YouTube's content ID system. AGAIN.

@PJH said:
@blakeyrat said:
@PJH said:
@blakeyrat said:
I DO NOT CARE IF PEOPLE DOWNLOAD MY VIDEOS AND WATCH THEM OFFLINE.
So why do you complain when people download your videos and watch them offline?

I never did that.

Yes you did.

@blakeyrat said:
I don't recall giving you permission to download them and YouTube sure as fuck didn't.

Have a relevant quote?

People: blakey doesn't care if people download his videos, he cares when they do it without asking him for permission.

You know, the same as when you have sex with his mom.

Ben L.

I have a strange feeling blakeyrat lives in a different universe where Lotus Notes is a brand of potato chips.

ASheridan

@blakeyrat said:

I DO NOT CARE IF PEOPLE DOWNLOAD MY VIDEOS AND WATCH THEM OFFLINE.

Then what the hell is your problem? You say you only care that he didn't ask your permission. Get over it. Did the world end? No. Did anything bad happen? No. Was your ego hurt a little bit because something you felt you had control over was actually never under your control in the first place? Probably, yes.

Either way, at the end of the day, it's not something any normal person would spend time getting in such a state about.

Lorne Kates

@Ben L. said:

I have a strange feeling blakeyrat lives in a different universe where Lotus Notes is a brand of potato chips.

You mean instead of a shitty email program forced upon unsuspecting workers? That would be a beautiful universe.

...

Unless you like potato chips, I guess. Because I bet they're made out of yams. They come in a perfectly round celophane/foil bag with no pull-tab opening (though, you'd know how to properly open one of them, if you listened to your Lotus Chips rep during the fourth hour of Bag Opening training). When you do finally open them (most likely with a hammer), they come out of the bag in sharp, intestine shredding shards. That's not because you broke them opening the bag. That's how they were baked. Of course, you can glue back together using a 3rd party corn-starch solution. Oh, and if you try to eat them while watching a movie, they instantly absorb all the moisture in the surrounding air, and melt into a soggy mass. You could eat them with a straw, but when they decompose, they release all that sulphur vapor they've been holding in.

And for sure, I don't want to live in the universe where Linux is a brand of potato chips. All you get is an empty burlap sack. Then you have to drive to Idaho to pick your own potato, then to Florida to evaporate some sea water for salt, then finally to California to press your own olives for oil. When it comes to cooking, I bet you've been spoiled by one of those brain dead, hand-holding deep fryers, right? n00b, needing a shiny (working) tool to do a job for you. Strap a cast-iron dutch oven to your engine block, of course!

boomzilla

@Lorne Kates said:

And for sure, I don't want to live in the universe where Linux is a brand of potato chips. All you get is an empty burlap sack. Then you have to drive to Idaho to pick your own potato, then to Florida to evaporate some sea water for salt, then finally to California to press your own olives for oil.

TRWTF is trying to deep fry something with olive oil.

Lorne Kates

@boomzilla said:

@Lorne Kates said:
And for sure, I don't want to live in the universe where Linux is a brand of potato chips. All you get is an empty burlap sack. Then you have to drive to Idaho to pick your own potato, then to Florida to evaporate some sea water for salt, then finally to California to press your own olives for oil.

TRWTF is trying to deep fry something with olive oil.

Linux chips don't support anything with a smoke point over 375. Just manually regulate the tempurature in your engine block. You may need to get a different driver. You'll probably bork your first few dozen batches, have to dump the chips and oil and start from scratch, but that's just because you didn't know what you were doing.

blakeyrat

@ASheridan said:

Then what the hell is your problem?

I've explained the problem 8 krajillion times. Nobody ever reads and/or understands the explanation.

antiquarian

@Lorne Kates said:

Unless you like potato chips, I guess. Because I bet they're made out of yams.

Some grocery stores do sell potato chips made from yams. They're in the health food section and are quite tasty.

boomzilla

@blakeyrat said:

@ASheridan said:
Then what the hell is your problem?

I've explained the problem 8 krajillion times. Nobody ever reads and/or understands the explanation.

Some people would consider that when they believe they have explained something thoroughly and repeatedly, but so that no one understands, the problem might lie with the explanation and / or the explainer. Some people.

From what I've read (but only about 6.5 krajillion times, by my estimate, to be fair), blakeyrat is upset by what he believes to be Cassidy's ill manners, and that if Cassidy had asked blakeyrat if blakeyrat was OK with Cassidy violating Youtube's TOS (which according to Youtube, blakeyrat cannot do, unless he is somehow able to make the magic download button appear on the Youtube page), then blakeyrat would consider Cassidy to have acted honorably towards blakeyrat, and he would not have gotten upset.

antiquarian

@blakeyrat said:

@ASheridan said:
Then what the hell is your problem?

