Live data from Hacker News

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

improbable.com

181–190 of 259 posts

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

#181
post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I missed the evidence of them having fought the battle. How do I file notice with Youtube of public domain or fair use assertion with regard to a video I'm uploading?

Viacom International Inc. v. YouTube, Inc.

> the week before the parties were to appear in the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, a settlement was announced in March 2014, and it was reported that no money changed hands.

That's not fighting the battle and losing. That's fighting the battle and surrendering.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viacom_International_Inc._v._Y...

They won every time their case was argued. When did they lose?

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

#182
post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Sue the companies making false claims for damages. Time spend by employees sorting out the mess after fraudulent ownership claims has a measurable dollar figure. And then there is the damage to the brand and loss of business, which a lawyer with chutzpah would claim at billions. If they don't do this, they will just keep bleeding business to companies that do push back or are in better jurisdictions.

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

#183
post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This just shows that economists are poor historians. It doesn't change how money enables more efficient and sophisticated forms of commerce than than barter or a credit social credit system.

> This just shows that economists are poor historians F*ck me, if that's the only thing you take away from this thread I'll have done my job. The problem is they keep taking that poor history and using it to spin tales about humans as greed-stricken robots who'd sell their grandmas if it would generate a dollar more value than whatever you want to price a plate of fresh-baked cookies at, and the bigger problem is we'…

I didn't read the book, but from the summaries I don't find Graeber's thesis any more convincing. It's not like people who lived in pre-money societies sang Kumbaya all day. They pillaged each other all the same. Sure, money was able to finance armies that did this with more efficiency, but you can say the advances in metallurgy were made with nefarious motivations. That doesn't make the advancement bad in itself.

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

#184
post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Viacom International Inc. v. YouTube, Inc.

That's not the "battle" for allowing users to tag Public Domain content, and to have moderators confirm that status where it applies in the case of legal disputes, because they never even fought that "battle".

That is absolutely the battle YouTube fought that lead to Content ID and the claims system that doesn’t have the leniency you wish that it did. It’s not even ambiguous; this is the system that we got. In fact, the system actually improved vastly since it was initially implemented.

Really. It was all a direct reaction to the lawsuits: https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB118161295626932114

When I say it has improved, I mean it genuinely has. Back in 2008 the usual outcome of copyright strikes were deleted videos and deleted channels. Copyright cartels monetizing videos they didn’t make due to dubious Content ID matches may seem like an unreasonable response, but it is still a better compromise than content flying down blackholes.

And yes. It would be great if all of these problems could just be solved. I’m sure they’ve heard every idea imaginable. There is no one obvious way to solve everything. So asking “why don’t they just do this?” is not productive. What we could ask is “how did we get here?”

And the answer to that is that copyright is broken. And if we could fix that, or at least make it less broken, some of these problems would literally disappear.

And if you don’t believe me, there’s tons of backup from people more persuasive who have perspectives of being in the direct line of fire. Like Tom Scott: https://youtu.be/1Jwo5qc78QU

And yeah YouTube could do better, but all too often you get the perspective that this is all their fault because they could solve it with one easy trick. It’s easy to say that when none of the competition managed to stick around to prove it.

Instead, the opposite happened instead, when Twitch had its own copyright reckoning.

We knew copyright on the internet was fundamentally broken in the Napster days. Did we forget?

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

#185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What you say is mostly true, but in the case of sound recordings from before 1972, it's actually the opposite. At the time such recordings were made, they were subject to an infinite copyright term! The Music Modernization Act [1] passed in 2018 to put a finite life on those copyrights. As a result, all sound recordings from before 1923 become public domain this January. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Music_Modern…

> they were subject to an infinite copyright term! If so, that law was unconstitutional: "[the United States Congress shall have power] To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Clause

It was common law copyright, not derived from the copyright clause of the Constitution.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_law_copyright

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

#186
post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Viacom International Inc. v. YouTube, Inc.

> the week before the parties were to appear in the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, a settlement was announced in March 2014, and it was reported that no money changed hands. That's not fighting the battle and losing. That's fighting the battle and surrendering. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viacom_International_Inc._v._Y... They won every time their case was argued. When did they lose?

They had been facing lawsuits and legal scrutiny since 2007; the only parties that ever won were the legal departments. Until relatively recently, YouTube wasn’t even profitable, and Content ID itself was, according to Google, over $100 million of investment to develop over the years. Given the scale of YouTube, I actually think it’s fair to take this at face value.

Ultimately I am not a lawyer and I can’t analyze how and why the case ended the way it did. However, I do think it is obvious to anyone that Content ID is a key component of how YouTube managed to escape further lawsuits and legal scrutiny. And as can be seen in the Oracle case, fighting something all the way into legal precedence can backfire in enormously painful ways, like having APIs all be eligible for copyright.

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

#187
post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So this is WAI per current copyright laws?

For now, at least until they extend it another 100 years.

> For now, at least until they extend it another 100 years.

I don't think there's the political will to keep doing that.

https://creativecommons.org/2018/01/15/copyright-term-extens...

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

#188
This happens in the Synthesizer world. It started with Starsky Carr's channel has had a takedown because he did a filter sweep on his synthesizer, and YouTube removed it because it violated Chemical Brother's works, but it's happened to a lot more since then.

Soon a single stroke of a piano will be all it takes to take down videos :(

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

#189
post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should Google keep wasting money. If its that important then people can protest to change the laws.

Because they aren't paid to enforce unreasonable copyright laws, yet they still have to do so. It's not just the users that are penalized by the status quo, it's the service itself.

But they already implemented a system to do this and have contracts with the relevant rights holders. This gives them a competitive advantage over other video platforms who don't have the resources to develop a Content ID clone and an army of lawyers to write contracts.
Post reply on HN