4 ms·
> Youtube is just so beyond broken at this point. It's not entirely fair to blame YouTube exclusively for the complicated mess that is copyright laws. In fact
by kllrnohj 6y ago
> Youtube is just so beyond broken at this point.
It's not entirely fair to blame YouTube exclusively for the complicated mess that is copyright laws. In fact most of this video & thread are misdirected blame.
Per the video it sounds like he received 5 DMCA copyright strikes to which he issues counter-claims. That's not youtube's system and youtube is bound to follow the laws outlined by the DMCA. YouTube didn't issue the copyright strike, so why would YouTube know what was or wasn't at issue?
So yes the system is broken, but moving somewhere else doesn't fix it. The new system will still have this exact same set of circumstances happen because that new system will still be governed by DMCA & US copyright law (in this instance being US-based).
The only part of this that has anything to do with YouTube itself or being in YouTube's control is the channel being deleted. But that policy is clear - 3 copyright strikes and the channel is deleted. Too harsh? Maybe. Ambiguous or unclear? No. And if the channel does what it should as a business & lawyers up to respond to the DMCA notices & issue counter-claims, if those counters are successful then the channel remains at 0 strikes and isn't deleted. But there the part that's shit is DMCA. Want to fix that part? Stop blaming YouTube for it and go try to get the law reformed. YouTube isn't going to be your lawyer. Nor will Vimeo. Nor will any video hosting service.
- bryan0 6y agoWhat about the part in the video where he showed YouTube's policy which says the claimant must provide information about the material that is under violation, but he shows YT's email to him which says they do not have this information? Isn't that solely YT's responsibility to uphold its own policy?
- jcranmer 6y ago> Per the video it sounds like he received 5 DMCA copyright strikes to which he issues counter-claims. Actually, I believe YouTube uses a mechanism which is explicitly not-DMCA for its copyright claims. Under the DMCA, a user has the right of counterclaim, where the user says "your claim is wrong, here's why, see you in court", and the service provider has to reinstate the claimed material (unless it actually goes to court). I don't believe YouTube's ToS gives the user that provision.
- kllrnohj 6y agoPer the video the creator did issue a counter claim, this is stated at timestamp 2:40. He then also states the course of action to follow is either they drop the claim or sue him - this is exactly the DMCA system. As far as I know YouTube's mechanisms do not end in a courtroom.
- hnick 6y agoSure but if it's a real DMCA claim won't Google be obligated to reinstate the content? https://www.dmca.com/faq/What-is-a-DMCA-Counterclaim https://www.dmca.com/faq/What-is-a-DMCA-Counterclaim There's a summary but it links to a more detailed PDF. If it is a "real" DMCA claim, then according to this Google must put the content back up within 10 to 14 business days. If it's Google's house rules then they don't, but that would mean it's not a real DMCA claim. Now I understand Google reserves the right to ban you for anything at any time, like all providers. But that would be a secondary action in addition to this.
- kllrnohj 6y agoThe content is still up. His channel isn't currently deleted: https://www.youtube.com/c/GarethEvansYT https://www.youtube.com/c/GarethEvansYT If his counter claims are successful there's no reason to believe the channel will be deleted, either.
- hnick 6y agoImportant clarification, thanks. But we'll see if that holds up if "deleting" becomes past tense. This story probably got enough reach now that something will happen, as usual.
- Google234 6y agoIt doesn’t seem like they are obligated to reinstate the content
- 6y ago