
Gameloft took down Marvel's SpiderMan trailer (11M views) with a copyright claim - 101008
https://www.reddit.com/r/PS5/comments/hcj9hx/gameloft_has_taken_down_marvels_spiderman_miles/
======
slg
There are no real details at the Reddit link (at the time of posting). As best
I can surmise, Gameloft has the exclusive license to mobile Spider-Man games
while Sony has the exclusive license to Spider-Man on home consoles. There was
probably some automated process either with Gameloft or Youtube that was setup
specifically to enforce that exclusive mobile license and accidentally caught
the trailer for the Sony game.

This will likely get fixed quickly, but it highlights the stupidity of
Youtube's copyright system and how leaving it up to the algorithms generates
new problems that can only be fixed by humans. The humans will obviously be
quick to react when it is a video uploaded by Sony with 11M views. How quickly
will they react when your or my videos are inappropriately taken down?

~~~
prox
If anyone from Google YT is reading this : when is this ridiculous system
going to change?

On a similar note : Why is it so hard to license music for small use,
especially if you are _willing to pay_ for small audiences use / non-
commercial use?

~~~
kmeisthax
The system was imposed upon them by 1) licensing agreements with major content
companies and 2) EU Copyright Directive Article 17.

Actually, EUCD17 is a bit more insidious: it's a sliding scale of "best
practices", which means that when content companies demand a better system of
one licensee, every other player in the space (regardless of if they do
business with that licensee) loses their liability protection until they meet
that licensee's standard. That's how they were able to get away with claiming
it didn't have upload filters: they just made it so that a court could point
to YouTube and say "why aren't you as good as YouTube in taking things down"?

~~~
zamalek
Another problem with the YT system (EUCD17) is that it is not a legal system.
At least under DCMA (which Content ID pre-empts), you could seek legal damages
for false claims.

If Google wants to continue with Content ID, the fix is easy: hold ad money in
escrow until their entire dispute process is complete (from the initial flag).
This will prevent the ad money piracy that is so rampant on the platform right
now.

~~~
doh
> Another problem with the YT system (EUCD17) is that it is not a legal
> system.

You are misinformed. YT System has nothing to do with the EUCD17 which is not
yet active. CID was built 12 years ago to get out of the Viacom lawsuit.

EUCD17 (or more precisely its implementations) are laws that you can actually
sue under. They have concrete obligations (licensing, alternative dispute
resolution, ...) and concrete penalties for misbehavior.

In fact, as it stands, YouTube's Content ID is not going to be complaint with
the requirements of the EUCD17.

~~~
zamalek
> You are misinformed.

Thanks for the correction. I was under the impression that it was more in
alignment with European legislature.

------
CaliforniaKarl
For everyone asking "Why is YouTube's copyright system like it is? When is it
going to change?", I suggest watching Tom Scott's video "YouTube's Copyright
System Isn't Broken. The World's Is.":
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Jwo5qc78QU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Jwo5qc78QU)

~~~
carapace
(Who is this guy? The youtube comments on that video don't suck.)

~~~
enzanki_ars
Tom Scott is an educational YouTuber that teaches people about a wide range of
interesting topics, and there is a reason why his main series is called
"Things You Might Not Know." He always ensures that his content is short and
to the point, all while maximizing the amount of thoroughly researched
information. Funny enough, the video linked regarding copyright is actually
one of his more unique projects with a much longer run time and higher
production value. Tom Scott is one YouTuber in a small set that I would
recommend everybody checkout to learn something cool.

~~~
iso947
Like Nigel Farage he stood for parliament and failed to get in - in Tom’s case
it was due to a split in the pirate vote, as “Mad Capn Tom” was ip against the
Pirate Party

------
_bxg1
This brings up an interesting question: could YouTube be forced to fix its
abuse-ridden copyright system by having individuals spam major companies'
videos with bogus takedown requests?

~~~
mirimir
Wild guess: Google would just respond by nuking accounts of those submitting
bogus takedown requests.

