Switch to full style
Primary discussion forum. Also, feel free this use as a hangout for fans of the funny non-story based comics.
Post a reply

Youtube Copyright

Sun Oct 20, 2013 6:01 pm

This is something that has been on my mind for a long time, but I do not really have many people IRL to talk to that can be on level with me in terms of understanding. So for those who are on the internet a lot (or more specifically Youtube) will know about issues with Google's copyright system. So what I want to try and figure out is if the general public as a whole can do anything to adjust Google's copyright system through petition.

First thing is understanding what Google's approach to copyright is. These 3 pages explain the primary points to it:
1. Explanation of Copyright for Youtube
2. Explanation of Fair Use
3. Explanation of Content ID

Second, is identifying the issues with either the system or current day approach to copyright itself so that it can be adjusted:

1. In terms of Google's view on copyright, they are approaching this correctly for the most part. However, one part can be put into question with the section "Can Youtube Determine Copyright Ownership". Though it is correct for Google to not police given claims, they should still look into claims to assure legitimacy for the protection of the users. Currently when a copyright claim is given, it has certain elements of anonymity to which people can commit fraud safely with rights to content. Placing a counter claim is then impossible to push through as the anonymity can prevent the capability to settle in court. Also claims can be legitimate, but abused by the copyright holders themselves which can be settled in court, but puts into question if the current system gives the copyright holders too much power and the affects it can have on a person through Google's strike system.

2. In terms of Fair Use, it follows the law itself to which Google has no involvement from this point. This does make me ask though, with the advancement of technology, how the law should be amended to set standards of copyright in video sharing sites on the internet in general. Specifically with new methods of sharing content in the forms of "Let's Plays" and "Let's Watch". Is the content used within these videos considered protected by copyright? As of now, most likely they are. However, these methods of sharing content are similar to that of sharing a game or video you own with a friend except on a larger scale. The only difference being that uploaded content is monitored unlike the real world.

3. In terms of Content ID, Google meant well with the intention to protect copyrighted content. The unfortunate thing is the system works too well. With use of audio and video tracking, content that does not intentionally infringe can still be taken down with ease simply with how the system works. Music playing in the background? Can be tracked. Television in the background of vlog showing content? Can be tracked. Once these things are tracked, the copyright holders can have an automated system in place to determine what to do with the content. Certain companies are incredibly uptight about protecting copyrighted content to which they can choose to automatically take down videos tracked in mass. The companies do not even need to review the tracked videos, it just follows as they say for it to do. At the very least, the companies should review these tracked videos with public interest in mind.

So lastly, summarize what could be amended if such is possible to do so for not just Google, but also video sharing websites in general (except for Google's strike system as that would be company policy). Video sharing websites should be required to check legitimacy of companies and claims in case said company is fraudulent. Determine if certain new forms of content sharing (i.e. let's plays, let's watches, streaming content) would be protected under fair use. If protected by fair use, possibly consider further benefits to companies aside from content advertising such as gaining profit through advertisements on the video. When a company makes use of a content tracking program, companies will be required to check the tracked content to reassure if it is or is not rightfully protected through copyright laws.

Feel free to add your thoughts. As stated above, I am curious if what has been summarized is possible to petition into law. Video sharing on the internet is nearly 10 years old and politicians in many countries have been trying to consider how to approach copyright with the internet without harming the positive aspects that it brings. The unfortunate thing is most politicians do not understand the internet as well as the people who use it on a daily basis, so that is why it may be more beneficial for the general public to take a proactive approach.

Re: Youtube Copyright

Mon Oct 21, 2013 2:01 pm

Here's me hoping this isn't just another bit of the avalanche TB's video on Gary's Incident caused.

Also, educational:

Re: Youtube Copyright

Mon Oct 21, 2013 4:06 pm

It is not specifically TB's video that makes me think this. Though it did heighten my resolve to making this post. The copyright issue has been on my mind for quite a few years, but I never had anybody to share it with in general that would understand my point of view or to having a better understanding to either add/discredit factors brought up.

Re: Youtube Copyright

Tue Oct 22, 2013 10:38 am

I've always understood very well that "fair use" can't be applied to "let's plays" or "let's watch" because both of these things are displaying almost the entirety of the game's content.

My english fails me when i want to convey a point so i'll try to put it as simply as i understand it: If i make a cartoon that features, at some point, a short clip of Grand Theft Auto V displayed on a little tv somewhere, i am ok because possible Rockstar customers have yet to see the game in it's entirety and so they have a reason to buy the game, so Rockstar is able to make a profit, they don't bother me, everyone's cool.

