4 ms·
I still don't understand why Google went on the route of proactively removing content rather than reactively.
by aaomidi 5y ago
I still don't understand why Google went on the route of proactively removing content rather than reactively.
- kube-system 5y agoThey just don't care. They're not a public service altruistically serving their users' videos up until the point the law requires them to take it down. They're an ad platform, trying to serve ads and not get sued. Content ID was born out of a desire to keep Viacom happy after Google got sued: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viacom_International_Inc._v._YouTube,_Inc.#Background https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viacom_International_Inc._v._Y...
- remram 5y agoThat is part of the DMCA (the act, not the "DMCA notice" often shortened "DMCA"). In exchange for not being liable for the copyright infringement ("safe harbor"), the service provider (here YouTube) has to act on notices right away. The user files a counterclaim if that was wrong. In short, it's not YouTube's (or GitHub's, etc) call, this is part of the agreement with copyright holders (the DMCA copyright law). Don't take that as an endorsement though, I hate the system as much as you do.
- aaomidi 5y agoRight, that's what I mean. I wish they only did DMCA rather than the bullshit they do now.
- lmm 5y agoMoney, dear boy. They gain a lot more from keeping the big media companies onside than they do by pissing off a handful of creators (who are frankly a commodity to them).
- ThrustVectoring 5y agoBecause the alternative is staring down billion-dollar lawsuits from Viacom and other copyright holders.
- fphhotchips 5y agoIIRC, it's because they got sued, and content ID was part of the settlement.