5 ms·

As to how this will affect YouTube and the like, I don't think it will. YouTube's process is not actually DMCA, it's a separate but similar entity following You

by Zikes 11y ago

As to how this will affect YouTube and the like, I don't think it will. YouTube's process is not actually DMCA, it's a separate but similar entity following YouTube's own rules and policies. That's why YouTube's system is rife with abuse with no real recourse for content creators whose works are unfairly flagged.

pdabbadabba 11y ago
I don't think this is correct. This very case is about a video hosted on YouTube. The DMCA requires YouTube to have a takedown process that complies with the DMCA's rules in order to avoid liability for hosting infringing content. And YouTube likely cannot exculpate copyright holders from liability for making misrepresentations in their takedown requests since that liability is explicitly created by statute.
- bjt 11y ago
  Yes, YouTube needs to honor DMCA takedown requests, but that doesn't stop YouTube from creating another YouTube-specific kind of request that people can make if they want to make some money off their content that other people have uploaded. That's what YouTube has done with Content ID. See https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/6013276 https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/6013276 > This very case is about a video hosted on YouTube. This case is about a video posted to YouTube 8+ years ago. Content ID was just getting off the ground then, and wasn't at issue in this case. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/YouTube#Content_ID https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/YouTube#Content_ID
  - pdabbadabba 11y ago
    Fair enough. But I think this raises an interesting, and possibly challenging legal question: is a takedown request (including the standing requests that that content id allows) a "notification of claimed infringement" under the DMCA even if YouTube calls it something different? I could see this going either way if it were tested in court (maybe it already has been--I don't know). But if I were YouTube, I would try to keep my content ID procedures in line with the DMCA procedures voluntarily so that I wouldn't have to find out the hard way. The terminology and general procedure that YouTube uses for content ID roughly parallel the process set out in the DMCA, so I'm inclined to think that YouTube is thinking the same thing. I expect that someone in YouTube's legal department already has a memo someplace discussing the implications of this ruling for content ID that addresses these very issues.
    - magicalist 11y ago
      As I also posted above, you're correct and Youtube falls back to the usual DMCA takedown procedure[1] [1] http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/10/youtube-finally-offers-a-meaningful-contentid-appeal-process/ http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/10/youtube-finally-o...
magicalist 11y ago
> YouTube's process is not actually DMCA, it's a separate but similar entity following YouTube's own rules and policies This hasn't been true for three years now[1]. First stage of ContentID is within the ContentID system. After that it's just normal DMCA takedowns. [1] http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/10/youtube-finally-offers-a-meaningful-contentid-appeal-process/ http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/10/youtube-finally-o...

by Zikes 11y ago

pdabbadabba 11y ago

I don't think this is correct. This very case is about a video hosted on YouTube. The DMCA requires YouTube to have a takedown process that complies with the DMCA's rules in order to avoid liability for hosting infringing content. And YouTube likely cannot exculpate copyright holders from liability for making misrepresentations in their takedown requests since that liability is explicitly created by statute.

bjt 11y ago
Yes, YouTube needs to honor DMCA takedown requests, but that doesn't stop YouTube from creating another YouTube-specific kind of request that people can make if they want to make some money off their content that other people have uploaded. That's what YouTube has done with Content ID. See https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/6013276 https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/6013276 > This very case is about a video hosted on YouTube. This case is about a video posted to YouTube 8+ years ago. Content ID was just getting off the ground then, and wasn't at issue in this case. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/YouTube#Content_ID https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/YouTube#Content_ID
- pdabbadabba 11y ago
  Fair enough. But I think this raises an interesting, and possibly challenging legal question: is a takedown request (including the standing requests that that content id allows) a "notification of claimed infringement" under the DMCA even if YouTube calls it something different? I could see this going either way if it were tested in court (maybe it already has been--I don't know). But if I were YouTube, I would try to keep my content ID procedures in line with the DMCA procedures voluntarily so that I wouldn't have to find out the hard way. The terminology and general procedure that YouTube uses for content ID roughly parallel the process set out in the DMCA, so I'm inclined to think that YouTube is thinking the same thing. I expect that someone in YouTube's legal department already has a memo someplace discussing the implications of this ruling for content ID that addresses these very issues.
  - magicalist 11y ago
    As I also posted above, you're correct and Youtube falls back to the usual DMCA takedown procedure[1] [1] http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/10/youtube-finally-offers-a-meaningful-contentid-appeal-process/ http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/10/youtube-finally-o...

magicalist 11y ago

> YouTube's process is not actually DMCA, it's a separate but similar entity following YouTube's own rules and policies This hasn't been true for three years now[1]. First stage of ContentID is within the ContentID system. After that it's just normal DMCA takedowns. [1] http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/10/youtube-finally-offers-a-meaningful-contentid-appeal-process/ http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/10/youtube-finally-o...