31 ms·

> There's a fundamental difference between curating content like a newspaper does vs what Youtube and similar sites do. It's a whitelist vs blacklist approach:

> There's a fundamental difference between curating content like a newspaper does vs what Youtube and similar sites do. It's a whitelist vs blacklist approach: a newspaper approves things one by one and only has so much content, while Youtube allows anything by default and then removes thing in certain categories. That distinction is no solace if your copyright is being violated or you are being defamed in an unaddressable way.

JoshTriplett 8y ago
> That distinction is no solace if your copyright is being violated or you are being defamed in an unaddressable way. Then send an individual takedown notice, or file a defamation lawsuit. Why should you get a special process that bypasses the legal system?
- ocdtrekkie 8y ago
  The problem with individual takedown notices is that they don't scale. The same excuse YouTube is making for why they can't police the illegal content they host, is why sending individual takedown notices similarly isn't a manageable system to remove illegal content on the platform. People can upload illegal content faster than lawyers can issue takedown notices for them.
  - macspoofing 8y ago
    >The problem with individual takedown notices is that they don't scale Ok. So how is copyright policing scalable? I argue that a general copyright filter is much harder than a copyright filter targeting your specific works. Also, the big copyright holders have automated this process, unless you think they employ thousands of people to send individual take-down notices?
  - JoshTriplett 8y ago
    > The problem with individual takedown notices is that they don't scale. > People can upload illegal content faster than lawyers can issue takedown notices for them. Why is a massive copyright-owning organization's failure to scale a problem that anyone else should help with? I'm aware of the original lawsuits against YouTube to that effect, and the arguments are just as wrong now as they were then. (Also, I fully believe that filing an incorrect takedown notice should have legal repercussions, which today it never seems to.)
    - ocdtrekkie 8y ago
      Why is YouTube's inability to scale to meet the EU's regulation anyone else's problem but YouTube's? Your logic applies again, to YouTube as well. If YouTube can scale to ship videos, they can scale to actually be responsible for them. Shouldn't they be held responsible for the illegal activity they profit from? And be responsible to figure out how to make a business model around that basic responsibility?
      - JoshTriplett 8y ago
        You're begging the question by assuming the EU should get to define "responsible" for YouTube, or that they've done so correctly.
- golemotron 8y ago
  > Then send an individual takedown notice, or file a defamation lawsuit. Why should you get a special process that bypasses the legal system? Filing suit against the publisher is not bypassing the legal system, it is addressing the one that causes harm.

JoshTriplett 8y ago

> That distinction is no solace if your copyright is being violated or you are being defamed in an unaddressable way. Then send an individual takedown notice, or file a defamation lawsuit. Why should you get a special process that bypasses the legal system?

ocdtrekkie 8y ago
The problem with individual takedown notices is that they don't scale. The same excuse YouTube is making for why they can't police the illegal content they host, is why sending individual takedown notices similarly isn't a manageable system to remove illegal content on the platform. People can upload illegal content faster than lawyers can issue takedown notices for them.
- macspoofing 8y ago
  >The problem with individual takedown notices is that they don't scale Ok. So how is copyright policing scalable? I argue that a general copyright filter is much harder than a copyright filter targeting your specific works. Also, the big copyright holders have automated this process, unless you think they employ thousands of people to send individual take-down notices?
- JoshTriplett 8y ago
  > The problem with individual takedown notices is that they don't scale. > People can upload illegal content faster than lawyers can issue takedown notices for them. Why is a massive copyright-owning organization's failure to scale a problem that anyone else should help with? I'm aware of the original lawsuits against YouTube to that effect, and the arguments are just as wrong now as they were then. (Also, I fully believe that filing an incorrect takedown notice should have legal repercussions, which today it never seems to.)
  - ocdtrekkie 8y ago
    Why is YouTube's inability to scale to meet the EU's regulation anyone else's problem but YouTube's? Your logic applies again, to YouTube as well. If YouTube can scale to ship videos, they can scale to actually be responsible for them. Shouldn't they be held responsible for the illegal activity they profit from? And be responsible to figure out how to make a business model around that basic responsibility?
    - JoshTriplett 8y ago
      You're begging the question by assuming the EU should get to define "responsible" for YouTube, or that they've done so correctly.
golemotron 8y ago
> Then send an individual takedown notice, or file a defamation lawsuit. Why should you get a special process that bypasses the legal system? Filing suit against the publisher is not bypassing the legal system, it is addressing the one that causes harm.