I don't know what the recommendations are based on but I get a lot of "Start a business easily" type motivational videos and IT related content. Which ones are you seeing?
You would think youtube would be fine with public domain content too. But this is not necessarily the case. Besides copyright strikes, youtube will also take videos down because they contain controversial content that advertisers don't like. They don't evaluate videos in the context of the video being old archived content representing old values from a different era.
Particularly, I believe Jeff Quitney's channel (which was mostly old aerospace videos made by the US government, but was generally for whatever old film he got his hands on) got banned because some of the videos were old political propaganda which expressed views which are now verboten.
The IA hosts lots of non-public-domain videos, including loads of rare ripped-from-VCR material. Copyright status rarely is an issue unless a copyright holder finds a specific video and makes an explicit DMCA claim against it.
And even then, nothing is ever really deleted, just non-visible, for now…
Youtube banned the archivist Jeff Quitney a few years ago. This particularly stings because a lot of wikipedia articles still cite and link to videos he uploaded.
There was a Danish church organist I came across on YouTube, who had worked his way through pretty much every Danish hymnal/school song book, and many Swedish and Norwegian ones too. He'd been at it for years. Then suddenly he was gone. I assume one too many of the songs he'd played must have had been too recent, and got copystriked.
It's pretty sad that even marginal, plainly non-commercial work of an archival nature isn't left alone.
> I assume one too many of the songs he'd played must have had been too recent, and got copystriked.
I bet whatever songs got him banned were in the public domain, but ContentID thought it sounded too much like a copyrighted recording of the same song. This sort of thing happens all the time to musicians who upload themselves playing classical songs. It's infuriating.
Is there any reason to suspect it's something besides the person behind the content requested their domain be excluded? Or IA behaving as they legally should and always have?
Yes - the Archive's refusal to provide a reason. They don't get to have both the privilege of opaquely excluding content, and the assumption that all exclusions are for the most faultless reasons.
I'm sure there's some guideline somewhere giving themselves blanket excuse to do anything they want, then hide behind secrecy and hope people will assume the best. What I'm not sure is why such duplicity being "standard" makes it any better.
>including complaints by people other than the website/domain owner:
Yes, they are legally required to listen to the copyright owner's request. In your linked example, that was the church of scientology. In your earlier post, that would be whoever was writing the tweets. Twitter could also choose to block their requests as the wayback machine would also grab their copyrighted code, but choose not to.
You're making a documented legal requirement sound like a shady partisanship. Unless there are examples of these people wanting their content archived and the IA refusing, I don't see your point. Anybody is free to tell the IA not to archive their copyright material.
> You're making a documented legal requirement sound like a shady partisanship
Unless keeping the cause of removal secret is also a legal requirement, then this is by definition shady. And you assume that because some removals are results of legal complaints, then all are. It is Archive's choice to keep us in the dark regarding removals, and it is our choice not to trust them for it.
I assume all unarchived content is unarchived because of their established policy for not archiving things, which is the copyright holder refusing archiving. Why would I assume otherwise?
We aren't being kept in the dark, we know the reason some content is unarchived and they say which content is unarchived.
Your complaint is like going to a store with posted hours after closing and demanding an explanation for why they aren't letting you in. It's possible there's some vast conspiracy to block you from shopping, bit it's more likely they're following the posted rules.
> I assume all unarchived content is unarchived because of their established policy for not archiving things, which is the copyright holder refusing archiving. Why would I assume otherwise?
Because of their deliberate policy of secrecy that forces you to assume, instead of know. As this is the 3rd time I repeat this same point, it will also be the last.
I directly addressed this with my following two paragraphs. It's not secrecy, we're fully aware of why they were unarchived and have no reason to think there's any other reason.
The program above is from the last shutdown and the example given there about his most popular clip was a very old show of Bonnie Tyler. SVT, at the time, made the clip available officially via SVT Play again but has since disappeared from their service almost as a reminder that culture will disappear from the public unless enthusiast like Rosa Mannen can make them available somewhere.
SVT is public service TV in Sweden. SvtPlay their online streaming service.
Lots of opinions about SVT (as there should be, it’s public!) but if you ask me, it’s super high quality and it’s something that I’m very proud of, as someone from Sweden.
I am of a different opinion. I agree that SVT Play is technically well built and the service is useful. Also, there are good programs to be found. But I think it could be much better. For example the DW Documentary channel, which can be found on Youtube, has better documentaries on average, than are broadcast on SVT. Also, I feel like SVT has an abnoxious tendency to lecture their audience. I don't feel I am treated as an adult, but I am told what to think.