I've explained the problem 8 krajillion times. Nobody ever reads and/or understands the explanation.

Relevant quote:

@boomzilla said:

(and it's almost always fun to poke at blakey when he gets worked up about something like this)

Lorne Kates

@PedanticCurmudgeon said:

@Lorne Kates said:
Unless you like potato chips, I guess. Because I bet they're made out of yams.
Some grocery stores do sell potato chips made from yams. They're in the health food section and are quite tasty.

Granted, I should have said something like rhubarb-- or apple cores-- or mechanically separated dog feces. But the fact remains, if you buy potato chips, you want them to be made out of potatoes for the taste, color, consistency, texture, etc. There's nothing wrong with yam chips, if your recipe and cooking process is tailored to yam chips. But you can't just (presumably) substitute yams for potatoes 1:1 and get the exact same results. And in any case, if you buy potato chips, you expect potatoes, no matter how much IBM says that no one got fired for using yams.

(Sidenote: just spent a week being the chef at a cottage where one person was Celiac. I'd modified all the recipes to be gluten free. You can make GF waffles, crepes and deep fried fish with modifications, but not by substituting 1:1 regular flour for GF flour. And if that doesn't make sense, then screw you with a humorless yam)

antiquarian

It makes sense. I'd just rather talk about food than complain about Lotus Notes.

boomzilla

@PedanticCurmudgeon said:

It makes sense. I'd just rather talk about food than complain about Lotus Notes.

That's fair. But a car analogy would have been much better.

Xyro

@boomzilla said:

That's fair. But a car analogy would have been much better.

Oh, hey, speaking of cars, I was playing a video game the other day that involved using a car. You'd be in the car and driving around and doing stuff. It was pretty fun. Have you guys played this one?

Lorne Kates

@PedanticCurmudgeon said:

It makes sense. I'd just rather talk about food than complain about Lotus Notes.

Me too.

Since I mentioned it, the GF flour substitute I use is:

2 cups rice flour
2/3 cup potato starch (NOT potato flour)
1/3 cup tapioca starch

You can pretty much substitute 1:1 for flour in any recipe. If you are making something that will be more glutenous (ie: lots of stirring, or should be using bread flour), add 1 teaspoon of xanthum gum for each cup of flour.

Works great for crepes, gravies, etc. Breads turn out good, a bit on the thick side, and missing a bit of that yeasty flavor. Haven't quite nailed that one yet.

Lorne Kates

@Xyro said:

@boomzilla said:
That's fair. But a car analogy would have been much better.
Oh, hey, speaking of cars, I was playing a video game the other day that involved using a car. You'd be in the car and driving around and doing stuff. It was pretty fun. Have you guys played this one?

Tetris, right? Fun game, especially the hacking minigame. I was sad they changed it in the sequel.

ASheridan

@blakeyrat said:

@ASheridan said:
Then what the hell is your problem?

I've explained the problem 8 krajillion times. Nobody ever reads and/or understands the explanation.

And clearly you have a reading problem, as the rest of my post fully explained the point of what I was trying to get across. I'll try and say it another way:

"Why the hell are you still bitching about something that is totally outside of your control and has absolutely no affect on you whatsoever?"

I understood what your problem was. It's not that someone downloaded your videos, I get that. We all fucking get that. But you're still whining about how nobody understands you. You want people to ask for your permission, that's fine. The thing is, it's not likely to ever happen is it? Move on, you can't change the situation.

And if you still want to whine, think about it like this. It's human nature to share things. You're sharing things on YouTube. That's cool. People like that kind of thing. The average Joe doesn't make a huge distinction between watching something in a browser or downloading it to watch later with something else. As there's no real distinction in Joe's mind, they don't think to ask permission. To them, watching is watching. Doesn't matter where it is. Why would one form of watching need permission? For Joe, there is no need to ask for permission. They are just watching a video clip, that's it.

There, I've broken it all up into small, manageable chunks for you to read, and I've tried not to use big words, as apparently actually reading someones reply seems to be tricky for you.

Oh, and as an added bonus, those YouTube terms and conditions are largely unenforceable, prescedent is here: http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120907/15424120313/barnes-nobles-web-terms-service-not-enforceable-without-evidence-that-they-were-seen.shtml The terms are pretty much there to make people like you happy thinking they have some modicum of control over their content.

blakeyrat

@ASheridan said:

And clearly you have a reading problem, as the rest of my post fully explained the point of what I was trying to get across.

I didn't read the rest as you made it obvious in your first sentence that you didn't get it. If you don't bother to read my posts, I'm not going to bother to read yours.

