3 ms·
Which makes one wonder why they pandered to the content industry with it at all. There's no requirement they make such a system, and it makes their service less
by gergles 15y ago
Which makes one wonder why they pandered to the content industry with it at all. There's no requirement they make such a system, and it makes their service less desirable and usable.
Google's responsibility is to respond to DMCA notices; that's it. They have no requirement to create a Draconian copyright monitor.
(The standard response is "so the content industry would work with us!!!" Who gives a shit? Oh no, we wouldn't have any of the shitty "Vevo" channels laced with advertising without Content ID. What a terrible loss that would be.)
- jdietrich 15y agoIf the record industry is dying, how much do you imagine they're willing to spend on lobbying to delay their fate? Any regulation of the internet places a disproportionate burden on Google, simply because of their size. They know this, the RIAA/MPAA know this. The RIAA would happily spend billions and kill Google in the process if it bought them another few years of the good old days.
- jaylevitt 15y agoBecause responding to DMCA notices would take people, and Google always prefers algorithms over manual labor. I'm half convinced that the whole reason they're developing driverless cars is for Google Maps, the one Google property that requires a huge labor force.