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

My Web Series Was Suspended by YouTube Without Explanation

alexjmann.tumblr.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 65 posts

Re: My Web Series Was Suspended by YouTube Without Explanation

#51

Post by Terretta »

denzil_correa wrote: post #18

Does anyone else think that lack of accountability from content hosting providers makes this game so unfair to people who use these services. For example, if YouTube were legally accountable to provide a service would this situation have occurred? I understand YouTube is free (itself a topic of contention) but just because you are free, it doesn't give you a guilt free pass to do anything you want.

Jeff Atwood was having this problem, and finally hosted it with us at Vive.ly. We're a commercial CDN that made Vive.ly as a side project "Dropbox for Video" for small businesses or people who want to feel comfortable owning their content, and we are big supporters of "fair use".

Atwood mentions his fair use issues here:

http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2012/07/but-you-did-not-per...

Granted, Vive.ly isn't free. There's a small cost for uploading, encoding, and storing the video, but that's a one time charge, and there's a nominal cost for bandwidth (we call it "minutes" to make it simple). But it's a wallet system, so if you don't use it you aren't dinged every month, and you own the content so you can run your own ads, name the site what you want or embed it anywhere.

We've gone toe to toe with big content trying to do take-downs of fair use content, and won. The DMCA doesn't have to be handled the way YouTube does it.

You can try it out through http://www.getvively.com/ which explains the platform or direct at http://www.vive.ly/ which is the platform itself.

You can use the invite code "hd4yc" to try it out with 600 minutes of video storage, and 12,000 minutes of delivery.

Re: My Web Series Was Suspended by YouTube Without Explanation

#52

Post by rhizome »

gcb0 wrote: post #48
rhizome wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've come to assume that, like Paypal, they are trying to go as long as possible without implementing customer service.

You mean Product Service. Because you're their product. They DO have customer service. Remember, google customers are advertisers.

You're being That Guy. You know what I mean.

Re: My Web Series Was Suspended by YouTube Without Explanation

#53

Post by chris_wot »

FireBeyond wrote: post #13
TheAmazingIdiot wrote: post #2

When people while about getting 'removed from friends list' like Google, YouTube, Facebook, Yahoo, MSN networks... If it is free, they can do this anytime they like. Your proper answer is to set up your own server and do it yourself. I guess taking it public and getting responses from individuals in that company is your response. Still doesn't mean you shouldn't set up shop in your own right.

To be fair to the parent, he does have a point. You are in no way entitled to the free use of such a service. It's great that it's provided and all, but in the end, there may be some, or no, reason, that they want to pull the plug, on you, on a subset, or the entire service. "Entitled" blogs, rants and the like (and to be clear, this entry didn't strike me as particularly entitled, but disappointed) are more the act…

Its a non monetary transaction. You get to host you video on YouTube, YouTube gets to advertise in your videos.

No money passes hands, but there is a benefit for both sides. It is the video that generates the traffic, I'd consider that the payment.

Re: My Web Series Was Suspended by YouTube Without Explanation

#54

Post by magicalist »

Terretta wrote: post #51
denzil_correa wrote: post #18

Does anyone else think that lack of accountability from content hosting providers makes this game so unfair to people who use these services. For example, if YouTube were legally accountable to provide a service would this situation have occurred? I understand YouTube is free (itself a topic of contention) but just because you are free, it doesn't give you a guilt free pass to do anything you want.

Jeff Atwood was having this problem, and finally hosted it with us at Vive.ly. We're a commercial CDN that made Vive.ly as a side project "Dropbox for Video" for small businesses or people who want to feel comfortable owning their content, and we are big supporters of "fair use". Atwood mentions his fair use issues here: http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2012/07/but-you-did-not-per... Granted, Vive.ly isn't free. Ther…

You don't have to have a Content ID system, but you have to take down the content in the face of a correctly filled out takedown request, even if it's plainly fair use.

