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

CBS gets YouTube review of 'Picard' taken down for using 26 seconds

techdirt.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 188 posts

Re: CBS gets YouTube review of 'Picard' taken down for using 26 seconds

#11

Post by legitster »

warent wrote: post #6

I really dislike DMCA takedowns, but am I the only one who thinks 26 seconds is actually quite a long time--especially for a product of this caliber? That represents basically a full teaser trailer.

It was a 40 minute video. 26 seconds is barely anything. Not that it should matter for the purposes of fair use.

> especially for a product of this caliber

Do more valuable IPs get more legal rights? Or is the implication that this property transcends normal importance?

Re: CBS gets YouTube review of 'Picard' taken down for using 26 seconds

#14

Post by krustyburger »

pavel_lishin wrote: post #7
warent wrote: post #6

I really dislike DMCA takedowns, but am I the only one who thinks 26 seconds is actually quite a long time--especially for a product of this caliber? That represents basically a full teaser trailer.

What ratio of length-to-caliber is appropriate?

It’s all about how you use it.

Re: CBS gets YouTube review of 'Picard' taken down for using 26 seconds

#15

Post by SequoiaHope »

warent wrote: post #6

I really dislike DMCA takedowns, but am I the only one who thinks 26 seconds is actually quite a long time--especially for a product of this caliber? That represents basically a full teaser trailer.

It should be noted, this was two 13 second clips of the publicly available trailer. So the content isn’t even paywalled normally. What is the point of copyright if it’s being used to prevent discussion of a freely available work?

Re: CBS gets YouTube review of 'Picard' taken down for using 26 seconds

#16

Post by Barrin92 »

warent wrote: post #6

I really dislike DMCA takedowns, but am I the only one who thinks 26 seconds is actually quite a long time--especially for a product of this caliber? That represents basically a full teaser trailer.

> That represents basically a full teaser trailer.

The footage he took was literally taken from the publicly available trailer. Reactions to trailers are quite common on youtube and generally don't appear to be taken down.

I question what the value of this for CBS is anyway because I doubt the few hundred bucks they theoretically lose from the youtube ad-revenue for the trailer aren't more than compensated by the attention that Angry Joe draws to the show. Not to mention that anyone who watches 40 minutes of star trek analysis has likely clicked on the trailer a while ago.

Re: CBS gets YouTube review of 'Picard' taken down for using 26 seconds

#17

Post by JoshTriplett »

riffic wrote: post #2

edit obviously I didn't catch a detail in my comment. Please stop downvoting this. Automation fails to discern fair use. The YouTuber should file a DMCA counterclaim, but many youtubers are unsophisticated enough in copyright law to do so.

YouTube does not make the DMCA counterclaim process available. Youtube give the copyright holder (or claimed copyright holder) who filed the original takedown the ultimate authority to process appeals themselves. (Which is horribly broken.)

Re: CBS gets YouTube review of 'Picard' taken down for using 26 seconds

#18

Post by henryfjordan »

Youtube has it's own system outside of the DMCA to handle copyright claims in which the claimant has all the power. If the poster of a video wants to appeal a copyright claim, they appeal directly to the claimant who gets to decide. You can then appeal to YT directly (good luck with that) but in the meantime the claimant can issue a "strike" on your account. 3 strikes and you are out. So instead of fighting claims, posters are encouraged to just roll with the punches and be glad they get any money. Youtubers at this point will openly say "I'd show a clip but then I won't make money on this video" even when that clip would 100% be fair-use.

Youtube designed this system after pressure from the major Movie / Music publishers to either give them stronger tools than the DMCA provides or face a blackout from these major publishers. They wanted final control over their IP on Youtube and they got it, damn the law. If they had to file real DMCA claims, these claims on obviously fair-use materials would disappear.

Re: CBS gets YouTube review of 'Picard' taken down for using 26 seconds

#19

Post by JakeTheAndroid »

legitster wrote: post #11
warent wrote: post #6

I really dislike DMCA takedowns, but am I the only one who thinks 26 seconds is actually quite a long time--especially for a product of this caliber? That represents basically a full teaser trailer.

It was a 40 minute video. 26 seconds is barely anything. Not that it should matter for the purposes of fair use. > especially for a product of this caliber Do more valuable IPs get more legal rights? Or is the implication that this property transcends normal importance?

I read this as larger entities have quicker response times for DMCAing their own IP. Not that larger entities have more rights, although I would expect in practice they do as they have more money for lawyers to get the law interpreted in their favor.

Re: CBS gets YouTube review of 'Picard' taken down for using 26 seconds

#20

Post by riffic »

ru552 wrote: post #4
riffic wrote: post #2

edit obviously I didn't catch a detail in my comment. Please stop downvoting this. Automation fails to discern fair use. The YouTuber should file a DMCA counterclaim, but many youtubers are unsophisticated enough in copyright law to do so.

This specifically has nothing to do with automation. The article clearly states that it was a manual take down initiated by a person.

Content ID plus an unsophisticated overworked "manual review" step may as well just be considered automated from a high level view.

Who's to say the "person" doing the manual review isn't just a Mechanical Turker?

Post reply on HN