4 ms·

And put your content where? What should this piano teacher do? This is partially the fault of YouTube/Google, but also copyright law in general. It's broken.

And put your content where? What should this piano teacher do? This is partially the fault of YouTube/Google, but also copyright law in general. It's broken. This community, right here, could collaborate and force changes upon the powers that be. Boycotting Google and YouTube isn't going to do it though.

josteink 5y ago
> And put your content where? Vimeo? Peertube? Facebook? Self hosted website? Anywhere?
- livre 5y ago
  You can put your content anywhere you want but you can't choose where the audience is. YouTube is in practice a big monopoly because there's no audience in the "alternatives." If you want to be seen you have no choice but YouTube, you can prepare for the worst and upload simultaneously to other platforms and include links in your video description but you can't avoid YouTube.
- jasode 5y ago
  >Vimeo? Peertube? Facebook? Self hosted website? Anywhere? Those proposed alternatives don't address why the content creators like this piano teacher put their tutorials on Youtube: ++ $0 in hosting and bandwidth costs: self-hosted costs money that's often unpredictable, and Vimeo has platform membership fees ++ ad revenue to help make the effort of producing a video worthwhile : Peertube does not have relationship with ad sponsors ++ audience size & reach : Vimeo/Peertube/selfhosted/etc don't have comparable viewers. For niche content such as piano instruction, this makes building a financially sustainable audience more difficult ++ discovery recommendations from the platform: Vimeo/Peertube/selfhosted don't have the network effect ecosystem of other videos on music that can lead viewers to the piano teacher's tutorial videos. When frustrated Youtubers ask "And put your content where?", they're not looking for dumb hosting sites to upload some mp4 files. Their question is really a short version of: "And put your content where that has the audience reach and monetization to make the video production worthwhile?" A content creator like this piano teacher wants to make some extra money with Youtube videos. It's not the end of the world if she can't do that but the extra income could help offset the cancellation of in-person lessons because of pandemic social distancing. I don't think lecturing people repeatedly about Vimeo and Peertube is helpful. EDIT reply to: >But the other rely to this comment makes a very good point - post in as many places as possible/desired _in addition_ to YouTube, and point to all the other places in that YouTube posting. You're still losing sight of this thread's topic: the piano teacher is losing ad monetization money to a fraudulent claim of copyright. If she hypothetically uploaded her Moonlight Sonata tutorial to Peertube/Vimeo/selfhosting, she still gets $0 in ad share revenue from those alternative video hosters which makes the advice irrelevant. Your "syndication" advice to distribute the videos to multiple sites solves a different problem such as de-platforming. E.g. Youtube deletes/censors her video or her entire channel. That's not the problem she has. Her video is still there and viewable. But she doesn't want the ad monetization money stolen from her by a fraudulent claim.
  - zentiggr 5y ago
    But the other rely to this comment makes a very good point - post in as many places as possible/desired _in addition_ to YouTube, and point to all the other places in that YouTube posting. Also a good way to inform viewers about Google's shitty policies and forewarn them that the much more reliable sources are All The Others.
  - johnnyanmac 5y ago
    >But she doesn't want the ad monetization money stolen from her by a fraudulent claim. she's making $0 now regardless. May as well do a small jab in spite of it by promoting other places. More likely she'd probably just stop hosting videos and switch to a different format, like private tutoring.
- pacomerh 5y ago
  Facebook? I hope you're kidding
anigbrowl 5y ago
I hate copyright law and agree it's broken, but it's not at fault here. Compositions can be copyrighted, but obviously Beethoven's Moonlight Sonata is in the public domain and has been for a long time. Performances can be copyrighted, but obviously a performance isn't the same thing as a composition. There's no legal grey area here. This is completely on Google/Youtube. Why isn't there a way to assert the copyright status when uploading, beyond saying you ownt he copyright or not? The answer would seem to be that it would take some work on the company's part, and they don't want to put it in because it's unlikely to yield any additional revenue and the occasional bit of bad publicity doesn't hurt them enough.
- robbrown451 5y ago
  "This is completely on Google/Youtube. " What about the copyright trolls that are filing claims for content they don't own, forcing Google into an arms race with them. Even when the system is working "correctly" it is broken. If I take a video of my kid dancing to a song, I often can't share it with my family on YouTube. That's messed up.
  - PaulDavisThe1st 5y ago
    Is it messed up, though? Suppose your video goes crazy viral, has 12 million views, you monetize it, earn some modest figure on the thing. What forces you to pay the song's creators/copyright holders? What would make you think you should not pay them? Obviously, this is an unlikely scenario, but where's the threshold at which it becomes important? Monetization? First million views? Theoretical monetization? Actual payout?
    - johnnyanmac 5y ago
      that notion is why I imagine Google added a threshold before a channel can be monetized. So the payment details here are moot unless you are already an established channel who should know this. Regardless, this is less about a random user "making money off music they don't own" and more about the potential that users aren't instead going to Vevo to make the music company ad revenue. I have my qualms on DMCA as a whole, but this is ultimately tangential to the real issue of the lack of consequences for perjury.
ratww 5y ago
Google's extension to copyright and lack of accountability is the only thing broken here. That, and the fact that they have multiple monopolies. Boycotting Google is the only way to go. One can also advocate for regulation in this are. As for your question: They can put the video in Nebula or Patreon, for instance. Maybe there can be more of those, perhaps for music teachers. Maybe that's also an opportunity for someone new to jump into the streaming game and provide some competition.
jtriangle 5y ago
Many, many creators who's content is not youtube friendly are hosting their videos off platform (no shortage of options there) and only posting previews on youtube to direct their subscribers and anyone who happens upon their videos to an external site. Google makes this moderately difficult of course, but it seems to be a viable option when coupled with patreon (where you usually get more content/early access/more creator engagement) or some other external subscription where the same is offered. To answer your question succinctly, no, you don't want "other youtube" you want something sufficiently different to avoid youtube's pitfalls.
- johnnyanmac 5y ago
  >To answer your question succinctly, no, you don't want "other youtube" you want something sufficiently different to avoid youtube's pitfalls. I argue "other youtube would suffice". We see this with Youtube streaming needing to actually compete due to Twitch existing, and vice versa. There's still the likely issue that they both fall into legal troll pitfalls, but I argue that they will avoid more of them in an attempt to compete for a better service. With video hosting, Youtube doesn't need to compete.
- robbrown451 5y ago
  I think you are referring to porn. Yes, there are places people can post porn and get views and monetize them. I don't think that helps piano teachers and the like.

