4 ms·
They could fall back to the legally required process (DMCA takedowns). There is no law requiring Google to take down channels because of reports on a few videos
by lozenge 8y ago
They could fall back to the legally required process (DMCA takedowns). There is no law requiring Google to take down channels because of reports on a few videos, or requiring Google to keep content down after the uploader has re-affirmed it is not breaking copyright law (called a DMCA counter-notice).
- yeahitslikethat 8y agoDmca ruined the Internet. We thought it was good but it wasn't.
- pilsetnieks 8y agoThat's not even remotely what we're talking about here. Anyway, this has nothing to do with DMCA but with Google's Content ID system which is much worse than DMCA.
- yeahitslikethat 8y agoNo dmca. No Google content ID system.
- nitrogen 8y agoNo, that's not how it happened. ContentID is a proactive system that goes well beyond what the DMCA requires and skirts around the DMCA penalties for false claims.
- nitrogen 8y agoNobody in tech ever thought the DMCA was a good thing.
- yeahitslikethat 8y agoWired isn't nobody https://www.wired.com/2008/10/ten-years-later/ https://www.wired.com/2008/10/ten-years-later/
- tinus_hn 8y agoThe DMCA requires big parties like YouTube to create systems like ContentID and the copyright strikes to remain shielded from copyright infringement claims. You can be sure Google isn’t running these systems because they want to.
- delinka 8y agoNot exactly. As long as YT acts the way the DMCA specifies (receive takedown notice, take down content, notify account owner), YT maintains safe harbor protection. The problem is that Big Media doesn’t like the idea of safe harbor. It also doesn’t like the potential to have their unlicensed content available while a court decides (they file a DMCA takedown, but the account owner claims “fair use” and YT puts it back up - now it’s online until a court orders it offline.) Hell, Big Media hates the idea of fair use. ContentID came about because Google decided it would be cheaper to just allow Big Media more direct access than to keep defending themselves in spurious lawsuits designed to make example cases and have parts of the DMCA nullified.
- yeahitslikethat 8y agoThey aren't spurious lawsuits. Google is pirating content and selling ads on it. Everyone knows that. YouTube built itself on stolen content. Any of us could go on there right now and watch any number of pirated movies, songs, TV shows. .. you name it.
- anticensor 8y ago> it would be cheaper Also easier. Even corporations have finite resources to work with.