Earlier quoted context omitted.
Take what you can, give nothing back. Apparently.
Very piracy, but okay for the big guy.
It's only piracy when the law isn't on your side
YouTube demonetizes public domain 'Steamboat Willie' video after copyright claim
161–170 of 216 posts
Re: YouTube demonetizes public domain 'Steamboat Willie' video after copyright claim
#162Maybe because in some countries (like Germany) it is not yet in public domain.
YouTube forces everyone, independent of local laws, to work under the US's fair use laws, they could at least be consistent and not care if some country has other laws on copyright. Which is what they do mostly. If Germany was the problem, they'd make the upload inaccessible in Germany and leave it untouched for everyone else. Content-ID marking it globally is clearly an issue on YouTube's end
> YouTube forces everyone, independent of local laws, to work under the US's fair use laws
No they don't. You must work under the fair use laws of every territory the content is available in.
The US has a significantly wider fair use law than almost any other country on Earth.
> If Germany was the problem, they'd make the upload inaccessible in Germany and leave it untouched for everyone else.
They do - it is extremely common for items to be blocked to Japan especially, as Japan has very tight fair use provisions in particular.
Re: YouTube demonetizes public domain 'Steamboat Willie' video after copyright claim
#163Earlier quoted context omitted.
Google has two options here: 1) Accept all take down notices at face value and let the courts handle disputes 2) Become a mediator and open themselves up for liability It's no surprise Google chooses option 1 given the scale they must operate at. It's a consequence of the legal system which makes Google liable for not taking action immediately on valid claims, but also making it such validity not determined until aft…
This is a false dichotomy that lets Google off the hook for irresponsibility and amorality. If Google’s management is not responsible for Google’s pathological behavior, then nobody is.
Exactly. It's not like it would be that difficult to provide a single shred of support for users that isn't hidden at the center of a labyrinth that most people cannot find their way through, but excusing that by saying the larger labyrinth is even more difficult overlooks the fact that labyrinths are inherently designed to contain evil and we shouldn't ever have to navigate them.
Labyrinths are designed to trap monsters. The only reason to put humans into them is to feed those monsters.
Re: YouTube demonetizes public domain 'Steamboat Willie' video after copyright claim
#164Earlier quoted context omitted.
> But instead it just bowed down to the copyright industry you mean youtube tried to obey the law? You cannot just unilaterally decide not to obey copyright laws. > It could have spurred a copyright revolution. I am not in favour of vigilantism - the right way to change the law is to participate in the public civil procedures. For example, if enough people joined the Pirate Party ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unite…
> you mean youtube tried to obey the law? To be clear, YouTube's goal is not to obey the law, but to minimize their loss. This is why they entirely disregard key aspects and intents of the law, leaving fair use and fair process as a joke. Their implementation harms creators and redirects their earnings to companies that were never legally, contractually or morally entitled to it. > the right way to change the law is…
> This is why they entirely disregard key aspects and intents of the law, leaving fair use and fair process as a joke.
This isn't a key aspect of the law and you misunderstand it.
Fair use is a defence, not a right. Nobody is obligated to facilitate it for you and never has been.
Re: YouTube demonetizes public domain 'Steamboat Willie' video after copyright claim
#165Earlier quoted context omitted.
> you mean youtube tried to obey the law? To be clear, YouTube's goal is not to obey the law, but to minimize their loss. This is why they entirely disregard key aspects and intents of the law, leaving fair use and fair process as a joke. Their implementation harms creators and redirects their earnings to companies that were never legally, contractually or morally entitled to it. > the right way to change the law is…
> This is why they entirely disregard key aspects and intents of the law, leaving fair use and fair process as a joke. This isn't a key aspect of the law and you misunderstand it. Fair use is a defence, not a right. Nobody is obligated to facilitate it for you and never has been.
A "defense" is a right that a litigator attempted to violate. That is what all legal defenses are: proof that you are in your right.
Legal defenses are however entirely useless against private companies with arbitrary terms of service.
Re: YouTube demonetizes public domain 'Steamboat Willie' video after copyright claim
#166Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hey come on they have original ideas, talking African animals, talking cars, talking fish, talking toys. Without intellectual property protection they wouldn't of made all these super original ideas.
