If you’ve been on the internet in America then it is nearly guaranteed that at some point you’ve found yourself in front of a YouTube hosted video. YouTube has become the leading website to go to for video content, as it has become the third most visited website on the internet around the world (Alexa Top 500 Global Sites). However, one of the things users of YouTube struggle with is YouTube’s rather aggressive DMCA-enforcing copyright protected algorithms. That is, that YouTube automatically takes down anything that it identifies as copyrighted, sometimes before a takedown request is made by the copyright holders.
So called “old media” companies, Viacom most notably, have struggled to stop people from sharing their copyrighted materials on video websites like YouTube since video started being available to stream directly to your computer. People often associate torrenting a movie or album as illegal, but finding a streaming video that offers the same content seemed to be perfectly legal. Just recently, YouTube once again won the ongoing court case of Viacom vs YouTube (LA Times). Viacom has been trying to get YouTube, and Google who owns the service, to pay them for damages in having their content uploaded to YouTube. The courts rule that with the amount of content going up on YouTube, about 72 hours worth of video every minute (YouTube Statistics), that there was no way YouTube could be held responsible for checking every video and that it was up to Viacom to flag individual videos that violate their copyright.
YouTube, however, doesn’t want to take any chances. They have a system called Content ID which scans through uploaded material and searches for matches in a large database of works which have been identified as “copyrighted” (How Content ID Works). This system is purely automated, no Human being comes into play. Machines are not perfect, and they occasionally make mistakes of some form or another. Perhaps the channel uploading material does have permission, or perhaps it is a remix or other form of valid use of the copyrighted material. The algorithms behind Content ID do occasionally block content that is should be available.
As a rather comical example, shortly after the First Lady gave a speech in late 2012 which was broadcast live over YouTube, the Content ID system flagged the recorded broadcast as being copyrighted (Extreme Tech Article). Even though this was a White House channel broadcast, the computer software running Content ID was quick to jump on it and take the video down.
Some people may see the “Better Safe Than Sorry” approach as good, but I would bet those people work for an Old Media company who is most threatened by New Media Internet Entertainment. There is an increasing rise in “Professional YouTubers” who don’t work for anyone but themselves and are producing new material all to themselves. These people don’t have access to the same protection as a multi-billion dollar media mega-corporation does, but in the law they should be just as protected from copyright if they choose to be. What is most different is that a majority of those on the internet have the same fondness of expression and don’t mind people using their material to be creative. It is my opinion that in the very near future media companies will be forced to back down on their copyright protections.
No comments:
Post a Comment