Category: Technology Author : Duncan Riley Posted: January 24, 2009
Tags : copyright, DMCA, google, youtube
We’ve had some interesting run-ins with YouTube before over copyright. In December USA Today claimed copyright of a Digg demonstration video we uploaded, and given YouTube seemingly ignores complaints, USA Today to the best of our knowledge is still gaining revenue from a video that had nothing to do with them.
But usually copyright claims happen after a video is already on the site, with YouTube following the DMCA safe harbor provisions to take videos down that are subject to claims. But not any more.
We regularly receive pitches from various people, including reps for movie companies. On January 23 we received an email from one of our regular PR contacts (and we’re always grateful for the emails, even if we don’t always run them) for the upcoming film Sunshine Cleaning. The email included links to private downloads for the movie, including a trailer and poster. I downloaded the trailer this morning, ran it through iMovie for processing, then uploaded it to YouTube so we could run it on The Inquisitr. Note that the trailer had been sent so we could run it on the site, so we had permission to do so from an authorized representative of the copyright owner.
Imagine then my surprise that after the clip had finished prcoessing, YouTube immediately identified it as being in breach of copyright and didn’t allow it to go up.
I was then redirected to an option where by I could lodge a dispute to the claim; the end result in the picture above.
To YouTube’s credit the movie was quickly included again, but the process still begs the question: why has YouTube seemingly abandoned the DMCA process in favor of blocking material upfront, and automatically presuming that the uploader isn’t authorized to share the material?
No doubt the MPAA and RIAA will be happy with YouTube’s now authoritarian stance on copyright, but as a user it completely stinks, and offers no fair and due process in these matters. Once upon a time we would have expected better from Google/ YouTube, that’s obviously no longer case.
Jan 24, 2009
Yeah, I've been nabbed by YouTube as well. BS claims, one was approved by a PR team before hand but the legal team didn't get the memo. It was restored after going through the marketing director. Only to be taken down AGAIN a few months later. And we repeated the process of getting it back up. Never seen this occur at processing though – guess they're filtering/scanning for something. My latest run-in was a video that a contractor of a bigger firm claimed they own copyright on. Again, as a blogger i often work through PR and have no idea who the claimant is. But I didn't bother fighting it given the prior run arounds, they can stick their ad on my video (wasn't a takedown, they just want revenue).
HOWEVER, I'm now going to start hosting my own videos. I'm not enabling these bogus copyright and DMCA claims by letting them scan my YouTube stuff. Guilty until proven innocent? I think not. A claimant's going to have to find it on their own at my site and then decide how they want to proceed with a frivolous and likely inaccurate claim.
Jan 24, 2009
Your solution to host your own videos, while it won't give you the reach that YouTube gives you, looks like it will save you tons of hassle that will make it more than worth it. Not that it will completely shield you from frivolous claims, but at least when such a claim is filed, you won't have to go through issues with a “guilty until proven innocent” host. Dave, perhaps Duncan and others may eventually follow suit and host their own videos.