I understand you are ’reworking’ a reductive history of Pixar’s canon meme except for one thing you added: “talking African animals”. Which is a reference to the Lion King, one of the mouse’s 2d classics, which is also one of their most egregious derivative works. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kimba_the_White_Lion
I enjoyed this comparison https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5B1mIfQuo4 more than Kimba or Lion King (longer than both of them too!)
lion king 1 1/2 was fantastic tho
Re: YouTube demonetizes public domain 'Steamboat Willie' video after copyright claim
#167Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hey come on they have original ideas, talking African animals, talking cars, talking fish, talking toys. Without intellectual property protection they wouldn't of made all these super original ideas.
I understand you are ’reworking’ a reductive history of Pixar’s canon meme except for one thing you added: “talking African animals”. Which is a reference to the Lion King, one of the mouse’s 2d classics, which is also one of their most egregious derivative works. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kimba_the_White_Lion
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5B1mIfQuo4
Here's a nearly 3 hour video from someone whose Special Interest is The Lion King where he researches the claims that it's ripping off Kimba.
If you don't want to watch it, the original kimba series was 52 episodes and only bears a superficial resemblance to The Lion King.
_MANY_ of the most egregious examples are actually from the 1997 Kimba movie released as Jungle Emperor Leo which came out after The Lion King.
Re: YouTube demonetizes public domain 'Steamboat Willie' video after copyright claim
#168Earlier quoted context omitted.
Very piracy, but okay for the big guy.
You realize that the folks at Disney put in thousands of hours to create their own version of the story. Yeah, they borrowed a bit, but they put in plenty of their own work. But go ahead and pretend that this is the same as the cheap-ass behavior of some stoned pirate who can't bring himself to pay for content and uses Lessig as a justification for his thievery.
Keep huffing that corporate propaganda.
Re: YouTube demonetizes public domain 'Steamboat Willie' video after copyright claim
#169Earlier quoted context omitted.
> you mean youtube tried to obey the law? To be clear, YouTube's goal is not to obey the law, but to minimize their loss. This is why they entirely disregard key aspects and intents of the law, leaving fair use and fair process as a joke. Their implementation harms creators and redirects their earnings to companies that were never legally, contractually or morally entitled to it. > the right way to change the law is…
>[YouTube] entirely disregard[s] key aspects and intents of the law, leaving fair use and fair process as a joke. I make my living from YouTube, and I am very familiar with their policies surrounding copyright. I think your characterization of YouTube in relation to copyright is totally off base. YouTube is covered by the DMCA, and YouTube responds to DMCA takedowns because if they don’t, they could be liable for con…
Your positive opinion on their copyright stance does not seem to align with other YouTube creators - in particular, their complaints about aggressive automatic content ID application, that successful appeal often lead to the video being up but with redirected monitization to the claimant, the poor appeal process for the blind legal requests made using it, and the associated "copyright strike" system where third parties can basically terminate your source of income as a result of a few blind, incorrect takedown requests.
Perhaps your type of content is less likely to get incorrect matches, or does not use fair-use or expired works often, or maybe you have access to better YouTube representatives than the average (semi-succesful or better) YouTuber.
Re: YouTube demonetizes public domain 'Steamboat Willie' video after copyright claim
#170Earlier quoted context omitted.
Youtube has to follow the DMCA, yes. And much of the problem is the fault of the law, not of Youtube. But nothing in law requires them to implement Content ID at all, let alone to allow big corporations to claim any content they want, or for users who dispute Content ID claims to have their claims adjudicated by the corporation who made the claim, or to allow those corporations to retain their access to the system af…
But there's the law and then there's a company's ability to make another's life miserable by way of lawsuit. So even if you're right, getting sued by Disney, Warner Brothers, Universal and every other player in the media world on a regular basis will cost you a staggering amount of time and money and will generate a lot of bad press. Just taking content down on the other hand costs you very little. And since copyrigh…
On what grounds would they file suit? If YouTube complies with the DMCA §512 requirements, it’s a safe harbour, granted immunity from copyright liability.