josteink 5y ago

> And put your content where? Vimeo? Peertube? Facebook? Self hosted website? Anywhere?

livre 5y ago
You can put your content anywhere you want but you can't choose where the audience is. YouTube is in practice a big monopoly because there's no audience in the "alternatives." If you want to be seen you have no choice but YouTube, you can prepare for the worst and upload simultaneously to other platforms and include links in your video description but you can't avoid YouTube.
jasode 5y ago
>Vimeo? Peertube? Facebook? Self hosted website? Anywhere? Those proposed alternatives don't address why the content creators like this piano teacher put their tutorials on Youtube: ++ $0 in hosting and bandwidth costs: self-hosted costs money that's often unpredictable, and Vimeo has platform membership fees ++ ad revenue to help make the effort of producing a video worthwhile : Peertube does not have relationship with ad sponsors ++ audience size & reach : Vimeo/Peertube/selfhosted/etc don't have comparable viewers. For niche content such as piano instruction, this makes building a financially sustainable audience more difficult ++ discovery recommendations from the platform: Vimeo/Peertube/selfhosted don't have the network effect ecosystem of other videos on music that can lead viewers to the piano teacher's tutorial videos. When frustrated Youtubers ask "And put your content where?", they're not looking for dumb hosting sites to upload some mp4 files. Their question is really a short version of: "And put your content where that has the audience reach and monetization to make the video production worthwhile?" A content creator like this piano teacher wants to make some extra money with Youtube videos. It's not the end of the world if she can't do that but the extra income could help offset the cancellation of in-person lessons because of pandemic social distancing. I don't think lecturing people repeatedly about Vimeo and Peertube is helpful. EDIT reply to: >But the other rely to this comment makes a very good point - post in as many places as possible/desired _in addition_ to YouTube, and point to all the other places in that YouTube posting. You're still losing sight of this thread's topic: the piano teacher is losing ad monetization money to a fraudulent claim of copyright. If she hypothetically uploaded her Moonlight Sonata tutorial to Peertube/Vimeo/selfhosting, she still gets $0 in ad share revenue from those alternative video hosters which makes the advice irrelevant. Your "syndication" advice to distribute the videos to multiple sites solves a different problem such as de-platforming. E.g. Youtube deletes/censors her video or her entire channel. That's not the problem she has. Her video is still there and viewable. But she doesn't want the ad monetization money stolen from her by a fraudulent claim.
- zentiggr 5y ago
  But the other rely to this comment makes a very good point - post in as many places as possible/desired _in addition_ to YouTube, and point to all the other places in that YouTube posting. Also a good way to inform viewers about Google's shitty policies and forewarn them that the much more reliable sources are All The Others.
- johnnyanmac 5y ago
  >But she doesn't want the ad monetization money stolen from her by a fraudulent claim. she's making $0 now regardless. May as well do a small jab in spite of it by promoting other places. More likely she'd probably just stop hosting videos and switch to a different format, like private tutoring.
pacomerh 5y ago
Facebook? I hope you're kidding

