This is no doubt in the minds of anyone that Youtube has seriously changed our lives. No question. Youtube allowed anyone around the world to get their view out into the world with nothing but a camera. This system also allows people to become media producers, instead of consumers, at a very little cost to them. People can upload video blogs, random stuff they see on the street, and even important world-wide events, at no cost to them. All that is needed is a camera and an Internet connection. The only thing holding people back is the file size limit. This is great! Everyone is equal and everyone is fair. Now, go onto my main page and read the article from last week about Twitter, China, and the media.
Now you’re confused. Why am I contradicting myself by saying that Youtube is fair, when I specifically said that some are more equal than others? I’m not saying that at all. It is, in fact, the worst offender. This is all based off flawed assumptions and premises of the people using Youtube. As long as there is a popular video sharing site on the Internet, people will use it to upload copyright material without the authorisation of the actual copyright holders. I want to say to everybody that this is wrong. I agree about how this is wrong and shouldn’t be happening. A false assumption here is that people will pay attention to the Terms and Conditions of use on Youtube, which clearly state:
Do not upload any TV shows, music videos, music concerts or commercials without permission unless they consist entirely of content you created yourself. The Copyright Tips page and the Community Guidelines can help you determine whether your video infringes someone else’s copyright.
It also says this on the video upload page. But Youtube assumes that people pay attention and it will stop people doing it. The law of the world is: if you tell people not to do something, they will do it anyway. There is nothing we can do about that. I don’t have a problem with Youtube taking action over copyright content. They specifically said that you can’t do this. There is no problem with this. However, it is how they act on the copyright content.
The default for what Youtube do is take the video down and warn the uploader about copyright content (after a certain amount of warnings, usually three, the account will be suspended. If you are suspended a certain amount of times, you get banned). This is a fantastic system in nine out of ten cases. In other cases, there is a small advert using the annotations system on Youtube videos that allows you to buy the music or movie on iTunes, Amazon, or other online stores. There is also a small notice under the description linking to the channel of the original content creator. In extreme cases, the video is muted. This is fair enough. And with the introduction of the Content Detection system, it makes it easier to pinpoint. Here it comes everybody…
However, there is a problem. Surprisingly, it involves the media and companies being whiny little bitches. Imagine that!
The DMCA has been criticized for making it too easy for copyright owners to encourage website owners to take down allegedly infringing content and links which may in fact not be infringing. When website owners receive a takedown notice it is in their interest not to challenge it, even if it is not clear if infringement is taking place, because if the potentially infringing content is taken down the website will not be held liable.
Digital Millennium Copyright Act – Criticism (Wikipedia)
This system is a perfect system. Content owners upload samples of their content into a database and videos uploaded go through these scanners and offending videos are flagged up. This is great. But the system’s greatest strength is also it’s greatest flaw. We have a large issue that circles the Internet about how broken the Digital Millennium Copyright Act is. This is one of those issues, which allows companies to run to these companies that host content, cry and ask them to take it down, whether it is a breach of copyright or not. Unfortunately, the hosting companies are unable to challenge these types of requests. And this is where the idiots that make up the stereotypical American citizen come into play. The fear of being sued over a false claim is far greater than just taking the ‘unoffending’ content down. There is a word I am thinking of here that describes this. It is called: bullying.
The problem with Youtube’s system is that it catches a lot of genuine content or content that is covered under the Parody Clause or Fair Use clause. I am all for Youtube catching genuine content (such as television shows) but Youtube seem to only listen to the companies who think of poor reasons to take content down, rather than the consumers who use THEIR service and give definite reasons why their content should stay up. Not that this stops them from just deleting their video out of their own free will due to the poor appeal system that threatens to remove their Youtube account if they DO protest. I love that people who genuinely put copyright material get caught and they shouldn’t be doing it. This is great. But by purposely listening to their idiotic lawyers and not to the consumers and the actual law, then it is impacting on the kind of thing that Youtube is known for. Youtube was made so the common person can upload original content for the world to see and reach out to a captive audience. But it seems that a few people have ruined it for everyone else and rather than punish that person, Youtube’s lawyers have decided that it is best to punish everyone else. Youtube! Stop listening to your lawyers and listen to the people. At least acknowledge the Parody Clause and the Fair Use Clause in copyright law. This kind of thing is making Youtube change its image from one of freedom to one of a policing dictatorship governed by people like Viacom. OK. Maybe taking it a little too far, but you get the idea. That is why so many other people are moving to other sites, away from Youtube.
A couple of examples:
Someone playing Rock Band and recording the note chart with a copyright notice in the description saying it is not their content and it belongs to someone else. However, it does say that they are allowed to use the song in conjunction with the software. Should this be taken down? Common sense says ‘no’. It is fair use. They are not purely putting the song up on its own with a download link or anything. They have said that this is fair use and is protected by the law. According to Youtube’s lawyers, it is bad and needs to be taken down or the audio changed.
Someone reviews a movie and puts small ten second sections of the movie in the video to highlight a point. It is a work of parody, they have acknowledged the original owners of the content, it is less than thirty seconds so it is excempt from copyright, and it is under fair use. Common sense and the law says ‘fine’. Lawyers say ‘no’. Ban this guy’s account! Ha! Ha! Ha! (*twists moustache and strokes cat*).
…
You get the idea (the previous example being a reference to Doug Walker a.k.a. That Guy with the Glasses). Youtube are breaking the law by ignoring clauses that allow the content and paying attention to ones that don’t allow it, even if it is annulled due to a clause that makes it exempt from this law. Youtube is no longer a place where people can get a message out. It is, just like every other place now, a bitch for the bigger organisations. It should be named ‘ViaTube’ or ‘WMGTube’. Whatever it should be called, Youtube is no longer about ‘You’. It is controlled, like everywhere else where people can express an opinion, by those in power.
But it was good while it lasted!
Also, Fred? 1 million subscribers for some voice changer software? Sod off!
