9 ms·
YouTube blocks recording of public domain Schubert/Liszt composition
- tenaciousDaniel 7y agoRousseau is actually active on HN, curious to see what he says about it here. What a ridiculous DRM implementation by YT. I understand that with such a large volume of data, it's a difficult challenge. But it should not be difficult for an algorithm to figure out that Schubert or Liszt are in the public domain.
- wbl 7y agoThey are but the recording is not: it's copyright belongs to the performer. Unfortunately YouTube can't figure out the subtle differences between performances that identify them.
- i_am_proteus 7y agoThe headline is slightly inflammatory in its reference to the "200 year old composition." Exactly to parent's point: a contemporary recording would be neither 200 years old not in the public domain.
- lightedman 7y agoComposition is entirely different from recording. Composition is the written score, which in this case is ~200 years old.
- ratel 7y agoI'm not sure I agree with inflammatory. It seems that the common attribute between the two materials is that it is based on the same 200 year old composition and not much else. Like if IT takes your keyboard and gives it to someone else because they are the same keyboard. Completely missing subtle differences like the serial number or the fact that on one the space is worn out and on the other the tab key.
- yreg 7y agoI have a feeling that if Google thought they could get away with making it less sensitive, they would have done it. They surely can't be happy about censoring legitimate content on their platform by mistake.
- falcolas 7y agoThis is a shame. I love Rousseau's performances of classical pieces. It really reminds me how little I am capable of playing the piano. ;) On a slightly more serious note, this is what happens when you force a content host to bypass the normal flow of copyright claims.
- jasonjayr 7y agohttps://twitter.com/hyperionrecords/status/1162384514984947712 https://twitter.com/hyperionrecords/status/11623845149849477... From @hyperionrecords regarding a recent unrelated incident. Hyperion's content is the one making the claim against Rousseau's video. They seem aware that ContentID often misidentifies claims, but there doesn't seem to be a public statement on what they proactively can or will do to help fix it.
- crankylinuxuser 7y agoThe usual canard is: Google is a private Corp and can do whatever the hell they want. The real problem is that tech companies are monopolies and oligopolies and they hide behind "The people can just leave if they want". The end result is that monopolies beget and work with other monopolies to strengthen each other. So we see YouTube working with RIAA and MPAA on non-DMCA underhandedness and what is clearly fair use (car driving by with 2s of a tune).
- lotsofpulp 7y agoI think the real problem is no one (or not enough people) want to pay for a service that hosts user uploaded video, filters each and every one accurately for illegal/copyrighted content, and then is able to serve it worldwide 24/7 instantaneously. That’s the reason I think no alternative service has sprouted up.
- crankylinuxuser 7y agoWe had a policy for that built into the DMCA. It was a procedure that copyright holders could send an email and go through a process of attestation and rebuttal. Google shortcutted that by working with music and movie studios and made a ML version that bypasses the DMCA. The harm is caused to everyone not represented by a major media company. In the end, I have no due process afforded to me by the DMCA because Google bypassed it for cronyism.
- lotsofpulp 7y ago
- sheinsheish 7y agoHave a look at Rick Beato on Youtube
- MichaelApproved 7y agoWhy?
- aoeusnth1 7y agoMaybe he's referring to the video breaking down the bullshit Flame vs. Katy Perry lawsuit about Dark Horse, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4MuhPqfIk4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4MuhPqfIk4 He also says one of his videos was de-monetized because Dark Horse was bleeding through someone's headphones in one of his videos.
- tigeba 7y agoHe does fairly deep analysis of recording techniques and music theory on his channel. He claims that even playing a few bars of music from certain artists himself on an acoustic or electric guitar will cause his videos to become de-monetized.
- cameronbrown 7y agoYouTube's filter is so sensitive it's scary. Music from cars driving past in vlogs, or even <2s of music is enough to trigger the filter. Dialling the sensitivity up so much is bound to have second order effects negatively impacting somewhere else.
- lazyguy 7y agoDMCA, ain't it fun?
- WillPostForFood 7y agoDMCA as intended would be better here. The person who thinks they found something infringing should have to proactively send a takedown, which should trigger a process that can be appealed. What Google has created is a proactive automated takedown system with minimal recourse.
- jimbob45 7y agoIf anyone is wondering, Schubert and Liszt didn't collaborate IRL on these. Schubert wrote the pieces, died, and then Liszt transcribed them for solo piano after they had posthumously been found in Schubert's belongings.
- nine_k 7y agoThank you! The answer to this question is why I even clicked on the link. (A collaboration like that would be awesome, though.)
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- coliveira 7y agoThe big problem with classical music is that the compositions are all in public domain, however most performances are not. Given the subtle differences between performances, algorithms are not smart enough to figure out the difference. In fact, even humans would have a hard time to distinguish between two performances of certain classical pieces.
- Znafon 7y agoYes! And Kubrick knew this: for "2001: A Space Odyssey" he bought the right of "Also Sprach Zarathustra" directed by Böhm and replaced it at the last minute by the one directed by Karajan hoping no one would notice.
