I've said it before, and it bears repeating here: ContentID is not, has not been, and will never be the DMCA. It was developed by YouTube so Viacom would drop the suit that would likely have stripped YouTube's safe harbor protections under the DMCA. ContentID takedowns are not DMCA takedowns. They operate on a different, much less strict standard. Anyone that works with YouTube can flag any video for any reason (see…
Dear Google: This is about as evil as you can get.
Fox 'uses' a gameplay video from YouTube, and removes the original with DMCA
41–50 of 80 posts
Re: Fox 'uses' a gameplay video from YouTube, and removes the original with DMCA
#42Earlier quoted context omitted.
IMO it's not that black and white. If google didn't agree to the ContentID system, Viacom would have most likely been able to strip them of their safe harbor status. And that means the end of Youtube. Yeah, something needs to be done, but having humans review takedowns just doesn't work at this scale, and if they aren't extremely over zealous about taking things down, they will be shut down. Google is under the thumb…
Even if it's true that they are under the thumb of the evil media companies, Google has billions in their war chest to fight legal battles like these. Why aren't they? Apple seems willing to fight legal battles on moral grounds; why won't Google?
Re: Fox 'uses' a gameplay video from YouTube, and removes the original with DMCA
#43SmarterEveryDay told a story in one of his videos about slow-mo clip of tatoo machine in action being ripped from one of his movies by the large press publisher, Bauer, and reuploaded on Bauer's Facebook page. Then Bauer moved on to claim DMCA on his original uploaded by him on his Facebook page: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6A1Lt0kvMA
Re: Fox 'uses' a gameplay video from YouTube, and removes the original with DMCA
#44I've said it before, and it bears repeating here: ContentID is not, has not been, and will never be the DMCA. It was developed by YouTube so Viacom would drop the suit that would likely have stripped YouTube's safe harbor protections under the DMCA. ContentID takedowns are not DMCA takedowns. They operate on a different, much less strict standard. Anyone that works with YouTube can flag any video for any reason (see…
s512(c)(1)(C) "upon notification ... responds expeditiously to remove, or disable access to"
"Expeditiously" is the key. That is, today, understood to mean now, not after the weekend or once Bill comes back from lunch. On a giant system like Youtube, it requires an automated system.
Re: Fox 'uses' a gameplay video from YouTube, and removes the original with DMCA
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
IMO it's not that black and white. If google didn't agree to the ContentID system, Viacom would have most likely been able to strip them of their safe harbor status. And that means the end of Youtube. Yeah, something needs to be done, but having humans review takedowns just doesn't work at this scale, and if they aren't extremely over zealous about taking things down, they will be shut down. Google is under the thumb…
Even if it's true that they are under the thumb of the evil media companies, Google has billions in their war chest to fight legal battles like these. Why aren't they? Apple seems willing to fight legal battles on moral grounds; why won't Google?
Re Apple. You sure they were fighting that battle on moral grounds because the CEO said nice things? Apple's been happy to do similar things for Chinese, lie about need for Mac security, squeeze extra money using Foxconn workers' misery, reduce number of buyers by charging luxury prices, and so on. They're not ethical in the least. That is probably a greedy corporation rolling in money ensuring it will continue to do so by positioning itself as a private alternative to Android. It's... Marketing.
Re: Fox 'uses' a gameplay video from YouTube, and removes the original with DMCA
#46I've said it before, and it bears repeating here: ContentID is not, has not been, and will never be the DMCA. It was developed by YouTube so Viacom would drop the suit that would likely have stripped YouTube's safe harbor protections under the DMCA. ContentID takedowns are not DMCA takedowns. They operate on a different, much less strict standard. Anyone that works with YouTube can flag any video for any reason (see…
ContentID is the DMCA. It isn't a DMCA takedown, but it is a scheme designed to satisfy Google's DMCA obligations. Viacom was perhaps the fire behind its deployment, but it is the DMCA that dictates that the system exist. s512(c)(1)(C) "upon notification ... responds expeditiously to remove, or disable access to" "Expeditiously" is the key. That is, today, understood to mean now, not after the weekend or once Bill co…
Re: Fox 'uses' a gameplay video from YouTube, and removes the original with DMCA
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
ContentID is the DMCA. It isn't a DMCA takedown, but it is a scheme designed to satisfy Google's DMCA obligations. Viacom was perhaps the fire behind its deployment, but it is the DMCA that dictates that the system exist. s512(c)(1)(C) "upon notification ... responds expeditiously to remove, or disable access to" "Expeditiously" is the key. That is, today, understood to mean now, not after the weekend or once Bill co…
"upon notification of claimed infringement as described in subsection (c)(3),"
"[Safe harbour applies] if the service provider— upon obtaining such knowledge or awareness, acts expeditiously to remove, or disable access to, the material."
"Awareness" would apply even absent a formal DMCA takedown pointing to the content. So after the first, Youtube is 'on notice' for repeats even where those don't get new takedown notices ... ContentID.
Re: Fox 'uses' a gameplay video from YouTube, and removes the original with DMCA
#48I've said it before, and it bears repeating here: ContentID is not, has not been, and will never be the DMCA. It was developed by YouTube so Viacom would drop the suit that would likely have stripped YouTube's safe harbor protections under the DMCA. ContentID takedowns are not DMCA takedowns. They operate on a different, much less strict standard. Anyone that works with YouTube can flag any video for any reason (see…
Content ID is not open to anyone though. https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/1311402 This particular video seems like a nice test case of the review system.
Setting a high bar for eligibility presumably cuts down on fraud, wasted cycles vetting obvious noise, and the need for an army of people to do the vetting and legal checksumming around the clock.
The little guy is collateral damage in this case, not the intended target. You could argue, hey, potato potahto, the net result is a system that favors the large content publisher and offers the little guy no chance to participate. But intent matters. If Google's intent is to manage scale, then hopefully Google acknowledges the unintended problems its solution creates, and it's working on a better solution. If Google's intent is indeed to favor the big publishers, then that's a different story.
Re: Fox 'uses' a gameplay video from YouTube, and removes the original with DMCA
#49I've said it before, and it bears repeating here: ContentID is not, has not been, and will never be the DMCA. It was developed by YouTube so Viacom would drop the suit that would likely have stripped YouTube's safe harbor protections under the DMCA. ContentID takedowns are not DMCA takedowns. They operate on a different, much less strict standard. Anyone that works with YouTube can flag any video for any reason (see…
It would be great if articles would not say DMCA and be misleading about what is a YouTube process that has very little to do with the law. That way, people would focus on the real offender (YouTube and media companies) as opposed to assuming normal people actually have some legal protection and process provided by the DMCA. I think the headline in the article and here is misleading and should be changed.
Re: Fox 'uses' a gameplay video from YouTube, and removes the original with DMCA
#50Although I prefer buying content directly from the artist, like Louis CK does. As long as it seems "fair", I buy.
That where piracy comes from: a rational argument about a skewed market.