3 ms·
> That's relatively recent It's at least 7 years old[1] and the system itself (if not the name) is almost 9 years old[2]. That's not recent relative to just ab
by magicalist 10y ago
> That's relatively recent
It's at least 7 years old[1] and the system itself (if not the name) is almost 9 years old[2]. That's not recent relative to just about anything.
[1] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/01/youtubes-january-fair-use-massacre https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/01/youtubes-january-fair-...
[2] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2007/10/youtubes-copyright-filter-new-hurdle-fair-use https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2007/10/youtubes-copyright-fil...
- whatok 10y agoWould Youtube even exist if it had to have something like Content ID when it first launched? Its existence definitely took advantage of the relative lawlessness of the web back then. Don't see much difference between how Youtube established vs Uber/AirBnB as far as break shit and pay for it later goes.
- coldtea 10y agoThat's also a token effort. While many clips were affected by this, you can still (and could always) find almost anything, uploaded pirated, on the first try -- from songs and shows to whole movies. The main exception is for 1-2 very vigilant artists (e.g. can't easily find non-officially uploaded Dylan tracks that are not bootlegs).