- jfk13 7y agoCitation? That doesn't seem to match the story as given in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001:_A_Space_Odyssey_(soundtrack)#Album_release https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001:_A_Space_Odyssey_(soundtr..., for example.
- Znafon 7y agoThere is some reference to this in French: > Les droits d'enregistrement de Karajan n'étant pas disponibles, c'est la version de Karl Böhm, avec l'orchestre philharmonique de Vienne, qui fut créditée au générique. Mais au cours de la postproduction, Kubrick remplaça discrètement l'enregistrement de Böhm par celui de Karajan et personne ne le remarqua3. https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ainsi_parlait_Zarathoustra_(Strauss) https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ainsi_parlait_Zarathoustra_(St...
- stephen_g 7y agoI don't think it's so much that the algorithms aren't smart enough to tell, it's that Google have had to make the algorithm still match in the case of people altering music with filters/effects, time stretching, pitch shifting etc. - so it's been made deliberately a lot less sensitive to most of the factors that a musician brings into their interpretation. That's fine - it's probably necessary for Google to not be constantly dragged into the courts by actual infringement slipping through with small alterations. The issue is that there is absolutely no recourse for an incorrect match. There's no option to say 'no, the algorithm is wrong' or 'the claimant has made a false claim' - the nearest option is to claim fair use, and that kicks it back to the claimant to be able to lie again if it was fraudulent, with no fear of consequences. There needs to be some process where it can be appealed to a human. I think the best way I have seen suggested is to stake a small amount of money on it to have somebody review it - say, $15 from each party, and then you lose it if it's ruled against you, or get a refund if you win. That should easily pay for half an hour of somebody's time, so they could hire staff to do it. If the claimant lost and still didn't agree, it could be escalated to DMCA, where there are potential penalties for fraudulent claims (even if it doesn't happen much).
- dpcan 7y agoYouTube seems to be taking the brunt of the criticism when it's the repercussions of copyright infringement lawsuits that are the problem. I'm sure YouTube would love to be more lenient. If they could say "anything goes" they'd be thrilled, but we know they cannot because of the LAWS that are protecting IP owners. IP should be protected, but to what extent? And the bigger problem is the amount, and rate, of which content being produced threatens everyone's ability to do anything! Try naming a business. NOTHING is available. If you want to run a competing business in a saturated market, the naming options are almost non-existent, especially if you want to name your company something that embodies what your business does. Music is having this problem too. When you can take a few stanzas and say you OWN that music, could someone not just use a computer to generate every possible sequence of notes, slap a copyright on it, and own all future music? Photography, video, games, puzzles, speeches, books..... it's all about to hit a brick wall if we can't be more lenient with IP. In my opinion, complete works should be awarded a copyright, but sub-sections of works should not. And software patents..... dear god.
- quaquaqua1 7y agoThe US government has two options as I see them: 1) Reform the copyright system (unlikely due to powerful lobbyists and lawyers) 2) Eventually lose control over the industry to other countries as consumers vote with their feet.
- izacus 7y agoYou missed: 3) Bribe and capture legal system so everyone is forced to pay to the big copyright owners and you can't vote with your feet anymore.
- quaquaqua1 7y agoI suppose that's the current reality right? I'm imagining a future where everyone (re)discovers torrenting. Or Russia/China make a Spotify competitor with entirely stolen content and the government officials there turn a blind eye to Universal's rights.
- 7y ago
- wbhart 7y agoIt's ironic that a system of rules (DMCA) that was designed to help performers not lose revenue is actually causing a performer to lose revenue. Rousseau is one of the most recognised pianists on YouTube. He works tirelessly to perform a new piece about every week. This must be incredibly tiring, and the skill required to be able to do that week in, week out, is absolutely breathtaking. If anyone deserves to be made the poster child for the damage the DMCA and YouTube content ID is causing, it is Rousseau. And how is it that an hour after this is reported, the problem still persists!? A million people are missing scheduled content. If this happened to a television station as often as it happens to YouTube there would be widespread, vocal, public complaints. Their competitors would also be having a field day.
- onli 7y agoContent ID is not the DMCA. Content ID got it wrong here, and that happens all the time. It's not a big deal for the claimer. Which is totally contrary to how DMCA works, if someone makes a wrong claim there it gets very expensive for them. Youtube could easily copy that aspect of the DMCA and make it very expensive for mis-claimers, and easy to counteract automatic mis-classification. That they don't has nothing directly to do with laws, it's simply Youtube being a bad platform.
- izacus 7y ago> Content ID is not the DMCA. Content ID got it wrong here, and that happens all the time. It's not a big deal for the claimer. Which is totally contrary to how DMCA works, if someone makes a wrong claim there it gets very expensive for them. That simply is not true. DMCA misclaims are pretty much not punished at all in practice.
- onli 7y agoThe provisions are there. If they are not used it's either because the violated party does not sue or because the US justice system again is not working properly. But at least that's how the system ought to work. With Content ID there is no recourse at all against misuse, it all relies on Youtube to care. Which it doesn't seem to do at all.
