4 ms·

I understand it's an automated system and so on, but given how often these stories bubble up (and to make it even more egregious http://motherboard.vice.com/201

I understand it's an automated system and so on, but given how often these stories bubble up (and to make it even more egregious http://motherboard.vice.com/2012/8/6/nasa-s-mars-rover-crashed-into-a-dmca-takedown http://motherboard.vice.com/2012/8/6/nasa-s-mars-rover-crash... it hit NASA themselves), you'd think that Google/Youtube would invest some developer hours into either acknowledging the issue and dealing with it, or saying "It's not working and we're disabling until we can get it done properly". It's costing them a lot of face, I know people who perform who've had YouTube videos disabled due to background music being licensed off by one of the big studios and now refuse to use. It just isn't working. There's no understanding of context, no ability to detect what the usage is or whether the rights holder is the rights holder aside from 'they uploaded it as well'.

sp332 14y ago
Identifying infringing content is not the point of ContentID. The point is to keep content companies from suing them for $1,000,000,000 (billions) the way Viacom did before this system was in place. It's a very expensive and effective CYA move to show courts that they are putting real resources into minimizing infringement. It doesn't have to actually "work".
- nicholassmith 14y ago
  You make a convincing argument, but that still doesn't mean Google/YouTube shouldn't be pouring developer time in if they don't want the people who made YouTube to disappear to a rival content provider. People will get sick of the randomised takedowns, even if it's simple to resolve.
  - sp332 14y ago
    Well they have put developer time in, not to mention massive amounts of computing power. It processes every video uploaded to youtube, and compares it to every video in the contentID system. It's pretty amazing. There's a short TED talk on it http://www.ted.com/talks/margaret_stewart_how_youtube_thinks_about_copyright.html http://www.ted.com/talks/margaret_stewart_how_youtube_thinks...
    - nicholassmith 14y ago
      I'd argue that with the level of false positives it needs improvement. I won't argue that the existing system isn't both impressive in terms of scale and complexity, just that it's not working as well as it should over something like blocking ma & pa's home video for the Britney Spears track you can hear in the background.
  - roc 14y ago
    > "People will get sick of the randomised takedowns," They haven't yet. And what rival content host has a better system? I'd like to think people would demand better. But when it comes to free services, they generally don't.
    - nicholassmith 14y ago
      I know people who have gotten sick of the takedowns, so I'm basing that off a small subset of people who use YouTube, but I can't see them being the only ones. Take a wild stab at where they've gone. And it doesn't have a better system in many regards, but they already put all their other digital ephemera on it.

sp332 14y ago

Identifying infringing content is not the point of ContentID. The point is to keep content companies from suing them for $1,000,000,000 (billions) the way Viacom did before this system was in place. It's a very expensive and effective CYA move to show courts that they are putting real resources into minimizing infringement. It doesn't have to actually "work".

nicholassmith 14y ago
You make a convincing argument, but that still doesn't mean Google/YouTube shouldn't be pouring developer time in if they don't want the people who made YouTube to disappear to a rival content provider. People will get sick of the randomised takedowns, even if it's simple to resolve.
- sp332 14y ago
  Well they have put developer time in, not to mention massive amounts of computing power. It processes every video uploaded to youtube, and compares it to every video in the contentID system. It's pretty amazing. There's a short TED talk on it http://www.ted.com/talks/margaret_stewart_how_youtube_thinks_about_copyright.html http://www.ted.com/talks/margaret_stewart_how_youtube_thinks...
  - nicholassmith 14y ago
    I'd argue that with the level of false positives it needs improvement. I won't argue that the existing system isn't both impressive in terms of scale and complexity, just that it's not working as well as it should over something like blocking ma & pa's home video for the Britney Spears track you can hear in the background.
- roc 14y ago
  > "People will get sick of the randomised takedowns," They haven't yet. And what rival content host has a better system? I'd like to think people would demand better. But when it comes to free services, they generally don't.
  - nicholassmith 14y ago
    I know people who have gotten sick of the takedowns, so I'm basing that off a small subset of people who use YouTube, but I can't see them being the only ones. Take a wild stab at where they've gone. And it doesn't have a better system in many regards, but they already put all their other digital ephemera on it.