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

YouTube demonetizes public domain 'Steamboat Willie' video after copyright claim

mashable.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 216 posts

Re: YouTube demonetizes public domain 'Steamboat Willie' video after copyright claim

#201

Post by xrd »

xrd wrote: post #198
jsnell wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If a claimer can halt revenue for the first few months on any creative work, they can kill any opportunities to be made off public domain works. This a second order effect of the public domain laws. Your premise is incorrect, which makes the conclusions invalid. The revenue is not lost during a monetization dispute, it's held in escrow. I.e. even if it were true that the vast majority of revenue of a YT video is ge…

That's a really good clarification, thank you. I didn't know this!

But, isn't it a fact that the monetization would be limited because the viewing is limited? I can't believe that YouTube would leave the video accessible after a claimant tried to take it down.

Re: YouTube demonetizes public domain 'Steamboat Willie' video after copyright claim

#202

Post by johnnyanmac »

xhkkffbf wrote: post #200
johnnyanmac wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Yeah, they borrowed a bit, but they put in plenty of their own work. And "Steamboat Bill" didn't? I fail to see the difference outside of the fact that Grimm et. Al didn't have a small army OF lawyers to say otherwise.

I'm not sure your point? I admitted that they borrowed a bit. And then your point is that "Steamboat Bill" borrowed? Okay. I guess. But I'm not denying that the filmmakers and artists grab ideas and plots from the collective idea well. I'm saying that they also put in thousands if not millions of hours of work creating the new version. It's just wrong for the pro piracy crowd to use this as an excuse to justify their…

>It's just wrong for the pro piracy crowd to use this as an excuse to justify their theft.

My main point wasn't really about modern pirates. The internet cabal will define however they want to fit their own notions.

It was more about artists treated as "thieves" by companies like Disney that themselves have done "copyright infringement" to get themselves off the ground (by the definition they defined over the past century).

Re: YouTube demonetizes public domain 'Steamboat Willie' video after copyright claim

#203

Post by greenhexagon »

xhkkffbf wrote: post #200
johnnyanmac wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Yeah, they borrowed a bit, but they put in plenty of their own work. And "Steamboat Bill" didn't? I fail to see the difference outside of the fact that Grimm et. Al didn't have a small army OF lawyers to say otherwise.

I'm not sure your point? I admitted that they borrowed a bit. And then your point is that "Steamboat Bill" borrowed? Okay. I guess. But I'm not denying that the filmmakers and artists grab ideas and plots from the collective idea well. I'm saying that they also put in thousands if not millions of hours of work creating the new version. It's just wrong for the pro piracy crowd to use this as an excuse to justify their…

Please don't troll on HN.

Theft is taking something away from someone. Copying by definition doesn't. Pretending it's equivalent to, or even similar to, "theft" is ridiculous.

Re: YouTube demonetizes public domain 'Steamboat Willie' video after copyright claim

#204

Post by rezonant »

safety1st wrote: post #87
rezonant wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So is it a copyright enforcement system or is it really some kind of cartel mechanism which is replacing copyright law? Yes. In this case this is certainly because this footage is in Disney's YouTube CMS and set to be auto-claimed. The fact that we are at the whim of an admin doing the right thing and removing that content from their CMS or at the very least changing the policy attached to it is problematic at best…

Intent is significant, it can determine outcomes in court rulings. So here we have this content ID system which Google claims exists to help some Google partners manage their copyright claims. One would think that would mean it helps them determine which claims are valid and which aren't. But it didn't appear to help Disney with that in this case, rather it enabled Disney to swiftly make an invalid claim after the fi…

As far as I know, Content ID has no information about public domain content, nor does it understand fair use in any way other than by allowed match percentages that you configure (as a content owner). Content owners are under agreement to only claim content that they have the rights to. If you abuse the privilege Google gives you, which is an approval system, ostensibly Google would remove your access to use the system. (Basically no chance that would happen to Disney)

You are totally right that it should do these things, but I contend that an extralegal process that grants more rights to content owners (especially big ones) at the expense of fair use shouldn't be improved to the level of acceptability, I think it shouldn't be allowed.

Re: YouTube demonetizes public domain 'Steamboat Willie' video after copyright claim

#205

Post by peyton »

greenhexagon wrote: post #203
xhkkffbf wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure your point? I admitted that they borrowed a bit. And then your point is that "Steamboat Bill" borrowed? Okay. I guess. But I'm not denying that the filmmakers and artists grab ideas and plots from the collective idea well. I'm saying that they also put in thousands if not millions of hours of work creating the new version. It's just wrong for the pro piracy crowd to use this as an excuse to justify their…

Please don't troll on HN. Theft is taking something away from someone. Copying by definition doesn't. Pretending it's equivalent to, or even similar to, "theft" is ridiculous.

That’s not true. There’s a whole history of legislation and publications, e.g. https://bjs.ojp.gov/library/publications/intellectual-proper...

and

https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/PLAW-105publ147

If the terminology is good enough for the DoJ and Congress, it’s good enough for an internet forum.

I don’t like this movement to memoryhole the debate we had in the ‘90s through wordsmithing.

Re: YouTube demonetizes public domain 'Steamboat Willie' video after copyright claim

#206

Post by namaria »

peyton wrote: post #205
greenhexagon wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please don't troll on HN. Theft is taking something away from someone. Copying by definition doesn't. Pretending it's equivalent to, or even similar to, "theft" is ridiculous.

That’s not true. There’s a whole history of legislation and publications, e.g. https://bjs.ojp.gov/library/publications/intellectual-proper... and https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/PLAW-105publ147 If the terminology is good enough for the DoJ and Congress, it’s good enough for an internet forum. I don’t like this movement to memoryhole the debate we had in the ‘90s through wordsmithing.

There is a lot of middle ground between swallowing lobbyists language wholesale because it was adopted by legislators in their pocket and revisionism.

Re: YouTube demonetizes public domain 'Steamboat Willie' video after copyright claim

#208

Post by CalRobert »

a_gnostic wrote: post #141
CalRobert wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"once upon a time a beautiful but poor girl married a rich dude and everything was great"

Why not "once upon a time a beautiful but poor dude married a rich girl and everything was great"? Oh. Right.

We naïvely bought a book of classic German fairy tales and somehow no such stories appear

Re: YouTube demonetizes public domain 'Steamboat Willie' video after copyright claim

#209

Post by Mindwipe »

arghwhat wrote: post #165
Mindwipe wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

No, it literally isn't.

They are two separate and unrelated legal concepts. I'm sorry but you are literally wrong.

A "right" is something a state body (and usually third parties) must actively facilitate. I am required to get a fair trial, and if that needs the stare to wait to try me or build more courthouses they must proactively do that.

A defense is not. A defense is literally just "we will not find you guilty or liable in court due to this." But nobody is required to go out of the way to help you achieve it. You just can't be sued or suffer a criminal penalty for it.

Re: YouTube demonetizes public domain 'Steamboat Willie' video after copyright claim

#210

Post by weinzierl »

CogitoCogito wrote: post #128
weinzierl wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Germany there is no public domain, so it never will be. It will be "gemeinfrei" , which is a different thing, somewhen after 2036. Probably even only after 2058, because one of the composers of the music lived till 1988. EDIT: German Wikipedia says 2042.

What are the practical differences between US public domain and German gemeinfrei?

The main difference is that in Germany it is not possible to give up moral rights and therefore you cannot truly dedicate something to the public. Some rights always stay with the creator in contrast to public domain, which gives away all rights.
Post reply on HN