INDMUSIC Responds to False ContentID Claims with YouTube, TuneCore

[klaynexas3]

Dear 4chan, we have little use for YouTube anymore. Not that I'm condoning illegal activities, but if you're going to, there is little we can do to stop you, we just think that you should choose wisely what you want go after next.

Sincerely, Internet.

Please don't ever post such ridiculous and malevolent silliness again, kthx.

OT: Glad to see they're working on it. If every other company responds like this, we might be able to see the whole issue put straight.

I regret nothing of which I said and make no promises that I won't ever say something of the like again.

 

[lacktheknack]

Dear 4chan, we have little use for YouTube anymore. Not that I'm condoning illegal activities, but if you're going to, there is little we can do to stop you, we just think that you should choose wisely what you want go after next.

Sincerely, Internet.

Please don't ever post such ridiculous and malevolent silliness again, kthx.

OT: Glad to see they're working on it. If every other company responds like this, we might be able to see the whole issue put straight.

I regret nothing of which I said and make no promises that I won't ever say something of the like again.

In that case, I would encourage you to actually weigh the consequences of your proposals before you SAY them.

"Little use for YouTube", indeed. And screw everyone who has a job there, while we're at it.

 

[Strazdas]

"If a creator has permission to use a song and monetize their video, they need to state as much when disputing a video.

No. If the creator has a permission to use a song there should not even be a dispute to begin with unless you (and yes it is up to YOU) to prove otherwise. The creator should not have to prove anything to you, it is your responsibility to prove that he has no permission.

And that reason alone is why I dismiss those who defend youtube with "But this is the system they've had in place since ."

The scale of youtube is so great that full policing is just not feasible.
With automation, the number of false positives is overwhelming.
Without automation, it's more "wild west".

Its not a defense of youtube. Its like "we were telling you this for 3 years and only now you started caring".

I think I read somewhere that around 6000 hours of footage are uploaded to YouTube every day, so it would be nearly impossible to have real people check everything.

The way the system should work is the robot would flag the videos internally and real people would only watch those videos, or only parts of the videos that are flagged. this would lower that 6000 hours closer to 30 hours a day, meaning you could have 5 employees doing it easily.

Capcha: Fool's paradise
no, it is not.

 

[Atmos Duality]

Its not a defense of youtube. Its like "we were telling you this for 3 years and only now you started caring".

Except they weren't employing shotgun style "Guilty until proven innocent/Scorched Earth" policies for those previous 3 years before folks started "caring". Certainly not to this magnitude.

The parameters of the problem have changed drastically, not to the point where it's noticeable, but where it's impossible NOT to notice.

Youtube is the Sheriff of Nottingham, laying down the law of King John.

 

[Strazdas]

Its not a defense of youtube. Its like "we were telling you this for 3 years and only now you started caring".

Except they weren't employing shotgun style "Guilty until proven innocent/Scorched Earth" policies for those previous 3 years before folks started "caring". Certainly not to this magnitude.

The parameters of the problem have changed drastically, not to the point where it's noticeable, but where it's impossible NOT to notice.

Youtube is the Sheriff of Nottingham, laying down the law of King John.

Yes, they were. You would get flagged by a, say, MGM bot. automatically video gets locked and taken down from ppublic acess and you are guilty untill you prove Youtube you arent. The only thing that changed is that now they apply same logic to channels with monetization too, so once the people who make money on it started hurting everyone started screaming, but everyone else was already hurting, for years.

 

[Atmos Duality]

Yes, they were. You would get flagged by a, say, MGM bot. automatically video gets locked and taken down from ppublic acess and you are guilty untill you prove Youtube you arent. The only thing that changed is that now they apply same logic to channels with monetization too, so once the people who make money on it started hurting everyone started screaming, but everyone else was already hurting, for years.

You seem to have missed the part where I said "to this magnitude".
Before, their efforts were piecemeal and somewhat erratic; now they're rampant and widespread.

I knew about bots crawling for footage for years now, but not to this degree.

 

[Strazdas]

Yes, they were. You would get flagged by a, say, MGM bot. automatically video gets locked and taken down from ppublic acess and you are guilty untill you prove Youtube you arent. The only thing that changed is that now they apply same logic to channels with monetization too, so once the people who make money on it started hurting everyone started screaming, but everyone else was already hurting, for years.

You seem to have missed the part where I said "to this magnitude".
Before, their efforts were piecemeal and somewhat erratic; now they're rampant and widespread.

I knew about bots crawling for footage for years now, but not to this degree.

and i argue that it was the same magnitude, just excluding the monetized channels. They were rampand and widespread for years, but as long as they didnt touch peoples wallets noone cared that regular users were being banned (3 videos marked as copyright can easily get you a ban) just because somone angry with "atheist view" decided to flag all your videos or such. And yes, that was and still is happening.