5 ms·

I don't follow the YouTube world at all, but I still keep hearing things like this. I'm surprised YouTube doesn't punish or at least stop people who make false

I don't follow the YouTube world at all, but I still keep hearing things like this. I'm surprised YouTube doesn't punish or at least stop people who make false claims. I have an idea I'm exploring that would involve making YouTube videos and that (and other things I've heard) would make me hesitant to follow through on the idea.

Natsu 11y ago
If enough people were hit by a single entity, I wonder if a class action couldn't be formed? Though the YouTube ToS might forbid something like that, it'd be nice to see people going after the people who spam bogus notices.
- dogma1138 11y ago
  Filing a false dmca claim is a federal offense and you can sue people who abuse it for damages. While it's being abused some what it's usually due to automated content tagging systems from various IP protection/management firms, if you intentionally troll people with dmca you can get into a heap of trouble.
  - Natsu 11y ago
    Sort of. First, we're not clear that the YouTube claim form is an actual DMCA claim (it's defective in a number of ways, not the least is the lack of a real counter-claim process). Second, the 'perjury' part of the DMCA only applies if they falsely claim ownership of an infringed work. So if I make a bogus claim that your work infringes on something I actually have copyright over (however tenuous), it doesn't trigger the actual perjury bit. But if I claim to own, say, a Beatles album (which I do not) , or to be their copyright agent (which I am not), then it's a violation. [EDIT: Just to clarify the above, this is to mean that I claim someone infringe on a Beatles album which I don't own or that I'm their agent when I am not. Thus, it's when my claim of ownership over the allegedly infringed upon work is a lie that this triggers, rather than any dispute over the ownership of the allegedly infringing work.] I think that (unless barred somehow in YouTube's ToS), that a large enough group might be able to sue the groups making false claims for their ad money. It's rather murky whether you could go after people who are, e.g., claiming copyright over public domain works, but with sufficient evidence of bad faith, maybe you could get somewhere. The main problem is that federal lawsuits are really expensive and the amounts of money here are usually not all that large. It's not clear to me whether there are damages in an amount sufficient to make a class action worthwhile or anyone with deep enough pockets to pay a judgement even if one were obtained at great expense. Or maybe someone could do a class action against YouTube as a whole for upholding bogus claims, but I'm not sure that you don't agree not to hold YouTube liable somewhere in some ToS and even if you do, I'm not sure if it's enforceable. Disclaimer: IANAL, this isn't legal advice. If you have an actual legal issue, consult a lawyer, not random internet comments.
    - dogma1138 11y ago
      You can issue various content complaints to YouTube not all of them are DMCA related, however if you do claim a violation of copyright it is handled through the DMCA path (YT is an American company regardless of who is making the claim or the content at this point as DMCA is enforced globally on all US businesses not individuals/individual works). Making a bogus claim is a violation of YouTube's EULA/Terms of Service and filing one can result in your account being suspended and this has happened before. If you filing a copyright claim the only way to follow through it is through the DMCA channel (and it is very clear[0]) if the claim is bogus you have violated the DMCA it self, committed a federal offense and open yourself to civil law suits. There are also a few other channels to take down content for infringement [1] which do not directly fall under the DMCA primary various trademark / brand abuse issues these issues are covered by YouTube's own content policy, you can also of course always issue complaints over content for various other violations of YouTube's content policy. [0]http://www.youtube.com/t/dmca_policy http://www.youtube.com/t/dmca_policy [1]https://www.youtube.com/copyright_complaint_form https://www.youtube.com/copyright_complaint_form >[EDIT: Just to clarify the above, this is to mean that I claim someone infringe on a Beatles album which I don't own or that I'm their agent when I am not. Thus, it's when my claim of ownership over the allegedly infringed upon work is a lie that this triggers, rather than any dispute over the ownership of the allegedly infringing work.] If I understand this correctly you are suggesting that a party A can file a claim against party B for content that is potentially owned by party C without being a custodian of said content or being an agent of party C. You can't do this, if you go through the complaint form and select "I don't own the content" it will tell you that they cannot process your claim and direct you to their DMC policy [2]. [2]http://i.imgur.com/v2DnnbK.png http://i.imgur.com/v2DnnbK.png
      - Natsu 11y ago
        > You can issue various content complaints to YouTube not all of them are DMCA related, however if you do claim a violation of copyright it is handled through the DMCA path Interesting reading. It seems like one can send 'free-form' notifications (proper DMCA notices?) independently. Their form is certainly modeled after the DMCA, and I could reasonably believe that a judge would consider it a DMCA process for some purpose, I'm just not 100% sure of that due to YouTube's on process not having a proper put-back (the part cited above where they 'affirm' that it's really infringing and YT cuts you off). > If I understand this correctly you are suggesting that a party A can file a claim against party B for content that is potentially owned by party C without being a custodian of said content or being an agent of party C. Just to clarify, I was trying to give an example of something which triggers the 'perjury' clause of the DMCA, so I'm somewhat heartened to hear that YouTube explicitly tells people not to do that.