I don’t know specifically about På Spårer, but it’s not unusual that they licences the idea and format of the show, and that’s why they only are allowed to show it in Sweden.
That doesn’t explain why my kids can’t watch Beppes Godnattstund while we are abroad though.
> I just wish that I as a Swede living abroad could watch the Swedish language content.
As a first step, I wouldn't mind it if countries generally adopted a system where anyone in the world could simply pay for access at a rate comparable to the public TV tax.
The obvious downside of this system is that it would be expensive for certain networks (sorry Norway TV fans) but it would get the ball rolling.
What do you think happens when you upload captured TV-content on YT?? From copyright point of view there is not really much difference between 20 day old content and 20 year old content, its all equally protected. Just saying that the intent is "archival" doesn't change anything
Sadly we have many hobbyist who do great work, but they are completely naive about the world. I'd hate to see the work go to waste. I think archiving these things are important, sadly people who work like this are making a ton of assumptions about how the world works and often completely ignore legal issues. It's often good that they do, if someone sat down and tried to handle the legality of the project first, then it would never get off the ground.
Right now there's some hope that some Swedish organisation, The Internet Archive, maybe even YouTube, can step in and save the work. Then again there's a risk that no one can help.
It is not much different that people building a community on Facebook, because it's easy, it gives them a ready made platform. An easy to use platform. Then they're surprised when Facebook close their account for violating a policy that was always there, but they never actually read Facebooks terms and condition (which I can understand).
I'm sorry it happened to the guy, but you're right: "What did you think would happen?" The only surprise is that it didn't happen earlier.
There's a big difference between "oh you're an academic? Sure you can come pick through my basement archive of video" and "hey everyone, check out my youtube channel"
That's before you even get into issues of Youtube's aggressive compression
While it's right by the Olidan Hydroelectric Power Station, the photographer used a telephoto lens so Rosa Mannen is in the foreground and the upstream Hojum Hydroelectric Power Station is in the background. Here's a closer shot of Hojum:
I read it but didn't realize it was in Swedish. I mean, I did, but didn't realize HN linked to an article in Swedish and that others here might not read Swedish.
"Everyone in Africa can read Swedish." - Mean Girls.
I really thought BitTorrent would be the _de facto_ solution for data archiving at a planetary level. I thought dusty old computers would sync and store volumes of data across generations. Recorded history would be safe; it could even be checksummed for its integrity if needed.
Unfortunately, we are still relying on a couple of companies as the main custodians of our recorded history. This can't be good and we'll keep receiving sad news about content vanishing from the Internet from one day to the other.
I really hope someone who has put this much time into archiving stuff didn’t put all his eggs in one basket and still has these archives sorted offline in case he wants to distribute them, would be awful to put so much time into something and then just have youtube pull it away.
67 comments
[ 4.9 ms ] story [ 151 ms ] threadArchive.org is the right place for it.
Particularly, I believe Jeff Quitney's channel (which was mostly old aerospace videos made by the US government, but was generally for whatever old film he got his hands on) got banned because some of the videos were old political propaganda which expressed views which are now verboten.
And even then, nothing is ever really deleted, just non-visible, for now…
You can find (most of?) his videos here now: https://archive.org/download/Jeff_Quitney_me
It's pretty sad that even marginal, plainly non-commercial work of an archival nature isn't left alone.
I bet whatever songs got him banned were in the public domain, but ContentID thought it sounded too much like a copyrighted recording of the same song. This sort of thing happens all the time to musicians who upload themselves playing classical songs. It's infuriating.
https://web.archive.org/web/20220000000000*/amren.com
Sorry. This URL has been excluded from the Wayback Machine.
No reason or explanation given, or hint at who excluded it.
I am suggesting he upload the files directly.
https://github.com/etnguyen03/docker-tubeup
Are the content owners complaining about a desire to be archived but IA is blocking them? As if not, I don't see the issue.
I'm sure there's some guideline somewhere giving themselves blanket excuse to do anything they want, then hide behind secrecy and hope people will assume the best. What I'm not sure is why such duplicity being "standard" makes it any better.
Yes, they are legally required to listen to the copyright owner's request. In your linked example, that was the church of scientology. In your earlier post, that would be whoever was writing the tweets. Twitter could also choose to block their requests as the wayback machine would also grab their copyrighted code, but choose not to.
