

YouTube Alters Copyright Algorithms, Will ‘Manually’ Review Some Claims - lnguyen
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/10/youtube-copyright-algorithm/

======
magicalist
Yeah, the Ars Technica article is far better.

[http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/10/youtube-
finally-o...](http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/10/youtube-finally-
offers-a-meaningful-contentid-appeal-process/)

The improvements to the content ID algorithm and occasional manual review of
those is all well and good, but the _far_ more important change here (as TimNN
says) is to the counterclaim process. Before, you had the situation where the
only person judging whether or not your counterclaim was valid was the very
company that lodged the claim, which is ridiculous (and even if a company is
not malicious, they could very well be lazy and just issue blanket denials of
counterclaims).

A counterclaim now no longer goes into a black hole, but actually reinstates
the video. If a company wants to counter your counterclaim, they then have to
file a real DMCA takedown notice, with the normal DMCA process after that.

~~~
fpgeek
Yes, but there is an important caveat here...

YouTube has a "three strikes" policy with respect to DMCA takedown notices
(which doesn't seem to take the result of the takedown into account), so if
you dispute too many bogus ContentID claims you could lose your YouTube
account.

So I guess the next change to push for is that users should only get a
"strike" if the claimant actually sues after a counter-notification (or
something like that).

~~~
s_henry_paulson
Just because someone sues you, does not necessarily mean it is justified.

~~~
fpgeek
True, but it would be a step in the right direction.

------
raldi
> First Lady Michelle Obama’s speech at the Democratic National Convention was
> wrongly flagged by algorithms just after it aired

No it wasn't.

[http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2012/09/05/michelle_...](http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2012/09/05/michelle_obama_dnc_speech_why_did_youtube_flag_it_for_copyright_infringement_.html)

There's always a delay between the end of a livestream and the point where you
can watch the prerecorded video. In this case, YouTube merely displayed the
wrong error message during that delay.

------
TimNN
I think the best part is: "Under the new rules announced Wednesday, however,
if the uploader challenges the [Content ID] match, the alleged rights holder
must abandon I'D [copyright] claim or file an official takedown notice under
the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.", as this will probably lead to content
owners more carefully reviewing videos and also gives users a much better way
to appeal a copyright claim.

~~~
MrMember
It also thankfully gets rid of companies claiming they can't be punished for
illegitimate takedowns because they weren't done through the DMCA. Until they
find some other loophole to hide behind, of course.

------
sown
Ever since my favorite Youtube Channel, SFDebris, moved to another video site
after having been wrongfully flagged twice for copyright violation, I've been
hoping that 'fair use' would be included.

------
klausjensen
But isn't it still without consequence to file a false claim? I feel like
there should be some sort of "punishment" to filing a false claim, whether
done out of stupidity or malice.

~~~
NegativeK
The DMCA stipulates punishments for malicious claims, but not stupid ones.
Proving malice would be pretty hard.

Super downside? YouTube's takedown process is a precursor to official DMCA
takedowns, so the DMCA punishment doesn't apply until a formal DMCA takedown
is lodged.

------
Zenst
Good to hear having read many cases of somebody filming themselfs, uploading
and finding somebody claiming copyright automagicaly against there video.

Be interesting to see how such situations improve.

