9 ms·
YouTube Alters Copyright Algorithms, Will ‘Manually’ Review Some Claims
- TimNN 14y agoI think the best part is: "Under the new rules announced Wednesday, however, if the uploader challenges the [Content ID] match, the alleged rights holder must abandon I'D [copyright] claim or file an official takedown notice under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.", as this will probably lead to content owners more carefully reviewing videos and also gives users a much better way to appeal a copyright claim.
- MrMember 14y agoIt also thankfully gets rid of companies claiming they can't be punished for illegitimate takedowns because they weren't done through the DMCA. Until they find some other loophole to hide behind, of course.
- magicalist 14y agoYeah, the Ars Technica article is far better. http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/10/youtube-finally-offers-a-meaningful-contentid-appeal-process/ http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/10/youtube-finally-o... The improvements to the content ID algorithm and occasional manual review of those is all well and good, but the far more important change here (as TimNN says) is to the counterclaim process. Before, you had the situation where the only person judging whether or not your counterclaim was valid was the very company that lodged the claim, which is ridiculous (and even if a company is not malicious, they could very well be lazy and just issue blanket denials of counterclaims). A counterclaim now no longer goes into a black hole, but actually reinstates the video. If a company wants to counter your counterclaim, they then have to file a real DMCA takedown notice, with the normal DMCA process after that.
- fpgeek 14y agoYes, but there is an important caveat here... YouTube has a "three strikes" policy with respect to DMCA takedown notices (which doesn't seem to take the result of the takedown into account), so if you dispute too many bogus ContentID claims you could lose your YouTube account. So I guess the next change to push for is that users should only get a "strike" if the claimant actually sues after a counter-notification (or something like that).
- s_henry_paulson 14y agoJust because someone sues you, does not necessarily mean it is justified.
- fpgeek 14y agoTrue, but it would be a step in the right direction.
- raldi 14y ago> First Lady Michelle Obama’s speech at the Democratic National Convention was wrongly flagged by algorithms just after it aired No it wasn't. http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2012/09/05/michelle_obama_dnc_speech_why_did_youtube_flag_it_for_copyright_infringement_.html http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2012/09/05/michelle_... There's always a delay between the end of a livestream and the point where you can watch the prerecorded video. In this case, YouTube merely displayed the wrong error message during that delay.
- sown 14y agoEver since my favorite Youtube Channel, SFDebris, moved to another video site after having been wrongfully flagged twice for copyright violation, I've been hoping that 'fair use' would be included.
- klausjensen 14y agoBut isn't it still without consequence to file a false claim? I feel like there should be some sort of "punishment" to filing a false claim, whether done out of stupidity or malice.
- Achshar 14y agoA small fee should do it probably. Something like $5 for every false claim.
- NegativeK 14y agoThe DMCA stipulates punishments for malicious claims, but not stupid ones. Proving malice would be pretty hard. Super downside? YouTube's takedown process is a precursor to official DMCA takedowns, so the DMCA punishment doesn't apply until a formal DMCA takedown is lodged.
- Zenst 14y agoGood to hear having read many cases of somebody filming themselfs, uploading and finding somebody claiming copyright automagicaly against there video. Be interesting to see how such situations improve.