You're making a documented legal requirement sound like a shady partisanship. Unless there are examples of these people wanting their content archived and the IA refusing, I don't see your point. Anybody is free to tell the IA not to archive their copyright material.
Unless keeping the cause of removal secret is also a legal requirement, then this is by definition shady. And you assume that because some removals are results of legal complaints, then all are. It is Archive's choice to keep us in the dark regarding removals, and it is our choice not to trust them for it.
We aren't being kept in the dark, we know the reason some content is unarchived and they say which content is unarchived.
Your complaint is like going to a store with posted hours after closing and demanding an explanation for why they aren't letting you in. It's possible there's some vast conspiracy to block you from shopping, bit it's more likely they're following the posted rules.
Because of their deliberate policy of secrecy that forces you to assume, instead of know. As this is the 3rd time I repeat this same point, it will also be the last.
https://www.amren.com/robots.txt
For the first example, it sounds like[1] she requested that her page be excluded. It sounds like[2] the Internet Archive allows you to request that.[1] https://www.foxnews.com/media/taylor-lorenz-twitter-page-exc...
[2] https://help.archive.org/help/how-do-i-request-to-remove-som...
Much respect to media hoarders of all creeds.
And for Swedes you can watch a short interview with him on Swedish Televison in the first 8 minutes of this program: https://www.svtplay.se/video/33989650/sverige/sverige-sasong...
The program above is from the last shutdown and the example given there about his most popular clip was a very old show of Bonnie Tyler. SVT, at the time, made the clip available officially via SVT Play again but has since disappeared from their service almost as a reminder that culture will disappear from the public unless enthusiast like Rosa Mannen can make them available somewhere.
Lots of opinions about SVT (as there should be, it’s public!) but if you ask me, it’s super high quality and it’s something that I’m very proud of, as someone from Sweden.
Happy to fund it with my tax money, independent public service is important, and honestly I'm using it more than Netflix and HBO and the rest.
It's not like På Spåret is going to be sold abroad anyway.
That doesn’t explain why my kids can’t watch Beppes Godnattstund while we are abroad though.
For non-swedes, this is a show about a old guy who lives in a bed with a bunch of little girl dolls who need to go to the toilet all of the time.
https://mullvad.net/
5 dollar/month VPN. NOT BLOCKED BY SVTPLAY KK.
As a first step, I wouldn't mind it if countries generally adopted a system where anyone in the world could simply pay for access at a rate comparable to the public TV tax.
The obvious downside of this system is that it would be expensive for certain networks (sorry Norway TV fans) but it would get the ball rolling.
And on his desk… an AMIGA 1200. Seems fitting.
I remember seeing his name several times in old videos I watched in YouTube, although right now I can’t remember which those videos were.
Right now there's some hope that some Swedish organisation, The Internet Archive, maybe even YouTube, can step in and save the work. Then again there's a risk that no one can help.
It is not much different that people building a community on Facebook, because it's easy, it gives them a ready made platform. An easy to use platform. Then they're surprised when Facebook close their account for violating a policy that was always there, but they never actually read Facebooks terms and condition (which I can understand).
I'm sorry it happened to the guy, but you're right: "What did you think would happen?" The only surprise is that it didn't happen earlier.
Well, it sort of does because copyright laws have carve outs for libraries and archiving.
That's before you even get into issues of Youtube's aggressive compression
Sorry.
If I'm not mistaken, here's the bench - https://www.google.com/maps/@58.2749468,12.270221,3a,60y,141... .
While it's right by the Olidan Hydroelectric Power Station, the photographer used a telephoto lens so Rosa Mannen is in the foreground and the upstream Hojum Hydroelectric Power Station is in the background. Here's a closer shot of Hojum:
https://www.google.com/maps/@58.2789593,12.2774802,3a,75y,21...
I read it but didn't realize it was in Swedish. I mean, I did, but didn't realize HN linked to an article in Swedish and that others here might not read Swedish.
"Everyone in Africa can read Swedish." - Mean Girls.
https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
This type of archival work is very important for us interested in current & recent culture (This probably is all of us in some sense).
There's so many cool archival efforts going on that unfortunatley seem to rely on youtube.
As a nostalgic swede, i found this one recently.
Its a mad ** archive of all of the early underground swedish hiphop.
https://www.youtube.com/user/mfsthathustla/playlists
Unfortunately, we are still relying on a couple of companies as the main custodians of our recorded history. This can't be good and we'll keep receiving sad news about content vanishing from the Internet from one day to the other.
Sadly, we often seem to learn of a treasure trove of content when it makes the news for having already been taken down.