YouTube takes down the Ig Nobel show because of a 1914 recording • Hacker News Board

Re: YouTube takes down the Ig Nobel show because of a 1914 recording

#101

Post by type0 » Mon, Sep 13, 2021, 9:57 PM UTC

knorker wrote: post #91

matheusmoreira wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who knows? I don't have an answer for you. Maybe crowdfunding, patronage, selling physical copies which are scarce. What I know is this copyright business is fundamentally incompatible with the digital age we're living in. It's trivial to copy. Selling copies makes no sense. To actually enforce copyright in the 21st century, there must be no software freedom. Only well-behaving software that refuses to copy will be a…

> To actually enforce copyright in the 21st century, there must be no software freedom. It's also trivial to stab someone. Not all crimes can or should be prevented by technical means. In fact most cannot even in principle be prevented. Most of law depends on detection, not prevention.

> Most of law depends on detection, not prevention.

That's where the "there must be no software freedom" is exactly what might be mandated. It's trivial to re-purpose Apple CSAM mechanism to do this "detection" and something that might actually happen in the future.

Re: YouTube takes down the Ig Nobel show because of a 1914 recording

#102

Post by knorker » Mon, Sep 13, 2021, 9:57 PM UTC

matheusmoreira wrote: post #50

torben-friis wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Once you record a song, it's trivially copied and distributed. So are books. What do we do with writers?

Who knows? I don't have an answer for you. Maybe crowdfunding, patronage, selling physical copies which are scarce. What I know is this copyright business is fundamentally incompatible with the digital age we're living in. It's trivial to copy. Selling copies makes no sense. To actually enforce copyright in the 21st century, there must be no software freedom. Only well-behaving software that refuses to copy will be a…

> Without technology, copyright is unenforceable. It might as well not even exist. Piracy has proven that.

Like I said, you're making no sense at all.

With or without technology (you meant with, right? no that makes no sense either) copyright is clearly enforceable.

We have over 300 years of enforcement on copyright, even when it's trivial to copy.

Technology, or copying, wasn't invented this century, you know. "Piracy has proven that"... we have hundreds of years of easy reproduction pre-copyright too.

> either we abolish copyright, or all computers will eventually be turned into consumer appliances and we'll need programming licenses to write code.

"Either we make murder legal, or nobody may own a knife or other sharp object ever again".

See how it's nonsense?

(I can't reply deeper because HN limitations)

Re: YouTube takes down the Ig Nobel show because of a 1914 recording

#103

Post by pphysch » Mon, Sep 13, 2021, 10:00 PM UTC

exporectomy wrote: post #75

EvanAnderson wrote: post #20

Presumably this will encourage the creator of the 1914 work to create new works.

This argument that dead people's work shouldn't be protected because they can't be encouraged to make more is wrong, even where copyright gets extended afterwards. Predicting future value allows others to pay for it while they're alive, possibly by speculating on future enhanced copyright law. Corporations can persist beyond the life of any humans within them for a good reason. It enables longer term investment and d…

> Corporations can persist beyond the life of any humans within them for a good reason. It enables longer term investment and decision making to achieve things that can't be done in a single lifespan.

The median planning term for US corporations is far closer (even on a log scale) to one quarter than to one century. It's offensive to even suggest that any major US corporation is planning multiple human generations into the future, except, ironically, to be able to exploit their current IP holdings ad infinitum. Completely detached from reality, like most pro-IP arguments.

Re: YouTube takes down the Ig Nobel show because of a 1914 recording

#104

Post by yesenadam » Mon, Sep 13, 2021, 10:01 PM UTC

matheusmoreira wrote: post #89

yesenadam wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to another comment on this page by the GP, >> ownership of digital products >There is no such thing. Data is just bits. Really big numbers. Asserting ownership over numbers is simply delusional. I'm a musician working on an album at home at the moment. It's a bit odd to hear I'm delusional, or worse, "simply delusional", for thinking that the music I'm making will be in some sense mine! Maybe I should go ba…

Why not reply to me directly? All intellectual digital work boils down to discovering a number. A file in a computer. The path to this discovery is valuable labor. The number itself is not. The only way you can own a number is to keep it to yourself. Like a private key in cryptography. Nobody can guess it. Nobody can discover it. As soon as you publish it, there's nothing you can do anymore. It can be copied, transfe…

I wasn't replying to you. You seem to think you have everything worked out. It's (just) your opinion; other people have other opinions, points of view. Claiming that people who don't share your opinion—which you are aggressively promoting here like it's objective truth—are simply deluded, doesn't come across as very nice! You are here to teach the Truth on this subject, not to listen or learn - to lecture, not discuss, it seems. Why would you, when you have it all worked out and others are just deluded.

Re: YouTube takes down the Ig Nobel show because of a 1914 recording

#105

Post by knorker » Mon, Sep 13, 2021, 10:02 PM UTC

matheusmoreira wrote: post #100

knorker wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We kinda need an answer to that before we abolish the police... err I mean intellectual property.

