> A youtube copyright notice / copyright strike is not the same as a DMCA takedown. Yes it is. YouTube doesn’t magically get to ignore the DMCA, so their process is built around that (along with layering Content ID on…
YouTube’s “three strikes” policy is their implementation of the DMCA’s “repeat infringers” requirement: > has adopted and reasonably implemented, and informs subscribers and account holders of the service provider's…
You’re conflating the two systems. YouTube does have the Content ID system, which does automatic detection and is mostly used to monetize (not take down) copyrighted content. But this case is a copyright strike, which…
Sounds like he got a copyright strike, which means a DMCA takedown, not a Content ID claim. https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/7002106
> hold onto the revenue until the dispute is resolved They do that: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/7000961?hl=en
There's a different option for if the video is public domain or otherwise not copyrightable to handle this case. I assume that that "lawyerly language" is to dissuade users from abusing the process and choosing an…
Looking at copyright claims I have on my channel (these are valid music claims, for what it's worth), I see a dispute option labeled "The video is my original content and I own all of the rights to it", which I think…
Yes, sorry, you're right -- they do it to keep the safe harbor protection (which is the only sane option when running a video sharing website).
But YouTube does accept DMCA claims, of course, as it's required by law. Their Content ID system provides an automated way to detect potential infringement by large copyright holders and redirect ad revenue to them, but…
YouTube has an equivalent of that too: https://support.google.com/youtubegaming/answer/6304294?hl=e...
I agree that their monetization policy is pretty vague; I wish it was clearer but they probably have to cover their bases. As for "people that abuse moderation tools for hateful or trolling purposes": these people won't…
There's a lot of misinformation going on in the Reddit thread. These "Heroes" get better tools for flagging videos faster (among other things), but it's still just flagging. Every flag still gets reviewed by a human at…
I found an option to turn off notifications for those messages. If you open the notification settings for a channel that you're subscribed to, you can uncheck "Include community post notifications" and then stay…
> Censorship and demonetisation on YouTube seems to be happening to people fairly regularly, and without appeal, via poorly calibrated algorithms Demonetization happens when a video doesn't meet their…
After the uploader disputes an automated claim, the claimant can uphold it as you described, but the user then has the option to appeal that claim. The only way to settle that appeal is for the claimant to either drop…
Flagged videos aren't removed automatically; a human reviews them first. It would probably be better if it was more automated, because humans make mistakes and machines don't get tired after a long day of reviewing…
YouTube also allows users to sell or rent their videos directly through the website [0], so this doesn't seem very different to me. [0]: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/3249127?hl=en
Well, the law does not allow YouTube to "punish" false DMCA takedowns, so in those cases there's not much they can do. It's up to the person who had their content taken down to file a lawsuit if they want the person…
I just looked on some of the claims I've gotten on my own videos, an one of the options for a dispute is "The video is my original content and I own all of the rights to it.", which I think sums up the problem you were…
That's not quite true. YouTube does have to follow the DMCA as required by law, and so they do so accordingly. They also have a separate automated system ("Content ID"), which can automatically block videos or put ads…
> there is no attempt to curtail bad actors on that side of the table Do you have evidence to back that up? According to YouTube's Help Center, they do revoke Content ID access from those who abuse the system[0]. [0]:…
> Content ID exists so YouTube can ease big partners. It's probably more to ease their own burden. YouTube likely receives a huge number of takedown requests daily, but with Content ID a lot more can be automated. Also,…
Or, from another perspective, Content ID is one of the best things about YouTube. Rather than all videos with copyrighted content being taken down, many get to stay up and viewable, and the owner of the content is happy…
How do you determine which video is the "original" version? That is, how do you tell which uploader owns the content? There isn't really a way to know until the content owner makes a compliant (anyone can file a DMCA…
That's not correct. Content ID is an automated takedown, but if you dispute a content ID claim, then the content owner has to respond with a DMCA takedown request if they want to continue the process. All other…
> A youtube copyright notice / copyright strike is not the same as a DMCA takedown. Yes it is. YouTube doesn’t magically get to ignore the DMCA, so their process is built around that (along with layering Content ID on…
YouTube’s “three strikes” policy is their implementation of the DMCA’s “repeat infringers” requirement: > has adopted and reasonably implemented, and informs subscribers and account holders of the service provider's…
You’re conflating the two systems. YouTube does have the Content ID system, which does automatic detection and is mostly used to monetize (not take down) copyrighted content. But this case is a copyright strike, which…
Sounds like he got a copyright strike, which means a DMCA takedown, not a Content ID claim. https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/7002106
> hold onto the revenue until the dispute is resolved They do that: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/7000961?hl=en
There's a different option for if the video is public domain or otherwise not copyrightable to handle this case. I assume that that "lawyerly language" is to dissuade users from abusing the process and choosing an…
Looking at copyright claims I have on my channel (these are valid music claims, for what it's worth), I see a dispute option labeled "The video is my original content and I own all of the rights to it", which I think…
Yes, sorry, you're right -- they do it to keep the safe harbor protection (which is the only sane option when running a video sharing website).
