YouTube Introduces 'Appeals Court' for Copyright Fights

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
It looks as though YouTube is adding another option to help protect users from bogus copyright claims.

Now YouTube has added a second and third layer to the process -- the "appeal." If a content holder still insists you're using their material without permission after you appeal, they have to go the extra mile and file a DMCA takedown notice. In the meantime, your video will go back up. If you appeal that takedown notice, the copyright holder will have to take the case to court -- but you'll also have one "strike" against you on YouTube. Three strikes and you're out of the service.
Click to expand...
 
but you'll also have one "strike" against you on YouTube
Click to expand...

Wait...what? Guilty until proven innocent? No waiting until it's actually proven to be infringement instead?
 
So basically all you have to do to get someone taken off YT completely, presumably all their content as well, is file 3 false complaints then 3 false DCMAs?
 
-Dragon- said:
So basically all you have to do to get someone taken off YT completely, presumably all their content as well, is file 3 false complaints then 3 false DCMAs?
Click to expand...

A tactic that can prove to be useful for certain parties. People who make junk YouTube accounts can spam content online, but those with reputable accounts can see this being a problem.
 
-Dragon- said:
So basically all you have to do to get someone taken off YT completely, presumably all their content as well, is file 3 false complaints then 3 false DCMAs?
Click to expand...

Ashbringer said:
A tactic that can prove to be useful for certain parties. People who make junk YouTube accounts can spam content online, but those with reputable accounts can see this being a problem.
Click to expand...

Quick, someone do this to a legit record-label-funded YouTube account that serves music videos.

Policy will be fixed overnight.
 
LstOfTheBrunnenG said:
Quick, someone do this to a legit record-label-funded YouTube account that serves music videos.

Policy will be fixed overnight.
Click to expand...

Any accounts that have actual corporate presence and attorneys will be immune, leaving only the smaller companies and freelancers to hurt. Kind of like the economy.
 
-Dragon- said:
So basically all you have to do to get someone taken off YT completely, presumably all their content as well, is file 3 false complaints then 3 false DCMAs?
Click to expand...

That was the first thing that came to mind for me! Could have made it so people like Rebecca Black and Justin Beiber never got their 15 minutes!
 
sfsuphysics said:
That was the first thing that came to mind for me! Could have made it so people like Rebecca Black and Justin Beiber never got their 15 minutes!
Click to expand...

Those creatures are already out of the Barn.
 
sfsuphysics said:
That was the first thing that came to mind for me! Could have made it so people like Rebecca Black and Justin Beiber never got their 15 minutes!
Click to expand...

Okay, I can sort of understand why guys here are jealous of Justin with all his money and dating chicks most boys only get to fantasize about, but what's wrong with Rebecca Black? What'd she ever do to you? :confused:
 
SkribbelKat said:
..... but what's wrong with Rebecca Black? What'd she ever do to you? :confused:
Click to expand...

She made a song that somehow was so terrible that is was constantly played and spoofed. My ears hurt and to this day, I can not longer enjoy *THAT* day of the week. Yes I am bitter and angry at her.
 
Az Syndicate said:
She made a song that somehow was so terrible that is was constantly played and spoofed. My ears hurt and to this day, I can not longer enjoy *THAT* day of the week. Yes I am bitter and angry at her.
Click to expand...

Well if it was that bad and got spoofed that much, then it's probably actually well-known and she made lots of money from it, which is good even though people think its bad. Besides, everyone spoofs stuff. Remember that thing with Gog.com getting a cease and desist over selling unicorn meat as "the other white meat" or something? That doesn't make unicors or pork bad since most people still like them.
 
Ain't that dumb. All that someone has to do is find 3 video you upload, and claim 3 times you get 3 strikes and out of service even without even going to court. Will your video still be up by then?
 
The three strikes makes NO sense? What if you did in fact NOT have any copyright material and they just falsely accuse you 3 times? If you are in the right on all 3 times why should those count as strikes???

If they never take you to court or go into the DMCA rout ewhy should youtube then PUNISH you???
 
I can't help but think there's been a miscommunication on the "three strikes". I tried to look in to it further and I can't find any other sources for the same story though.
 
This sounds like a good step, but it's missing a key ingredient: a penalty for bogus copyright claims.
 
So all you have to do is claim that the video infringes on your rights? What ever happened to requiring to show proof of ownership before you could claim something was stolen?
 
something tells me that Google intends to profit off this somehow - A year down the road when this rage is forgotten, they'll implement a new feature - a fee to take points away from you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top