Do we? To me the choice is simple: either we abolish copyright, or all computers will eventually be turned into consumer appliances and we'll need programming licenses to write code. It's an easy choice for me. As it should be for anyone who browses Hacker News. In a copyright world we won't be able to hack anymore. So let the creators sort their business out. They'll find a way or go bankrupt. We must not keep inchi…

> So let the creators sort their business out. They'll find a way or go bankrup

Absolutely no need to make it technically impossible, or even hard. They'll do just fine suing people who infringe, and/or get criminal conviction.

As they have been doing.

They'll be just fine, don't worry about copyright holders.

Re: YouTube takes down the Ig Nobel show because of a 1914 recording

#106

Post by knorker » Mon, Sep 13, 2021, 10:03 PM UTC

matheusmoreira wrote: post #97

knorker wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> To actually enforce copyright in the 21st century, there must be no software freedom. It's also trivial to stab someone. Not all crimes can or should be prevented by technical means. In fact most cannot even in principle be prevented. Most of law depends on detection, not prevention.

Without technology, copyright is unenforceable. It might as well not even exist. Piracy has proven that.

You should read up on the history of copyright.

Re: YouTube takes down the Ig Nobel show because of a 1914 recording

#107

Post by pphysch » Mon, Sep 13, 2021, 10:05 PM UTC

phendrenad2 wrote: post #49

In previous years, we'd look at stodgy bureaucratic systems like this and think "Just wait until Google and/or venture capital disrupts them!" But now it is Google and venture capital perpetuating the slow, banal, bureaucratic injustice. The good news is, there's no reason to believe that Google won't also be disrupted eventually. It's sort of happening already, with people voluntarily deciding to not use music in th…

Does Google actually gain anything from enforcing IP, or is it they stand to lose lots by getting persecuted by the powerful IP lobby (Disney, etc), which is the real driver of all this?

Re: YouTube takes down the Ig Nobel show because of a 1914 recording

#108

Post by jchw » Mon, Sep 13, 2021, 10:05 PM UTC

anigbrowl wrote: post #92

jchw wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The blame for YouTube’s copyright system is largely not YouTube, lest we forget the parties that actually benefit from it. Sadly, it seems like it’s going to be the norm now. I recall hearing the EU wants to legally mandate the mechanism of Content ID, just another nail in the coffin for the open web really.

YouTube isn't a scrappy little startup with no resources left over after keeping the servers up and running 24-7. They absolutely have the talent, capital, and legal resources to innovate in this area and to assess things like public domain claims. The concept of public domain resources is not a difficult one, you don't need special legal training or advanced math to understand the idea that copyright expires and tha…

I don’t think it can be made clearer: YouTube fought the battle and lost. This is the compromise. Sure, they aren’t a scrappy little startup. Can anyone please propose what they’re supposed to do after losing the lawsuit?

Re: YouTube takes down the Ig Nobel show because of a 1914 recording

#109

Post by wongarsu » Mon, Sep 13, 2021, 10:07 PM UTC

jimbob45 wrote: post #85

wongarsu wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem isn't that YouTube uses some automation, it's that they use the absolute minimum support staff they can get away with.

Think about the scale we're dealing with here - not just of the number of YT videos being put out per day but also the amount of copyrighted work to enforce. There's simply no way even an army of staff can accurately enforce anything but a small subset of what comes out. Instead of playing favorites, YT chose to use automation to its greatest potential and let the citizenry put pressure on lawmakers to reform the sys…

I'm not sure how content id is a system that encourages people to put pressure on lawmakers, when YouTube isn't legally required to have that system at all. Content ID is Youtube's attempt to keep copyright holders happy so they don't lobby for legislation.

Re: YouTube takes down the Ig Nobel show because of a 1914 recording

#110

Post by matheusmoreira » Mon, Sep 13, 2021, 10:08 PM UTC

knorker wrote: post #96

matheusmoreira wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ownership of digital products There is no such thing. Data is just bits. Really big numbers. Asserting ownership over numbers is simply delusional. The second that number is published, it's already over. Non-fungible tokens do absolutely nothing to change those facts. They just let people delude themselves into believing they actually own stuff. The only thing they own is the token.

You're just talking nonsense. I don't think you thought this through at all. I own a house. In what way? The land registry says that I do. If it starts saying something else, then I don't. The police and courts will make it real. My wallet is only mine because that's what we agree. The brand Coca Cola is just information. But if you start selling your own under their brand you'll find out just how real intellectual p…

All of your examples are real things. They exist in the physical world. Naturally finite, tangible. It makes intuitive sense to most people.

Data is the opposite of all that. Society is trying to retrofit all of that physical world intuition into the virtual world. It doesn't work. It sorta worked up to the mid 20th century because data was still tied to the physical world. Now that computers exist and are globally networked, there are absolutely no physical barriers holding us back.

> The police and courts will make it real.

Police, courts, entire industries worth trillions of dollars, entire countries have been trying to make it real for what, over 50 years? The US will put your country in a literal naughty list if it doesn't take measures against infringement. Yet it happens every day, all the time. People don't even realize they're infringing copyright when they download a picture and post it somewhere. It's just a natural thing to do.

It's not working. Maybe it's time to understand that the world just isn't the same anymore. Times have changed. It's time to let go of these illusions of ownership and control.