How is this different than a big brand stealing a design and putting it on a Tshirt? The product in question is a video and it used art without permission.
> Unless you fuck up 3 times, then maybe it "ruins" your channel.
So by "fuck up" you mean having at least 3 videos on your channel which can receive fraudulent claims. Only stupid content creators make the mistake of having more than two videos I guess.
> And if it's a fraudulent strike the person who filed the fraudulent strike gets a strike.
If only it were that simple. If you try to tell Youtube it's fraudulent you get a response 12 seconds later that they reviewed it and it's valid.
"The 2.2 million incorrect claims represent less than 1 percent of the more than 729 million total copyright claims issued in the first half of this year, 99 percent of which originated from Content ID, YouTube’s automated enforcement tool. When users disputed these claims, the case was resolved in favor of the uploader of the video 60 percent of the time, according to the report."
You're using numbers from a completely different issue. This isn't the automated Content ID system this is a manual claim.
Most videos like this make the majority of their money in the first few days. If they get demonetized, they're effectively dead. Considering the huge costs involved, that's pretty bad.
The 'fuck ups' can be retroactive through. So you could do something that was totally fine and make multiple videos of said things, then have all of them individually flagged at some point in the future.
This is more equivalent to a transition image in a video featuring the T-shirt at some stage, and part of the transition is copyrighted, not the shirt itself.
To be clear, the copyright strike is for a small two second animation in the middle of a much larger video.
The correct course of action here is for Mr Beast to apologize to the animation owner (AO) and to reupload the video with the animation removed. Or, to license the animation.
YouTube should then lift demonization.
AO didn't suffer any damage so there's no compensation owed. Legally, AO might be able to chase this but the payout will likely be far less than the court costs.
Mr Beast seems to be a pretty upstanding guy, so I wouldn't be surprised if he licensed the animation for a generous price.
Ultimately, it was the editor who messed up so the Mr Beast team need to review their processes.
31 comments
[ 337 ms ] story [ 1232 ms ] threadIt turns off monetization for one video. Unless you fuck up 3 times, then maybe it "ruins" your channel.
And if it's a fraudulent strike the person who filed the fraudulent strike gets a strike. Meanwhile you can send as many phony C&Ds as you want.
So by "fuck up" you mean having at least 3 videos on your channel which can receive fraudulent claims. Only stupid content creators make the mistake of having more than two videos I guess.
> And if it's a fraudulent strike the person who filed the fraudulent strike gets a strike.
If only it were that simple. If you try to tell Youtube it's fraudulent you get a response 12 seconds later that they reviewed it and it's valid.
[1] https://www.theverge.com/2021/12/6/22820318/youtube-copyrigh...
You're using numbers from a completely different issue. This isn't the automated Content ID system this is a manual claim.
Nintendo has done this on multiple occasions.
https://blog.codepen.io/documentation/terms-of-service/#your...
it doesnt really have anything to do with CSS
But its not exactly the same, so maybe many other people have altered it.
The correct course of action here is for Mr Beast to apologize to the animation owner (AO) and to reupload the video with the animation removed. Or, to license the animation.
YouTube should then lift demonization.
AO didn't suffer any damage so there's no compensation owed. Legally, AO might be able to chase this but the payout will likely be far less than the court costs.
Mr Beast seems to be a pretty upstanding guy, so I wouldn't be surprised if he licensed the animation for a generous price.
Ultimately, it was the editor who messed up so the Mr Beast team need to review their processes.
How many people would have said the same about Linus Sebastion before Gamers Nexus' Steve Burke pointed out how they treated Billet Labs?
Mr. Beast's actual job is cultivating a public persona. Being good at that doesn't make him a good person.