5 ms·

> walk around outside, making a video of what they're doing, and post it, without having to worry that some copyrighted music is playing in the background for s

> walk around outside, making a video of what they're doing, and post it, without having to worry that some copyrighted music is playing in the background for some portion of it. You can, this is called "incidental use" and is an exception to copyright in the USA. If you're filming yourself going down the street and someone starts playing a song, and you're not going out of your easy to capture the copyrighted content, it is legal. YouTube's copyright strike system is more strict than the law, probably to kowtow to the music companies serving the YouTube Music product in exchange for not having to defend against a lawsuit. If we weren't subject to their monopoly on online video, someone could just start telling copyright trolls to pound sand when a frivolous complaint comes up.

talldayo 2y ago
> If we weren't subject to their monopoly on online video, someone could just start telling copyright trolls to pound sand when a frivolous complaint comes up. In principle, maybe. But realistically, even if we had a competitive and healthy video hosting market, the RIAA would still have a legal imperative to moderate those platforms. Although we don't perceive them in direct competition with YouTube, copyright takedowns still happen on TikTok, Twitter and Instagram. Platforms of a certain size become targets for IP holders, and platform-owners lack the time or accountability to deal with each claim on a case-by-case basis. It's less about finding a "someone" to tell-off copyright trolls, and more about paying enough lawyers to fight Sony & Friends when they make dubious claims. It's a status-quo that sucks for us humans, but this is what intellectual property laws look like as-applied to real life. Art, video and even code are all obsessively licensed to prevent the accidental proliferation of good ideas.
- clob 2y ago
  It's also easier said than done to fend off intelligent and determined legal adversaries.
RajT88 2y ago
It is pretty ridiculous what their copyright bots flag too. I recorded a live performance of an orchestra in Barcelona at some cathedral. Some version of the song got copyright flagged. Really? Flagging live performances of (checks notes) a song composed in 1954? Just bananas.
- jcranmer 2y ago
  Each live performance of a work creates a separate copyrightable work (a derivative work of the composed song, I believe). And composed in 1954 is almost certainly copyrighted still, given that most European countries follow a life+70 rule.
westurner 2y ago
In addition to incidental use and and law enforcement and investigative purposes , copyrighted music in a YouTube video could also be Academic Use, journalism / criticism, sufficiently transformative, a mixtape-style compilation,. Someday hopefully the musical copyright folks on YouTube will share revenue with Visual Artists on there, too.

talldayo 2y ago

> If we weren't subject to their monopoly on online video, someone could just start telling copyright trolls to pound sand when a frivolous complaint comes up. In principle, maybe. But realistically, even if we had a competitive and healthy video hosting market, the RIAA would still have a legal imperative to moderate those platforms. Although we don't perceive them in direct competition with YouTube, copyright takedowns still happen on TikTok, Twitter and Instagram. Platforms of a certain size become targets for IP holders, and platform-owners lack the time or accountability to deal with each claim on a case-by-case basis. It's less about finding a "someone" to tell-off copyright trolls, and more about paying enough lawyers to fight Sony & Friends when they make dubious claims. It's a status-quo that sucks for us humans, but this is what intellectual property laws look like as-applied to real life. Art, video and even code are all obsessively licensed to prevent the accidental proliferation of good ideas.

clob 2y ago
It's also easier said than done to fend off intelligent and determined legal adversaries.

RajT88 2y ago

It is pretty ridiculous what their copyright bots flag too. I recorded a live performance of an orchestra in Barcelona at some cathedral. Some version of the song got copyright flagged. Really? Flagging live performances of (checks notes) a song composed in 1954? Just bananas.

jcranmer 2y ago
Each live performance of a work creates a separate copyrightable work (a derivative work of the composed song, I believe). And composed in 1954 is almost certainly copyrighted still, given that most European countries follow a life+70 rule.

westurner 2y ago

In addition to incidental use and and law enforcement and investigative purposes , copyrighted music in a YouTube video could also be Academic Use, journalism / criticism, sufficiently transformative, a mixtape-style compilation,. Someday hopefully the musical copyright folks on YouTube will share revenue with Visual Artists on there, too.