anigbrowl 5y ago

I hate copyright law and agree it's broken, but it's not at fault here. Compositions can be copyrighted, but obviously Beethoven's Moonlight Sonata is in the public domain and has been for a long time. Performances can be copyrighted, but obviously a performance isn't the same thing as a composition. There's no legal grey area here. This is completely on Google/Youtube. Why isn't there a way to assert the copyright status when uploading, beyond saying you ownt he copyright or not? The answer would seem to be that it would take some work on the company's part, and they don't want to put it in because it's unlikely to yield any additional revenue and the occasional bit of bad publicity doesn't hurt them enough.

robbrown451 5y ago
"This is completely on Google/Youtube. " What about the copyright trolls that are filing claims for content they don't own, forcing Google into an arms race with them. Even when the system is working "correctly" it is broken. If I take a video of my kid dancing to a song, I often can't share it with my family on YouTube. That's messed up.
- PaulDavisThe1st 5y ago
  Is it messed up, though? Suppose your video goes crazy viral, has 12 million views, you monetize it, earn some modest figure on the thing. What forces you to pay the song's creators/copyright holders? What would make you think you should not pay them? Obviously, this is an unlikely scenario, but where's the threshold at which it becomes important? Monetization? First million views? Theoretical monetization? Actual payout?
  - johnnyanmac 5y ago
    that notion is why I imagine Google added a threshold before a channel can be monetized. So the payment details here are moot unless you are already an established channel who should know this. Regardless, this is less about a random user "making money off music they don't own" and more about the potential that users aren't instead going to Vevo to make the music company ad revenue. I have my qualms on DMCA as a whole, but this is ultimately tangential to the real issue of the lack of consequences for perjury.

ratww 5y ago

Google's extension to copyright and lack of accountability is the only thing broken here. That, and the fact that they have multiple monopolies. Boycotting Google is the only way to go. One can also advocate for regulation in this are. As for your question: They can put the video in Nebula or Patreon, for instance. Maybe there can be more of those, perhaps for music teachers. Maybe that's also an opportunity for someone new to jump into the streaming game and provide some competition.

jtriangle 5y ago

Many, many creators who's content is not youtube friendly are hosting their videos off platform (no shortage of options there) and only posting previews on youtube to direct their subscribers and anyone who happens upon their videos to an external site. Google makes this moderately difficult of course, but it seems to be a viable option when coupled with patreon (where you usually get more content/early access/more creator engagement) or some other external subscription where the same is offered. To answer your question succinctly, no, you don't want "other youtube" you want something sufficiently different to avoid youtube's pitfalls.

johnnyanmac 5y ago
>To answer your question succinctly, no, you don't want "other youtube" you want something sufficiently different to avoid youtube's pitfalls. I argue "other youtube would suffice". We see this with Youtube streaming needing to actually compete due to Twitch existing, and vice versa. There's still the likely issue that they both fall into legal troll pitfalls, but I argue that they will avoid more of them in an attempt to compete for a better service. With video hosting, Youtube doesn't need to compete.
robbrown451 5y ago
I think you are referring to porn. Yes, there are places people can post porn and get views and monetize them. I don't think that helps piano teachers and the like.