3 ms·

Since there appears to be no consequences to making a false or misleading claim, and although I wouldn't call it a solution, one course of action would be to ma

Since there appears to be no consequences to making a false or misleading claim, and although I wouldn't call it a solution, one course of action would be to make a claim against their song. Kick 'em where it hurts.

Waterluvian 9y ago
The cover band's claim that they were acting in good faith would likely hold more water. Not sure if you want to be playing games with the law like that.
- tripzilch 9y ago
  > Not sure if you want to be playing games with the law like that. There's no law involved here. "Infringement" in this context relates to a term defined in YouTube's TOS with regards to the ContentID take-down service provided to the big right-holders industry. Not the legal sense of "copyright infringement", because nobody is making a copyright infringement claim in this whole story. The entire ContentID take-down service is designed so that YouTube will have to deal with as little copyright infringement claims (from the big right-holder industries) as possible. From the perspective of the uploaders and viewers, ContentID is just this thing that helps YouTube take down videos, which they have the right to do (as per the TOS) "for whatever reason". The dispute procedure is just something to make that easier to swallow, but unsurprisingly it's not at all effective in getting a more just result. That's what you get when you upload your work to a platform like YouTube instead of publishing it yourself. As a small player you can't really get YouTube to sign a contract detailing the license under which you allow them to publish it on their platform.
- TheSpiceIsLife 9y ago
  Meh, it's not a major indictable: no one's going to gaol for misusing a copyright claim system. Anyway, as others have noted, I believe you agree to an arbitration clause when you sign up. Lawyers aren't likely to get involved, you'll just get kicked off when a human works out you're abusing the terms and conditions. (I didn't down vote you)
- wolfgke 9y ago
  > The cover band's claim that they were acting in good faith would likely hold more water. This claim of the cover band can only hold water if they made strong investigations to ensure to their best that the creater of the video did not have a permission of the original copright holder of the song that they covered.
- kakarot 9y ago
  Wouldn't Content ID just be a civil matter if the revenue is under a certain amount, given that it operates outside of the DMCA?
  - tripzilch 9y ago
    It's in fact just a TOS matter. It's entirely YouTube's call.
Terr_ 9y ago
IIRC there are penalties if you lie about who you're bringing the claim for.

Waterluvian 9y ago

The cover band's claim that they were acting in good faith would likely hold more water. Not sure if you want to be playing games with the law like that.

tripzilch 9y ago
> Not sure if you want to be playing games with the law like that. There's no law involved here. "Infringement" in this context relates to a term defined in YouTube's TOS with regards to the ContentID take-down service provided to the big right-holders industry. Not the legal sense of "copyright infringement", because nobody is making a copyright infringement claim in this whole story. The entire ContentID take-down service is designed so that YouTube will have to deal with as little copyright infringement claims (from the big right-holder industries) as possible. From the perspective of the uploaders and viewers, ContentID is just this thing that helps YouTube take down videos, which they have the right to do (as per the TOS) "for whatever reason". The dispute procedure is just something to make that easier to swallow, but unsurprisingly it's not at all effective in getting a more just result. That's what you get when you upload your work to a platform like YouTube instead of publishing it yourself. As a small player you can't really get YouTube to sign a contract detailing the license under which you allow them to publish it on their platform.
TheSpiceIsLife 9y ago
Meh, it's not a major indictable: no one's going to gaol for misusing a copyright claim system. Anyway, as others have noted, I believe you agree to an arbitration clause when you sign up. Lawyers aren't likely to get involved, you'll just get kicked off when a human works out you're abusing the terms and conditions. (I didn't down vote you)
wolfgke 9y ago
> The cover band's claim that they were acting in good faith would likely hold more water. This claim of the cover band can only hold water if they made strong investigations to ensure to their best that the creater of the video did not have a permission of the original copright holder of the song that they covered.
kakarot 9y ago
Wouldn't Content ID just be a civil matter if the revenue is under a certain amount, given that it operates outside of the DMCA?
- tripzilch 9y ago
  It's in fact just a TOS matter. It's entirely YouTube's call.

Terr_ 9y ago

IIRC there are penalties if you lie about who you're bringing the claim for.