Natsu 11y ago

If enough people were hit by a single entity, I wonder if a class action couldn't be formed? Though the YouTube ToS might forbid something like that, it'd be nice to see people going after the people who spam bogus notices.

dogma1138 11y ago
Filing a false dmca claim is a federal offense and you can sue people who abuse it for damages. While it's being abused some what it's usually due to automated content tagging systems from various IP protection/management firms, if you intentionally troll people with dmca you can get into a heap of trouble.
- Natsu 11y ago
  Sort of. First, we're not clear that the YouTube claim form is an actual DMCA claim (it's defective in a number of ways, not the least is the lack of a real counter-claim process). Second, the 'perjury' part of the DMCA only applies if they falsely claim ownership of an infringed work. So if I make a bogus claim that your work infringes on something I actually have copyright over (however tenuous), it doesn't trigger the actual perjury bit. But if I claim to own, say, a Beatles album (which I do not) , or to be their copyright agent (which I am not), then it's a violation. [EDIT: Just to clarify the above, this is to mean that I claim someone infringe on a Beatles album which I don't own or that I'm their agent when I am not. Thus, it's when my claim of ownership over the allegedly infringed upon work is a lie that this triggers, rather than any dispute over the ownership of the allegedly infringing work.] I think that (unless barred somehow in YouTube's ToS), that a large enough group might be able to sue the groups making false claims for their ad money. It's rather murky whether you could go after people who are, e.g., claiming copyright over public domain works, but with sufficient evidence of bad faith, maybe you could get somewhere. The main problem is that federal lawsuits are really expensive and the amounts of money here are usually not all that large. It's not clear to me whether there are damages in an amount sufficient to make a class action worthwhile or anyone with deep enough pockets to pay a judgement even if one were obtained at great expense. Or maybe someone could do a class action against YouTube as a whole for upholding bogus claims, but I'm not sure that you don't agree not to hold YouTube liable somewhere in some ToS and even if you do, I'm not sure if it's enforceable. Disclaimer: IANAL, this isn't legal advice. If you have an actual legal issue, consult a lawyer, not random internet comments.
  - dogma1138 11y ago
    You can issue various content complaints to YouTube not all of them are DMCA related, however if you do claim a violation of copyright it is handled through the DMCA path (YT is an American company regardless of who is making the claim or the content at this point as DMCA is enforced globally on all US businesses not individuals/individual works). Making a bogus claim is a violation of YouTube's EULA/Terms of Service and filing one can result in your account being suspended and this has happened before. If you filing a copyright claim the only way to follow through it is through the DMCA channel (and it is very clear[0]) if the claim is bogus you have violated the DMCA it self, committed a federal offense and open yourself to civil law suits. There are also a few other channels to take down content for infringement [1] which do not directly fall under the DMCA primary various trademark / brand abuse issues these issues are covered by YouTube's own content policy, you can also of course always issue complaints over content for various other violations of YouTube's content policy. [0]http://www.youtube.com/t/dmca_policy http://www.youtube.com/t/dmca_policy [1]https://www.youtube.com/copyright_complaint_form https://www.youtube.com/copyright_complaint_form >[EDIT: Just to clarify the above, this is to mean that I claim someone infringe on a Beatles album which I don't own or that I'm their agent when I am not. Thus, it's when my claim of ownership over the allegedly infringed upon work is a lie that this triggers, rather than any dispute over the ownership of the allegedly infringing work.] If I understand this correctly you are suggesting that a party A can file a claim against party B for content that is potentially owned by party C without being a custodian of said content or being an agent of party C. You can't do this, if you go through the complaint form and select "I don't own the content" it will tell you that they cannot process your claim and direct you to their DMC policy [2]. [2]http://i.imgur.com/v2DnnbK.png http://i.imgur.com/v2DnnbK.png
    - Natsu 11y ago
      > You can issue various content complaints to YouTube not all of them are DMCA related, however if you do claim a violation of copyright it is handled through the DMCA path Interesting reading. It seems like one can send 'free-form' notifications (proper DMCA notices?) independently. Their form is certainly modeled after the DMCA, and I could reasonably believe that a judge would consider it a DMCA process for some purpose, I'm just not 100% sure of that due to YouTube's on process not having a proper put-back (the part cited above where they 'affirm' that it's really infringing and YT cuts you off). > If I understand this correctly you are suggesting that a party A can file a claim against party B for content that is potentially owned by party C without being a custodian of said content or being an agent of party C. Just to clarify, I was trying to give an example of something which triggers the 'perjury' clause of the DMCA, so I'm somewhat heartened to hear that YouTube explicitly tells people not to do that.