You also have to "replace the removed material and cease disabling access to it not less than 10, nor more than 14, business days following receipt of the counter notice, unless its designated agent first receives notice from the person who submitted the notification under subsection (c)(1)(C) that such person has filed an action seeking a court order to restrain the subscriber from engaging in infringing activity relating to the material on the service provider’s system or network."[1] (emphasis added)

It would be interesting to hear about what you guys have found effective in helping support fair use with vive.ly, but since the DMCA makes it essentially zero cost to spam takedown notices, even if only to achieve a chilling effect, the only tool you have (talking to the company posting the notice) is not very effective. You certainly (AFAIK) have no legal leverage as a safe harbored service provider.

[1] http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/512#g

Re: My Web Series Was Suspended by YouTube Without Explanation

#55

Post by suhastech »

gcb0 wrote: post #46
magicalist wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there any company that doesn't reserve the right to terminate a free hosted email account without notice? If you want an SLA, you (almost always) have to pay for it. And if you pay for Google Apps, you also get phone support... In the meantime: IMAP backups. If that's too much of a pain, there are also a ton of services (free or otherwise) which will do automatic backups for you, though you should really ( really…

data backups: this point is moot because, who cares about archived email? that's like 1% of the pain of loosing an account. 99% of the problem is the messages you will never be able to read. Same with the youtube channel from OP. i'm 100% certain that the guy has all his videos ready for re-upload. but who cares? He had worked hard promoting that channel in several venues and acquiring an audience to THAT channel. Th…

That is the reason I wrote a Mac app to do just that. Atleast for emails as the parent comment is suggesting.

More on the that: http://thehorcrux.com/why-i-built-horcrux-app/

Re: My Web Series Was Suspended by YouTube Without Explanation

#56

Post by awj »

gcb0 wrote: post #48
rhizome wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've come to assume that, like Paypal, they are trying to go as long as possible without implementing customer service.

You mean Product Service. Because you're their product. They DO have customer service. Remember, google customers are advertisers.

Actually if you're using google apps for business, you are a customer.

Also, that bit of snark is getting old and tired, and wasn't ever very accurate to begin with.

Re: My Web Series Was Suspended by YouTube Without Explanation

#58

Post by Terretta »

magicalist wrote: post #54
Terretta wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jeff Atwood was having this problem, and finally hosted it with us at Vive.ly. We're a commercial CDN that made Vive.ly as a side project "Dropbox for Video" for small businesses or people who want to feel comfortable owning their content, and we are big supporters of "fair use". Atwood mentions his fair use issues here: http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/2012/07/but-you-did-not-per... Granted, Vive.ly isn't free. Ther…

You don't have to have a Content ID system, but you have to take down the content in the face of a correctly filled out takedown request, even if it's plainly fair use. You also have to "replace the removed material and cease disabling access to it not less than 10, nor more than 14, business days following receipt of the counter notice , unless its designated agent first receives notice from the person who submitted…

> You certainly (AFAIK) have no legal leverage as a safe harbored service provider.

This discredits your entire premise. We are a registered safe harbor service provider.

I've been in video since 98, and we've been hosting customer video since 2001. We've been to court over this, on behalf of our customers, and won. We know what we have to do and what we don't have to do. There's a lot of leeway for the provider in the DMCA.

The big guys partly want to automate everything, and partly are simply acknowledging they have a pirated content problem since anyone can upload anonymously and free, so their practices are far more anti-fair-use than the DMCA requires.

As a final note: you don't have to take down a given piece of content. You only "have" to take it down if you're afraid you'll lose on fair use and want to cover your ass.

Re: My Web Series Was Suspended by YouTube Without Explanation

#59

Post by MichaelGG »

jacquesm wrote: post #21
Karunamon wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can, but good luck. Filing a counternotice gets you the name (and I think the IP address) of the person that filed the notice, but considering that #1 is just a form input box and #2 is useless for identificiation purposes... This was likely the act of someone with an axe to grind, not any violation of YouTube policies.

This is the counter notification section of youtube: http://www.youtube.com/t/copyright_counter The final line reads: > We may then reinstate the material in question at our discretion. So it's a toss-up if they're actually going to do something but they will reveal your information to the party that claimed infringement. That seems to be a pretty lousy deal.

It is an offense for a party to DMCA takedown content they do not own the rights to. This is assuming it was a DMCA takedown and not YouTube's internal system which doesn't have the same protections the DMCA provides.

Not that it makes it necessarily feasible, but at least there is an option.

Post reply on HN