4 ms·

> all new manual claims It must not be a manual complaint. That's some nice PR-Legalese.

• davidivadavid 6y ago
  Video explicitly shows it's a manual complaint.
  • kelnos 6y ago
    There's a difference. If someone manually claims a video through YT's content-ID system, they have to provide timestamps (this is enforced by Google). If someone just sends a regular DMCA notice, they're only required (by law) to provide the URL, and Google has no choice but to take down everything at that URL, until/unless they receive a counter-claim from the poster. The content-ID stuff is a convenience outside the law, if content owners (who have access to it) choose to use it. Anyone can file a DMCA notice, and Google has to respond in a particular way in order to be compliant with the law, and cannot impose extra requirements (like timestamps) before acting on the DMCA claim.
    • avianlyric 6y ago
      The law also requires that the DMCA notice describes what copyright is being infringed on. [1] You can’t just go “this video infringes on my copyright, but I’m not going to tell you which copyright”. That isn’t a valid DMCA notice at all. [1] § (512(c)(3)(A)(i-vi)) https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/512 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/512
  • qppo 6y ago
    To quibble a bit, the video shows that YouTube's control panel tells users that a claim was "manual" and doesn't detail what "manual" means, or provide the DMCA notice (which is a written document, fwiw) that was filed, if one was. I barely trust the information in the logging functions that I write, and those don't have legal consequences attached to providing extra detail.