YouTube Promising To Change Policy Enforcement

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
It's nice to see YouTube finally acknowledging that there is a problem with its Content ID system. Hopefully this "new team" will lead to positive change and reduce the number of erroneous takedowns.

The good news is that the feedback you've raised in comments and videos on YouTube and beyond is having an impact. It's caused us to look closely at our policies and helped us identify areas where we can get better. It's led us to create a team dedicated to minimizing mistakes and improving the quality of our actions. And it's encouraged us to roll out some initiatives in the coming months that will help strengthen communications between creators and YouTube support. We'll also make improvements to increase transparency into the status of monetization claims. And of course, as we work to implement these improvements as quickly as we can, we'll continue to take your feedback seriously.
 
A penalty of some sort for running a relatively high percentage of invalid takedowns. That would unburden the resolution side of things and you could do more with less.
 
Since the system was put there to correct copyright, its probably safe to say that a channel that's of certain size deserves human attention instead of an automated system that's triggered by anyone who makes claims.
 
I agree, if they want to keep it automated - then the invalid take-downs should have some sort of penalty.

Users are automatically "Guilty until proven innocent"
I mean we are starting to see..

Automated Takedown
User "disputes" it
Automated Upheld
User "Appeals" it

I mean a "owner" could automate the entire process and there is no repercussions from what I am seeing...

----

After you appeal a rejected dispute, the copyright owner has 30 days to respond.

There are a few things the copyright owner can do after you appeal:

Do nothing, let the claim expire: If they don’t respond within 30 days, their claim on your video will expire, and you don’t need to do anything.

Release the claim: If the copyright owner agrees with your dispute, they can release their claim, and you don’t need to do anything.

Take down your video immediately: They may issue a takedown against your video if they believe their claim is still valid. This means you’ll get a copyright strike on your account, which will put your account into bad copyright standing. If you still believe that you have the rights to the content, you can submit a counter notification at this point.

Schedule a takedown of your video: If the copyright owner issues a delayed takedown, you can cancel your appeal within 7 days, which prevents the takedown and keeps the claim active on your video.

If you change your mind, you can take back your appeal after you’ve submitted it. Click cancel appeal on the page where you disputed the claim. Keep in mind, once you cancel, you won't be able to appeal the claim again.


Axe
 
I got a message from YouTube a month or so ago saying "due to a copyright claim" the ad money from ads placed on my video would be going to the copyright holder.


Here's the thing, the video was me doing burnouts / donuts in my Camaro. There was NO music in the video at all, no TV / movie content, just me doing burnouts.


The only thing I could think of was either Chevrolet or Goodyear objected to me destroying my tires :D


It turns out it was these asshats. So I appealed it (I never gave them permission to use my video), automatically lost, so I took down the video so they couldn't make revenue off my video.


I'll bet these guys do this to thousands of people without any repercussions at all. :(
 
I don't know if it was all Doug Walker (Nostalgia Critic) and the other guys that were trying to trend (WTFU - Where's The Fair Use), but I'm sure it didn't hurt. They did get a response from Youtube's CEO that they were listening to their complaints. I guess we'll see where they go from here. Here's Doug's video:

 
Youtube is also ghost banning people unfairly. I was accused of being a spammer and was ghost banned for simply posting news article links to pertinent discussions.
 
Yeah, the most repugnant part of the whole youtube/freebooting/fair use thing that I have seen is people claiming monetized videos when they have absolutely no right. First of all any monetization should be held pending a resolution of the claim, and that would be a very conservative measure (as it could take a month, and the content creator may need that money). Hopefully this fucks over some of these scumbags making shit claims.
 
I'll tell you what doesn't make sense to me. You can upload a video with a partial song and get flagged for copyright but other uploaders can use the whole song and get milliions of views with no issue. I mean, the amount of video uploaders using a whole song including 'x song w/lyrics' with no takedown requests while one you upload only has a few seconds of a song is flagged makes zero sense.
 
They use "tricks" so the song does not get flagged, like slightly changing pitch or speed of the song. You can do that with Audacity for free.
 
This issue of false flagging of accounts has been going on for a long time. Channels with hundreds of videos can be quickly taken down and all their content deleted in one evening of false copyright accusations.

There is also a large monetary burden on creators when a new video of theirs gets falsely accused, and the video is pulled for a day, week month. When the copyright claim is nullified and the video goes back up it isn't featured in recommendations lists anymore, so the number of views plummets.
 
My account was flagged about 8 years ago, and I can't do anything about it. They said I'd have to contact the person who filed the complaint, and ask them to withdraw it. Over a video that was deleted about 6 years ago. How would I contact a person who I don't know anything about?
 
I remember being flagged because I posted a local news clip about a Scientology protest that happened in front of my house. The only reason it got reversed was because Scientology did a mass copyright claim on anything that mentioned them and national media started to report it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top