Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Sunday July 05 2020, @05:03PM   Printer-friendly
from the Broken-As-Designed? dept.

YouTube Hit With Class Action Lawsuit Over Copyright Enforcement, Repeat Infringer Policy * TorrentFreak

For many years, Google-owned YouTube has been wrestling with the vast amounts of copyright-infringing content being uploaded by users to its platform.

The challenge is met by YouTube by taking down content for which copyright holders file a legitimate infringement complaint under the DMCA. It also operates a voluntary system known as Content ID, which allows larger rightsholders to settle disputes by either blocking contentious content automatically at the point of upload or monetizing it to generate revenue.

A class action lawsuit filed Thursday in a California court by Grammy award-winning musician Maria Schneider tears apart YouTube’s efforts. It claims that the video-sharing platform fails on a grand scale to protect “ordinary creators” who are “denied any meaningful opportunity to prevent YouTube’s public display of works that infringe their copyrights — no matter how many times their works have previously been pirated on the platform.”

The 44-page complaint leaves no stone unturned, slamming YouTube as a platform designed from the ground up to draw in users with the lure of a “vast library” of pirated content and incentivizing the posting of even more material. YouTube then reaps the rewards via advertising revenue and exploitation of personal data at the expense of copyright holders who never gave permission for their work to be uploaded.

The lawsuit further criticizes YouTube for not only preventing smaller artists from accessing its Content ID system but denouncing the fingerprinting system itself, describing it as a mechanism used by YouTube to prevent known infringing users from being terminated from the site under the repeat infringer requirements of the DMCA.

The full complaint can be obtained here (pdf)


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Interesting) by legont on Sunday July 05 2020, @07:22PM (1 child)

    by legont (4179) on Sunday July 05 2020, @07:22PM (#1016596)

    Yes, and that availability test should be agressive. The work has to be available in most typical forms and with comparable for similar works prices. Say for books, just an ondemand print for ridiculous money is not enough to satisfy eligibility for copyright. A movie should be available on most platforms. If they are "rare" people should be free to publish and distribute them for free for the sake of human knowledge.

    --
    "Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +3  
       Interesting=3, Total=3
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Monday July 06 2020, @06:32PM

    by fustakrakich (6150) on Monday July 06 2020, @06:32PM (#1017223) Journal

    That is the idea behind compulsory licensing, to ensure access. It should be part and parcel to copyrights and patents so they can't be weaponized.

    --
    La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..