4 ms·

How about partnering with UMG to stop removing educational videos where UMG copy written material is clearly credited and praised, and where the content creator

How about partnering with UMG to stop removing educational videos where UMG copy written material is clearly credited and praised, and where the content creator isn't even looking to profit from sowing UMG material, only to educate...

ebg13 7y ago
Copyright doesn't mean CC-BY. Attribution doesn't magically give you a redistribution license (copyrighted, btw, not copywritten). If UMG wanted to grant you a license, they would. But they don't. Yada yada, yes copyright should have sane term limits, and yes maybe copyright is a weird idea to begin with, but that's not the issue here.
- cwkoss 7y ago
  Youtube does not have a system for "fair use". If you use a few seconds of someone else's content - even for the specific purposes exempted in the copyright act like education and criticism - Youtube will still let the owner of those few seconds claim the total amount of ad revenue for the whole clip. Fair use is essential to allowing open debate in our country, and Youtube is negligent in creating a system which does not allow for legally exempted fair uses.
  - themacguffinman 7y ago
    There is no such thing as a "system for fair use", it's somewhat ambiguous and legally the matter is decided in courts. YouTube doesn't have the authority to systematically make decisions on this, although does have a program for creators that deal more frequently with fair use: https://www.youtube.com/yt/about/copyright/fair-use/#yt-copyright-protection https://www.youtube.com/yt/about/copyright/fair-use/#yt-copy... https://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/four-factors/ https://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/four-factors/
    - tehwebguy 7y ago
      All bad actors (especially UMG) should be relegated to either filing DMCA removal requests which do not have an option to monetize. If they want to collect any revenues YouTube should force them to sue individual creators in the courts. Unfortunately YouTube is rewarding the bad behavior of one of their biggest clients instead.
  - amelius 7y ago
    > If you use a few seconds of someone else's content - even for the specific purposes exempted in the copyright act like education and criticism - Youtube will still let the owner of those few seconds claim the total amount of ad revenue for the whole clip. What if your video contains two fragments, owned by different people? And what if one of those people is you or a friend?
    - cwkoss 7y ago
      It certainly seems like a flawed system, I've heard some discussion about whether someone could preemptively claim their own video with a separate account to prevent a third party from also claiming. Some thought it would work, but haven't heard anyone who's actually tried it in practice.

ebg13 7y ago

Copyright doesn't mean CC-BY. Attribution doesn't magically give you a redistribution license (copyrighted, btw, not copywritten). If UMG wanted to grant you a license, they would. But they don't. Yada yada, yes copyright should have sane term limits, and yes maybe copyright is a weird idea to begin with, but that's not the issue here.

cwkoss 7y ago
Youtube does not have a system for "fair use". If you use a few seconds of someone else's content - even for the specific purposes exempted in the copyright act like education and criticism - Youtube will still let the owner of those few seconds claim the total amount of ad revenue for the whole clip. Fair use is essential to allowing open debate in our country, and Youtube is negligent in creating a system which does not allow for legally exempted fair uses.
- themacguffinman 7y ago
  There is no such thing as a "system for fair use", it's somewhat ambiguous and legally the matter is decided in courts. YouTube doesn't have the authority to systematically make decisions on this, although does have a program for creators that deal more frequently with fair use: https://www.youtube.com/yt/about/copyright/fair-use/#yt-copyright-protection https://www.youtube.com/yt/about/copyright/fair-use/#yt-copy... https://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/four-factors/ https://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/four-factors/
  - tehwebguy 7y ago
    All bad actors (especially UMG) should be relegated to either filing DMCA removal requests which do not have an option to monetize. If they want to collect any revenues YouTube should force them to sue individual creators in the courts. Unfortunately YouTube is rewarding the bad behavior of one of their biggest clients instead.
- amelius 7y ago
  > If you use a few seconds of someone else's content - even for the specific purposes exempted in the copyright act like education and criticism - Youtube will still let the owner of those few seconds claim the total amount of ad revenue for the whole clip. What if your video contains two fragments, owned by different people? And what if one of those people is you or a friend?
  - cwkoss 7y ago
    It certainly seems like a flawed system, I've heard some discussion about whether someone could preemptively claim their own video with a separate account to prevent a third party from also claiming. Some thought it would work, but haven't heard anyone who's actually tried it in practice.