If i make a let's play or whatever, however, people who watch it could have a reason NOT to buy the game. I often see comments in youtube about games that go somewhere along the lines of "If i already saw everything the game has to offer, why even bother buying it?" or a youtube comment or two going "Nah it's not worth to buy this game, just see a let's play on it or something". That's not cool at all, the people making these games need to eat too and some dudes damaging sales by showing the entirety of a game's content online are not helping. Sometimes people adopt this antagonistic attitude towards game developers because as a whole a company is a faceless monster. People take a bit to realize some dudes working there are plain humans. But i went off a tangent i think idk oh well bye.

Re: Youtube Copyright

Tue Oct 22, 2013 11:41 am

Very well put Mirak. Perhaps Let's Plays and Let's Watches do go too far unlike reviews and initial game play. It can be counter argued that it is free advertising, but if people only care about the content to not buy the game is indeed bad. Pretty much the best two examples I can give that support each point given:

Positive: My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic would not be as popular as it is today without the contributions that the internet gives.

Negative: The "why buy when it is on the internet" issue.

Though now that I think about it, with games that could be crap. Yes it sucks these people are not making ends meet for a living, but these different capabilities of giving potential buyers a straightforward understanding of how good something is prevents crappy games from becoming popular. Heck in the past prior internet, everything you would read was monetized to upsell a lot of crappy games.

Re: Youtube Copyright

Wed Oct 23, 2013 9:20 pm

As much as I don't like a lot of Let's Play videos (personally I prefer playthroughs without audio commentary), I can't necessarily think they are a deterrent to playing video games or even necessarily infringement. For instance, a playthrough can be used as a walkthrough that is more effective than reading an FAQ or following along with a strategy guide. There is an educational benefit there that makes the use more than fair, I'd argue.

My issue with YouTube's system is that not only does it too readily flag material, it often misidentifies that material as well, and there's no option to challenge the flag based on the objection their flag is wrong.

Re: Youtube Copyright

Sat Dec 14, 2013 7:32 am

Update on that. I think it has gotten worse...

Not cool. I hope they fix this or people might consider migrating to vimeo or blip-- or make another Youtube.

Mirak did make a point that when watching Let's Play vids, people might not think of buying the game since they can just watch it. I can also make the argument it can urge people to buy it since they have a taste what's like playing the game. And seeing and hearing the guy having a blast, they'll think that the game is worth buying.

Brutal Legends
Darksiders 2
Skyrim and mods
Shank 2
Walking Dead
AC: Brotherhood
AC: Revations
Max Payne 3

These are the game I bought after I watched the Let's plays or game commentaries. I find it silly that companies are so against it. It promotes the shit out of their games.

Re: Youtube Copyright

Sat Dec 14, 2013 1:53 pm

That makes three different threads where I've seen this video.

Anyway, unless a petition or something gets started (and I'm not even sure that would help), I'm not sure how the public's gonna make YouTube change this.

Re: Youtube Copyright

Sat Dec 14, 2013 2:04 pm

Kusang_Manalo wrote:people might not think of buying the game since they can just watch it.

Honestly if you're content with a game just from watching it, it's probably shit.

Also as expected of jewgle.

Re: Youtube Copyright

Sat Dec 14, 2013 2:52 pm

Google right now is at the stage where its abusing its monopoly and uncaring towards its users. We had a good few years but the gravy train is over, it's time to wait for the next startup.

And yeah if you're watching entire games online and letting that suffice, the game is either bad or you just can't afford it in the first place. Instead of companies thinking "Hey, that guy's making a lot of money, I want in on that, let's hire that guy or do some of our own stuff" they think "Wow that guy is stealing trillions of dollars from us, let's shut him down".

Re: Youtube Copyright

Sun Dec 15, 2013 2:50 am

There's not much buzz on Youtube channels making game or movie parodies. Were they able to dodge the bullet on this one? I guess this mess only greatly affects game reviewers(?)

More info from Ohmwrecker and Total Biscuit

Ohmwrecker blames Channels (i.e. Machinima or Maker etc.) for being irresponsible at managing their YT partners.

Some input from TotalBiscuit

Re: Youtube Copyright

Mon Dec 16, 2013 9:05 pm


SOURCE: https://twitter.com/Jonathan_Blow/statu ... 3873858561

Re: Youtube Copyright

Tue Dec 17, 2013 9:50 am

That's pretty hilarious. What the hell is Google doing? There hasn't been a peep out of them on how are they going to fix. They keep on adding shit Youtube. Now they fused my youtube account with google + even more by changing the name of my Youtube account to my g+ name. Do they really give a shit?

Re: Youtube Copyright

Tue Dec 17, 2013 12:29 pm

Google abuses all of it's users all they want. Sooner or later a different video sharing website will rise up, then get bought out by google again.

Re: Youtube Copyright

Sat Dec 28, 2013 5:38 am

Remember that ad campaign before, promoting adblocker apps?

Would it sting Google if enough people blacklist youtube or any google-related product in their adblock in protest? Petitions didn't seem to do anything in this fiasco we're getting.
Post a reply