5 ms·

I play the piano and sometimes record and put on YouTube. Over 50% of the time, I get a copyright claim, usually from a big publisher, that my recording of myse

I play the piano and sometimes record and put on YouTube. Over 50% of the time, I get a copyright claim, usually from a big publisher, that my recording of myself that I made myself, of Bach, Chopin, Liszt, etc., is violating their copyright. And I, too, am angered that there's no option in the contact from YouTube for "this is a fraudulent or false claim. I own this material." YouTube should tell BMI, Sony, DG, to be more careful when flagging amateur performances of classical works.

heyjudy 8y ago
YT doesn't care because megacorps and a handful of elite creators butter their bread. The only way around this is just like the problem with ad-driven journalism: content and user-experience corrupted by perverse relationships and motivations... corpo bullshit. User-supported journalism works, so must streaming to break free of megacorp bullshit.
- B-Con 8y ago
  I can only assume YT bends over backward to cater to the copyright claimees so that the major labels keep uploading their copyrighted content to official channels. Basically, at some point this conversation happened: Label: We don't want to upload our music to YouTube because we're afraid of piracy. YouTube: We promise that won't be a problem. We'll work with you to ensure you'll be happy with the state of things on YouTube. The current system was born of that and nobody gives a hoot about the small/medium players who get screwed over by the insanity.
  - TeMPOraL 8y ago
    > The current system was born of that and nobody gives a hoot about the small/medium players who get screwed over by the insanity. No surprise there. Encouraging small creators may have been necessary at some point, to increase user base, but at this point it's the creators that are compelled to be on YouTube, because that's where the audience is. Meanwhile, as long as the big labels upload their official music videos to YouTube, the userbase is pretty much guaranteed.
harshreality 8y ago
It's automated ContentID flagging, right? Classical music is a problem because different (copyrighted) performances have very similar music fingerprints. If you tune the music fingerprinting to distinguish between different performances of the same piece by Chopin, you will probably get false negatives if someone uploads a video with a Taylor Swift song that has some background noise added or slightly sped up or slowed down. False negatives are a problem, because big content rights holders get upset. False positives rarely matter. Not to ignore cases of manual copyright flagging abuse, but that's usually done for vindictive or careless reasons; there shouldn't be any reason for anyone to flag a video of someone performing an old classical piece.
- ethbro 8y ago
  It's Google's responsibility to create a system where false positives do matter. Neither users nor even copyright holders really have that power (at least against automated system). Consequently, it seems like there's nobody in the room pushing for better outcomes for false positives.

heyjudy 8y ago

YT doesn't care because megacorps and a handful of elite creators butter their bread. The only way around this is just like the problem with ad-driven journalism: content and user-experience corrupted by perverse relationships and motivations... corpo bullshit. User-supported journalism works, so must streaming to break free of megacorp bullshit.

B-Con 8y ago
I can only assume YT bends over backward to cater to the copyright claimees so that the major labels keep uploading their copyrighted content to official channels. Basically, at some point this conversation happened: Label: We don't want to upload our music to YouTube because we're afraid of piracy. YouTube: We promise that won't be a problem. We'll work with you to ensure you'll be happy with the state of things on YouTube. The current system was born of that and nobody gives a hoot about the small/medium players who get screwed over by the insanity.
- TeMPOraL 8y ago
  > The current system was born of that and nobody gives a hoot about the small/medium players who get screwed over by the insanity. No surprise there. Encouraging small creators may have been necessary at some point, to increase user base, but at this point it's the creators that are compelled to be on YouTube, because that's where the audience is. Meanwhile, as long as the big labels upload their official music videos to YouTube, the userbase is pretty much guaranteed.

harshreality 8y ago

It's automated ContentID flagging, right? Classical music is a problem because different (copyrighted) performances have very similar music fingerprints. If you tune the music fingerprinting to distinguish between different performances of the same piece by Chopin, you will probably get false negatives if someone uploads a video with a Taylor Swift song that has some background noise added or slightly sped up or slowed down. False negatives are a problem, because big content rights holders get upset. False positives rarely matter. Not to ignore cases of manual copyright flagging abuse, but that's usually done for vindictive or careless reasons; there shouldn't be any reason for anyone to flag a video of someone performing an old classical piece.

ethbro 8y ago
It's Google's responsibility to create a system where false positives do matter. Neither users nor even copyright holders really have that power (at least against automated system). Consequently, it seems like there's nobody in the room pushing for better outcomes for false positives.