- crazygringo 7y agoContent ID is never going to be perfect (so there always needs to be an appeal mechanism). But I'd always expected that false matches would be due to some kind of hash collision, not different recordings of the same piece. Because YouTube doesn't know what the composition is, it only compares to other performances (which are under copyright). And the fact that two different pianists could interpret and perform a work identically enough to generate the same signature Content ID uses is... astonishing to me, from my classical music background. If I'd had to guess, two musicians normally probably couldn't achieve that even if they tried. So this seems to just be a crazy statistical fluke? Otherwise classical performances would be getting blocked left and right, given the hundreds/thousands of different performances of the same underlying music? Or is something more advanced that audio fingerprinting going on?
- sdenton4 7y agoContent ID is designed for flexibility as well: it has to catch a lot of transformative that might be applied to try to bypass it. Perhaps you've noticed that actually evasive material has increasingly terrible effects layered in as the years go on... (I remember recently finding a cartoon that looked like it was a zoomed in camcorder recording from a CRT... But emulated in effects layers.) I've also seen things subtly slowed down or sped up, strangely cropped, bordered, then given animated borders once that stopped working. Between an incessant evasion arms race and a content generation industry all to happy to profit from false claims, I just think to myself, "this is why we can't have nice things."
- word-reader 7y agoYou can tell it's not a fluke if you look at the copyright claims that are sometimes available in the "Show More" section. Frequently, it will show claims that recordings of the same piece by other performers are part of the video. Here is one example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RxDCgFFBk20 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RxDCgFFBk20 Two of the movements have correct copyright claims for the performance, but another of the movements has a claim for a recording by a different conductor and orchestra. I see this all the time. Like another person said here, we don't know how Content ID works or what exactly it's looking for, but it's clearly not an "exact match" of sound waves or something: it has to catch covers of compositions that are still under copyright, for example [1]. [1] https://diymusician.cdbaby.com/youtube/posting-cover-songs-on-youtube-music-licensing-law-explained/ https://diymusician.cdbaby.com/youtube/posting-cover-songs-o...
- blisterpeanuts 7y agoYoutube seems to have gone to a ridiculous extreme on filtering copyright material. They blocked a non-public video of my daughter's Irish step dance recital, because the live band played three traditional tunes in the same order as found on some commercial recording. It took months to get the "copyright holder" to grant us permission; ridiculous. YT doesn't, and can't, have enough resources to correct every such situation, so they err on the side of the copyright holders. When they're receiving a billion submissions a day, the innocent ones caught in the net are just a rounding error. I'm wondering whether Bitchute might take up the slack here.
- danso 7y agoI have a slightly tangential question: can someone link to articles and writeups that discuss how YouTube and other platforms efficiently disambiguate between a valid/allowable recording and a prohibited recording, when the content between valid/prohibited is very similar or near identical in the most obvious features (e.g. rhythm and key).
- albertsondev 7y agoAnswer: They don't, and you're guilty until painstakingly proven innocent.
- danso 7y agoI don't disagree with your cynicism about the flawed and slow disciplinary process. But it's still in their operational best interests to improve and iterate on their auto-classifier algorithms.
- ropiwqefjnpoa 7y agoAnother huge problem are the companies making money simply calling copy-right strikes.
- smcameron 7y agoI used to use music from musopen.org that contains recordings that are either public domain or creative commons, typically from the Air Force band, or various small town orchestras or college or even high school orchestras for background music for my little space game videos, but dealing with the copyright claims became too much of a hassle, so now I just rapidly strum some chords on an acoustic guitar and run it through paulstretch and throw some reverb on it to get some ambient space music sound.
- moron4hire 7y agoYeah, I do the same thing with my Korg Kaossilator. For ~$100 (I have the original, not the updated one), you get a phrase sequencer that just about anyone can learn enough in about an hour to be able to generate their own ambient music. I feel like music education for children starting with pianos, guitars, and recorders is backwards. Get them playing music first. The interest in instruments will come.
- fortran77 7y agoThis happens to me all the time. As an amateur pianist, whenever I sit down and play a piece and upload it, it nearly always gets a copyright flag -- even if it's 150 years old or more!
- wbhart 7y agoRousseau found a way around the block. He uploaded the video again in a way that caused it to be claimed, rather than blocked, by a different company. He'll still have to dispute it, but YouTube is not obliged by law to take down content that only received a claim. The video is no longer blocked.
- SopaDeMacaco 7y agoYou idiots are discussing about how to amputate the arms of the zoo visitors that want to pet the alligators, instead of realizing that maybe people shouldn't be able to reach those animals. Copyright laws are immoral, and shouldn't exist. That's it. Anything else is negotiating with terrorists.
- blondie9x 7y agoWhere do you get that piano visualizer? Looks helpful for learning and playing.
- hnsocks 7y agoGo away YouTube! Censorship is not our interest!