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

141–150 of 188 posts

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

#141

Post by gbuk2013 »

henryfjordan wrote: post #18

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, p…

This is not entirely correct: you can also appeal the strike by affirming your claim (the strike will then be removed) and it will be up to the claimant to then sue you (you have to provide contact details in your appeal).

Unless you run up against some studio that has a private deal with YT in which case they'll just take down your video - no appeals.

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

#142

Post by mr_toad »

henryfjordan wrote: post #18

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, p…

> Youtube designed this system after pressure from the major Movie / Music publishers

At this point, YouTube is just another part of the entertainment industry, with commensurate business interests.

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

#144

Post by catalogia »

ciabattabread wrote: post #131
danso wrote: post #95

It's interesting that Angry Joe got taken down; AFAIK, RedLetterMedia's review didn't get taken down, and it featured decent chunks of non-trailer footage (not sure if any of them were 10+ seconds consecutively) [0]. And, like AJ's, it was a very negative review. I don't doubt AJ was the victim of manual review, I'm just surprised RLM wouldn't be on CBS's shit list as well. (and tangentially: both are right; the "Pic…

> the "Picard" show is depressingly bad and derivative. I've only watched the first ep, I don’t understand how you can pass judgment on a series based on one episode.

With so many shows to watch and so little time to watch them, most people pass judgement on series without watching any episodes. Can you earnestly say you watch two episodes of every series before deciding whether to watch more? I doubt there is any way you could find time for that; rather you judge most shows to be unworthy of your time after glancing at the promotional material at most. Everybody does.

So yes, watching one episode is enough to dismiss a show.

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

#145

Post by MivLives »

zadkey wrote: post #116
VectorLock wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It feels like most YouTubers know and have vocalized their issues with YouTube, but lack any viable alternatives. The benefits they get with YouTube with the large audience already using the platform and potential help the 'Suggestions' system on YouTube gives them outweigh the freedom they'd get from switching platforms.

I agree, there is about to be a large market gap for streaming content creators. If someone had the team, the skill, and the funding they could effectively roll out a viable competitor to YouTube. I'm not sure how it would go exactly, but their advertising could very easily be centered around dodging the wrongs of YouTube.

I'm honestly surprised Twitch hasn't made more of a grab for this.

Start slowly, maybe a nightly gaming news show. Get a few podcasts to live broadcast their episodes.

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

#146

Post by [deleted] »

danso wrote: post #95

It's interesting that Angry Joe got taken down; AFAIK, RedLetterMedia's review didn't get taken down, and it featured decent chunks of non-trailer footage (not sure if any of them were 10+ seconds consecutively) [0]. And, like AJ's, it was a very negative review. I don't doubt AJ was the victim of manual review, I'm just surprised RLM wouldn't be on CBS's shit list as well. (and tangentially: both are right; the "Pic…

[deleted]

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

#147

Post by wtallis »

chc wrote: post #76
colejohnson66 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but AFAIK, Google was legally required by the DMCA to make a Content ID system

No, there was no such requirement in the DMCA. Remember, we're talking about legislation that was written in the late '90s — the idea of Content ID would have been completely alien to them. YouTube has actually implemented a completely parallel system to the DMCA's takedown process.

Content ID was not at all alien to the 90s Congress; the DMCA explicitly calls for the industry to develop such systems, though it stops short of requiring YouTube to do all the technical heavy lifting:

(1) Accommodation of technology.—The limitations on liability established by this section shall apply to a service provider only if the service provider—

(A) has adopted and reasonably implemented, and informs subscribers and account holders of the service provider’s system or network of, a policy that provides for the termination in appropriate circumstances of subscribers and account holders of the service provider’s system or network who are repeat infringers; and

(B) accommodates and does not interfere with standard technical measures.

(2) Definition.—As used in this subsection, the term “standard technical measures” means technical measures that are used by copyright owners to identify or protect copyrighted works and—

(A) have been developed pursuant to a broad consensus of copyright owners and service providers in an open, fair, voluntary, multi-industry standards process;

(B) are available to any person on reasonable and nondiscriminatory terms; and

(C) do not impose substantial costs on service providers or substantial burdens on their systems or networks.

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

#148

Post by henryfjordan »

ikeboy wrote: post #136
henryfjordan wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can get a strike from a DMCA notice or YouTube's internal system. The difference between the two systems is that the DMCA has language about fraudulent claims, whereas wading through the ToS and contracts you have with YouTube will be nigh impossible. A lawyer might take your DMCA case where youtube wouldn't really be directly involved, but nobody is up for a fight with YouTube directly. It's never worth the mone…

A copyright claim not made through the DMCA does not lead to a strike, full stop. See https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/7002106?hl=en , which differentiates between takedowns through a formal notice (i.e. DMCA), and content ID takedowns. And if you dispute a content ID claim, the claimant must either retract it or convert it into a DMCA notice. So they have no additional legal protections if they want to keep…

ContentID is not the only only other way to issue a takedown. See the opaque tools described here: https://www.eff.org/issues/intellectual-property/guide-to-yo...

Strikes are not perfectly 1:1 with DMCA requests. I don't know how to prove that, but I don't trust some reductive Google support pages to have the whole picture either.

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

#149

Post by ghaff »

catalogia wrote: post #144
ciabattabread wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the "Picard" show is depressingly bad and derivative. I've only watched the first ep, I don’t understand how you can pass judgment on a series based on one episode.

With so many shows to watch and so little time to watch them, most people pass judgement on series without watching any episodes. Can you earnestly say you watch two episodes of every series before deciding whether to watch more? I doubt there is any way you could find time for that; rather you judge most shows to be unworthy of your time after glancing at the promotional material at most. Everybody does. So yes, wat…

It’s also been discussed that the streaming services are also tending to not give shows as much of a chance to find an audience and a voice as was often the case previously.

To the general point there’s so much content out there and I watch relatively little. I have to find a show that at least looks interesting. And then I’ll almost certainly drop it after an episode or two if it doesn’t grab me.

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

#150

Post by Keverw »

j-c-hewitt wrote: post #80
Keverw wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wonder if your claim fell under fair use and it harmed your channel if you could sue for tortious interference? There's some theme park in New Hampshire threatening to go after drone operators even though they don't own the private airspace, however, if it's a business day and full of crowds that a general no no anyways to fly over people. Be funny if that guy sued CBS in some small town court, I doubt they'd even sh…

Youtube in general is not liable for copyright infringement on content posted by users. People love to talk about standing up to legal bullies, but lawyers are expensive. Copyright law is extremely friendly to plaintiffs and generous in terms of damages: https://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap5.html CBS would totally show up in a small town if they knew that they had a good chance of winning. Their lawyers are alrea…

Sounds like that lawsuit with Epic Games was more about him selling the cheats instead of the videos. Plus I heard people spend real money in Fortnite and can even win real money with the Esports. Don't really follow that game much though.
Post reply on HN