But YouTube does accept DMCA claims, of course, as it's required by law. Their Content ID system provides an automated way to detect potential infringement by large copyright holders and redirect ad revenue to them, but…
YouTube has an equivalent of that too: https://support.google.com/youtubegaming/answer/6304294?hl=e...
I agree that their monetization policy is pretty vague; I wish it was clearer but they probably have to cover their bases. As for "people that abuse moderation tools for hateful or trolling purposes": these people won't…
There's a lot of misinformation going on in the Reddit thread. These "Heroes" get better tools for flagging videos faster (among other things), but it's still just flagging. Every flag still gets reviewed by a human at…
I found an option to turn off notifications for those messages. If you open the notification settings for a channel that you're subscribed to, you can uncheck "Include community post notifications" and then stay…
> Censorship and demonetisation on YouTube seems to be happening to people fairly regularly, and without appeal, via poorly calibrated algorithms Demonetization happens when a video doesn't meet their…
After the uploader disputes an automated claim, the claimant can uphold it as you described, but the user then has the option to appeal that claim. The only way to settle that appeal is for the claimant to either drop…
Flagged videos aren't removed automatically; a human reviews them first. It would probably be better if it was more automated, because humans make mistakes and machines don't get tired after a long day of reviewing…
YouTube also allows users to sell or rent their videos directly through the website [0], so this doesn't seem very different to me. [0]: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/3249127?hl=en
Well, the law does not allow YouTube to "punish" false DMCA takedowns, so in those cases there's not much they can do. It's up to the person who had their content taken down to file a lawsuit if they want the person…
I just looked on some of the claims I've gotten on my own videos, an one of the options for a dispute is "The video is my original content and I own all of the rights to it.", which I think sums up the problem you were…
That's not quite true. YouTube does have to follow the DMCA as required by law, and so they do so accordingly. They also have a separate automated system ("Content ID"), which can automatically block videos or put ads…
> there is no attempt to curtail bad actors on that side of the table Do you have evidence to back that up? According to YouTube's Help Center, they do revoke Content ID access from those who abuse the system[0]. [0]:…
> Content ID exists so YouTube can ease big partners. It's probably more to ease their own burden. YouTube likely receives a huge number of takedown requests daily, but with Content ID a lot more can be automated. Also,…
Or, from another perspective, Content ID is one of the best things about YouTube. Rather than all videos with copyrighted content being taken down, many get to stay up and viewable, and the owner of the content is happy…
How do you determine which video is the "original" version? That is, how do you tell which uploader owns the content? There isn't really a way to know until the content owner makes a compliant (anyone can file a DMCA…
That's not correct. Content ID is an automated takedown, but if you dispute a content ID claim, then the content owner has to respond with a DMCA takedown request if they want to continue the process. All other…