for 2 years following the incident and retain not-insignificant scarring. >They had the coffee machine set higher than standard McDonald's temper…

What happened to Stella Liebeck was terrible, but it was no one's fault more than her own. Stella's coffee was served within the temperature range that was, and still is, recommended by professional coffee associations like SCAA and NCA [1]. As of 2019, the NCA recommends that coffee be held and served at around 180-185 deg F (~80-85 deg C), which is likely near the temperature at which Stella was burned. This is a p…

She was 79 and she actually wanted milk/cream with it so she could drink it. But, yes, it was her fault.

However it was also McDonald's fault.

That was the reason for sueing, and the jury agreed.

> but making the world completely safe for people who use these things carelessly would mean depriving everyone of their proper use

Why would you argue that it is a binary choice between personal responsibility, or complete abrogation of responsibility?

Re: “A company is copyright-claiming every video I have ever made”

#255

Post by marcinzm »

gdy wrote: post #196
marcinzm wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which has nothing to do with copyright the concept but our particular current implementation of it.

Also communism is fine, a few failed implementations don't prove the opposite.

Socialism is doing quiet well in Europe and seem to provides a much better standard of living for the average person than America's capitalism implementation.

Re: “A company is copyright-claiming every video I have ever made”

#256

Post by kalleboo »

makecheck wrote: post #186

Why do we have push-button screw-people-over systems at all? If the problem is that there are “too many” things for companies to review manually, too bad! If a company is perfectly fine raking in money from massive sales at a global scale, they should be willing to spend a proportional amount of money to do business at that scale. Let them hire their own people to review content in depth. Let them hire their own goon…

Because that's the compromise Google chose with the publishers to avoid getting sued to death over the massive and blatant copyright infringement of full TV shows and movies going on YouTube at the time

Re: “A company is copyright-claiming every video I have ever made”

#257

Post by cannonedhamster »

icebraining wrote: post #237
michaelmrose wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Someone literally stealing from creators needs to start generating expensive lawsuits for some percentage of cases not managed appropriately. This will inspire more concern on their part.

Except legally, Youtube has no obligation to host these videos, and can take them down on a whim. So a lawsuit has no leg to stand on. While, on the other hand, they do have an obligation to take copyright infringement complaints very seriously - in fact, ContentID came from one of those "expensive lawsuits". You need to change the law first.

Facilitating copyfraud could invalidate their DMCA protections. Since they choose to provide monetary compensation based on accusations instead of evidence with a system they created, they would also be responsible for the system that they created facilitating said copyfraud that is knowingly taking money from legitimate copyright holders and giving it to false claimants. If any other publisher were to give money owed to a creator, say a book creator, this would be obvious fraud, as it is in this case. I think the case is stronger against YouTube than it will would initially appear.

Re: “A company is copyright-claiming every video I have ever made”

#258

Post by cannonedhamster »

jml7c5 wrote: post #214
Animats wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

YouTube seems to claim that the DMCA counter-notice procedure applies.[1] [1] https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2807684

That link is for actual DMCA notices. With the Content ID take-downs, Google never actually receives a DMCA request. The music company (etc.) politely asks YouTube to take down the video, and YouTube complies out of the goodness of its heart. (Well, and a bunch of contracts that give some sort of quid pro quo for the arrangement between YouTube and these companies.) It looks like these are all Content ID takedowns (w…

All of which makes Google liable for theft. They created the system, they run the system, they transfer the money. It's all facilitating copyfraud. Just because Google agrees to host the content doesn't mean that they are incapable of being able to be sued for their intentional actions.

Re: “A company is copyright-claiming every video I have ever made”

#259

Post by recursive »

perl4ever wrote: post #234
brightball wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FWIW there’s a lot more to that hot coffee lawsuit that people tend to generalize. It’s worth reading up on it.

It's been mentioned many times that there were "third degree burns". When I long ago read a definition, it said 3rd degree burns involve charred skin. That may not be quite accurate, but something still seems off. When I brew coffee or handle a pot of boiling water in the kitchen, I don't feel as though I'm risking "third degree burns".

Regardless of whether you feel you're risking third degree burns, you are.

http://www.burnfoundation.org/programs/resource.cfm?c=1&a=3

> Hot Water Causes Third Degree Burns… …in 1 second at 156º …in 2 seconds at 149º …in 5 seconds at 140º …in 15 seconds at 133º.

Re: “A company is copyright-claiming every video I have ever made”

#260

Post by blunte »

ErikAugust wrote: post #199
makecheck wrote: post #186

Why do we have push-button screw-people-over systems at all? If the problem is that there are “too many” things for companies to review manually, too bad! If a company is perfectly fine raking in money from massive sales at a global scale, they should be willing to spend a proportional amount of money to do business at that scale. Let them hire their own people to review content in depth. Let them hire their own goon…

Google borders on insane with lacking any sort of manual support. For example, when you are a paid G Suite customer - you'll need to dig hard to find their support number. Then you'll need to click several buttons making it clear you still need support. You also need to then generate a PIN used to access the phone support.

I have used g suite live support chat many times with quite pleasant results and typically very competent and friendly agents.

Now, free google services and YouTube services are obviously broken by design (no human support).

Post reply on HN