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

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

improbable.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 259 posts

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

#201

Post by olao99 »

anigbrowl wrote: post #44
jazzyjackson wrote: post #9

This mentions something that has always irked me, YouTube trying to be informative about who the music is licensed by. For one, it's completely useless on classical piano music because the Content ID algo finds similarity in a dozen different recordings. But even when there is one canonical recording, such as Rick Astley's Never Gonna Give You Up, I'm informed that the music is licensed by: (on behalf of Sony BMG Mus…

It's really a pity there's no way for people to sue Youtube for abuse of the commons. Many economists like to invoke the tragedy of the commons' as a justification for property rights (real, maritime, or intellectual) but they tend to sidle around the fact that it's almost impossible for anyone to get legal standing to advocate on behalf of the commons.

But people can sue YouTube for misapplication of copyright law. It would be extremely expensive and time consuming but they could in theory

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

#202

Post by howaboutnope »

jchw wrote: post #184
howaboutnope wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> I’m sure they’ve heard every idea imaginable.

And they didn't try the one that is the actual subject of this subthread.

> asking “why don’t they just do this?” is not productive

That doesn't make your answer to it valid.

> the answer to that is that copyright is broken

Why not go further back? Why is there greed? Why aren't all humans brothers? If only we could fix that, some of these problems would literally disappear!

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

#203

Post by andrekandre »

cool_dude85 wrote: post #167
Aunche wrote: 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.

But that has cause and effect backwards. Nobody is claiming that money does not do that, but that it did not arise because of the inefficiency of barter.

i havent read the book yet, but i am surmising that the claim is that money originally arose in order to service debts, not because (at that time) it was more efficient?

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

#204

Post by randomswede »

moksly wrote: post #192
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.

> The blame for YouTube’s copyright system is largely not YouTube, lest we forget the parties that actually benefit from it. It’s entirely YouTubes fault. Their business model is automated moderation and it’s constantly proven faulty. Yet they haven’t made a decent support system around it. Their automated systems is the primary reason why we would never consider using Google Cloud, even though parts of it would enab…

So, start a video streaming site and show that non-automated moderation scales to whatever scale you would consider to be a successful streaming site.

I suspect (but cannot prove) that the bandwidth and server costs will be small in comparison to the wages for the moderation staff.

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

#205

Post by Mindwipe »

kristopolous wrote: post #164
jchw wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Somehow we can get draconian international agreements on copyright enforcement that the biggest corporations and countries have to bow down to but when it comes to things like child labor or climate change our hands are magically tied.

The notion that nations do not have international agreements that bind countries much more tightly with more rigorously enforced penalties on child labour or climate change than copyright infringement is flat out laughable.

If child labour exploitation was enforced as loosely as copyright infringement most of the world's children would be in workhouses.

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

#206

Post by Kbelicius »

randomswede wrote: post #204
moksly wrote: post #192

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. It’s entirely YouTubes fault. Their business model is automated moderation and it’s constantly proven faulty. Yet they haven’t made a decent support system around it. Their automated systems is the primary reason why we would never consider using Google Cloud, even though parts of it would enab…

So, start a video streaming site and show that non-automated moderation scales to whatever scale you would consider to be a successful streaming site. I suspect (but cannot prove) that the bandwidth and server costs will be small in comparison to the wages for the moderation staff.

So what you are saying is that if youtube cannot solve the problem of scale, those problems should be dumped on the general public instead of youtube decreasing their scale? That is some interesting logic.

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

#207

Post by Kbelicius »

Aerroon wrote: post #137
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.

> 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. It already passed. Now we're just waiting for the consequences.

What are you referring to? There are many directives that were passed but none mandates the mechanism of content ID. In fact there was a directive, which you are probably referring to, that explicitly states that the mechanisms of content ID cannot be mandated.

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

#208

Post by KarlKemp »

hechang1997 wrote: post #199
anigbrowl wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's really a pity there's no way for people to sue Youtube for abuse of the commons. Many economists like to invoke the tragedy of the commons' as a justification for property rights (real, maritime, or intellectual) but they tend to sidle around the fact that it's almost impossible for anyone to get legal standing to advocate on behalf of the commons.

It's YouTube that's the perpetrator of the tragedy of the commons here. There must be a mandatory expiration of any intellectual property into the public domain after a set amount of time and/or after the owner died and the state should first and foremost protect the intellectual property of the public domain, that is, prevent any party from claiming it exclusively and punish any offenders.

This has nothing to do with tragedy of the commons" except in that people find it sad and CC licenses used the metaphor of the commons.

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

#209

Post by sumedh »

TheSpiceIsLife wrote: post #150
sumedh wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Is Google presently restrained from helping users to organise alternative legislation and general protest?

The question is, why should Google do that?

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

#210

Post by feintruled »

Kbelicius wrote: post #206
randomswede wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, start a video streaming site and show that non-automated moderation scales to whatever scale you would consider to be a successful streaming site. I suspect (but cannot prove) that the bandwidth and server costs will be small in comparison to the wages for the moderation staff.

So what you are saying is that if youtube cannot solve the problem of scale, those problems should be dumped on the general public instead of youtube decreasing their scale? That is some interesting logic.

It's the cleverest trick the social media companies pulled. "It's too hard!" So they don't do it!

I'm imagining a world where the answer was "tough luck, you have to or you don't get to do business". Imagine a Facebook where due to the enforced human moderation you were only able to make a single post a day. That actually sounds like it might solve a lot of problems!

Post reply on HN