4 ms·

I dont understand why youtube has no Sopa/Pippa issues? I searched but didn't find a good answer. Could somebody expain that please?

cryptoz 15y ago
What do you mean? If SOPA or PIPA had passed, YouTube would certainly have issues. Did the article suggest otherwise to you? As it is, YouTube receives DMCA takedown requests probably every single second, and they comply with them. So they stay alive. It seems the situation was the same with Megaupload, except that they didn't exactly comply all the time.
- colin-de-vries 15y ago
  I know about the DMCA takedown requests. But as I understand it YouTube has to do their own investigation with each upload. At the rate of 60 hours per minute. That seems a bit difficult if not impossible. In that respect YouTube should be taken offline like they did with mega upload and many other sites. So, why is YouTube not burned like many other websites. There are complete series seasons on YouTube. I guess i was just expecting more commotion around YouTube then there currently is. (For the record, I oppose to Sopa and Pipa)
  - jonknee 15y ago
    AFAIK YouTube can't self-censor and remain in the DMCA safe harbor. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_Copyright_Infringement_Liability_Limitation_Act#Knowledge_of_Infringing_Material http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_Copyright_Infringement_L... This is why Justin.tv can go on when its top channels are obviously illegal. It has to receive notice as such instead of simply monitoring what's currently broadcast and killing things like football.
    - colin-de-vries 15y ago
      Thank you for the answers. The replies makes sense to me. I just read that if you upload a Michael Jackson song you can get 5 years in prison. That's one year longer then what the doctor who killed him got.
  - eklitzke 15y ago
    I believe that most of the DMCA compliance can be done automatically through the use of Content ID.[1] Basically, for partners that they have a Content ID relationship with (e.g. the big entertainment companies), they can automatically determine infringement and whether they should take the content down, or if it's OK to leave it up. Obviously there are plenty of people who aren't using the Content ID system and are sending in traditional DMCA requests, but I imagine that the automated system takes care of a big chunk of the work. [1] http://www.youtube.com/t/contentid http://www.youtube.com/t/contentid
cristoperb 15y ago
By my reading of SOPA (and I think PIPA is very similar), youtube could not be construed as a foreign site and therefore would not be (directly) affected by SOPA. Of course google, being a DNS service provider, a search engine, and an ad service, would definitely have been affected by SOPA.
- onemoreact 15y ago
  SOPA did not limit it's self to international websites. 1/2 the bill focused on foreign sites the other half applied to US sites.
  - cristoperb 15y ago
    I'm almost sure you are incorrect (the entire purpose of SOPA was to provide the same copyright enforcement to "foreign sites" as already exist for domestic sites). Can you point me to the section/paragraph of SOPA that you are thinking of?
    - Retric 15y ago
      Read: TITLE II--ADDITIONAL ENHANCEMENTS TO COMBAT INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY THEFT http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c112:1:./temp/~c112GguCuX:e63203 http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c112:1:./temp/~c112Ggu...: PS: You replied several days after that post, but on the off chance you see this, I figured why not respond.

cryptoz 15y ago

What do you mean? If SOPA or PIPA had passed, YouTube would certainly have issues. Did the article suggest otherwise to you? As it is, YouTube receives DMCA takedown requests probably every single second, and they comply with them. So they stay alive. It seems the situation was the same with Megaupload, except that they didn't exactly comply all the time.

colin-de-vries 15y ago
I know about the DMCA takedown requests. But as I understand it YouTube has to do their own investigation with each upload. At the rate of 60 hours per minute. That seems a bit difficult if not impossible. In that respect YouTube should be taken offline like they did with mega upload and many other sites. So, why is YouTube not burned like many other websites. There are complete series seasons on YouTube. I guess i was just expecting more commotion around YouTube then there currently is. (For the record, I oppose to Sopa and Pipa)
- jonknee 15y ago
  AFAIK YouTube can't self-censor and remain in the DMCA safe harbor. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_Copyright_Infringement_Liability_Limitation_Act#Knowledge_of_Infringing_Material http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_Copyright_Infringement_L... This is why Justin.tv can go on when its top channels are obviously illegal. It has to receive notice as such instead of simply monitoring what's currently broadcast and killing things like football.
  - colin-de-vries 15y ago
    Thank you for the answers. The replies makes sense to me. I just read that if you upload a Michael Jackson song you can get 5 years in prison. That's one year longer then what the doctor who killed him got.
- eklitzke 15y ago
  I believe that most of the DMCA compliance can be done automatically through the use of Content ID.[1] Basically, for partners that they have a Content ID relationship with (e.g. the big entertainment companies), they can automatically determine infringement and whether they should take the content down, or if it's OK to leave it up. Obviously there are plenty of people who aren't using the Content ID system and are sending in traditional DMCA requests, but I imagine that the automated system takes care of a big chunk of the work. [1] http://www.youtube.com/t/contentid http://www.youtube.com/t/contentid

cristoperb 15y ago

By my reading of SOPA (and I think PIPA is very similar), youtube could not be construed as a foreign site and therefore would not be (directly) affected by SOPA. Of course google, being a DNS service provider, a search engine, and an ad service, would definitely have been affected by SOPA.

onemoreact 15y ago
SOPA did not limit it's self to international websites. 1/2 the bill focused on foreign sites the other half applied to US sites.
- cristoperb 15y ago
  I'm almost sure you are incorrect (the entire purpose of SOPA was to provide the same copyright enforcement to "foreign sites" as already exist for domestic sites). Can you point me to the section/paragraph of SOPA that you are thinking of?
  - Retric 15y ago
    Read: TITLE II--ADDITIONAL ENHANCEMENTS TO COMBAT INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY THEFT http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c112:1:./temp/~c112GguCuX:e63203 http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c112:1:./temp/~c112Ggu...: PS: You replied several days after that post, but on the off chance you see this, I figured why not respond.