FrostCat

@blakeyrat said:

Which is one of the reasons I want to stop discussing this because people obviously aren't reading what I type and so there's no point in my typing it and I don't like wasting my time

And yet you keep coming here. I am beginning to thing you're not really here for the hunting.

dhromed

@boomzilla said:

blakeyrat is upset by what he believes to be Cassidy's ill manners, and that if Cassidy had asked blakeyrat if blakeyrat was OK with Cassidy violating Youtube's TOS (which according to Youtube, blakeyrat cannot do, unless he is somehow able to make the magic download button appear on the Youtube page), then blakeyrat would consider Cassidy to have acted honorably towards blakeyrat, and he would not have gotten upset.

Ah, there is clarity in your observation, boomzilla-sama

dhromed

@FrostCat said:

I am beginning to thing you're not really here for the hunting.

The veal and sushi are delightful.

ASheridan

@blakeyrat said:

@ASheridan said:
And clearly you have a reading problem, as the rest of my post fully explained the point of what I was trying to get across.

I didn't read the rest as you made it obvious in your first sentence that you didn't get it. If you don't bother to read my posts, I'm not going to bother to read yours.

I guess that works both ways. What's that, you're a blubbering buffon who lives in his mothers basement? Why would you tell us that? I'm not sure what that has to do with anything on this thread.

Things get fun when I really don't bother reading your posts!

Daniel_Beardsmore

Here's my computer analogy:

boolean canIdownload = BlakeyRat::getPermission(f);

boolean BlakeyRat::getPermission(File requestedFile) {
    return true;
}

It's a no-op, but if the optimising compiler inlines the function, the CPU catches fire. The purpose of this method is completely unknown.

Medinoc

In Blakeyrat's defense, there is such thing as a difference between "permission is always granted" and "permission need not be sought".

Part of that difference is basic politeness.

boomzilla

@Medinoc said:

In Blakeyrat's defense, there is such thing as a difference between "permission is always granted" and "permission need not be sought".

Part of that difference is basic politeness.

This is true. I think my favorite part of this mini-drama is that Cassidy mentioned what he was doing on blakeyrat's original thread announcing the videos.

Of course, the other aspect is that it's obviously not obvious that permission was ever required or desired. I doubt that anyone here ever read the Youtube TOS before this meltdown, and blakey obviously wanted people to watch his videos. Also, given his previous non-reaction to this action, it's clear that this was just a recursive tantrum when he was already upset about something else. Of course, now that he's rationalized it, he can't back down, and since it doesn't really make sense to begin with, he's done explaining it and can act all put out about how no one understands the torured artiste who sees the world so purely that philistines such as inhabit this fallen forum cannot possibly relate.

In case you doubt any of this: @blakeyrat said:

@Cassidy said:
Currently downloading the HD versions now!
Thanks.

I guess a pedantic dickweed could argue that this was neither a request nor a grant of permission. An asshole wouldn't apologize for being such a dick.

In conclusion. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Daniel_Beardsmore

@Medinoc said:

In Blakeyrat's defense, there is such thing as a difference between "permission is always granted" and "permission need not be sought".
Part of that difference is basic politeness.

It's a no-op. This whole "politeness" thing is a rule BlakeyRat made up inside his own head. Even if people are violating YouTube's terms, it doesn't mean that the uploader has to agree with YouTube's stance and that they can't turn a blind eye (since it's not their problem anyway – it's between YouTube and the visitor, unless they do agree fully with YouTube). One of the problems with rules and laws is that they're absolute: you can't have leeway without loopholes, and you can't convict anyone if a law is merely a suggestion.

I go by the basis of harm done, not legalistic obsession.

dhromed

@Daniel Beardsmore said:

It's a no-op.

You're not a robot.

ASheridan

@Daniel Beardsmore said:

@Medinoc said:
In Blakeyrat's defense, there is such thing as a difference between "permission is always granted" and "permission need not be sought".
Part of that difference is basic politeness.

It's a no-op. This whole "politeness" thing is a rule BlakeyRat made up inside his own head. Even if people are violating YouTube's terms, it doesn't mean that the uploader has to agree with YouTube's stance and that they can't turn a blind eye (since it's not their problem anyway – it's between YouTube and the visitor, unless they do agree fully with YouTube). One of the problems with rules and laws is that they're absolute: you can't have leeway without loopholes, and you can't convict anyone if a law is merely a suggestion.

I go by the basis of harm done, not legalistic obsession.

The thing is, you can watch videos on YouTube without ever having read their terms, so they become unenforceable. The link I posted above shows a legal precedent for this. And even if the terms were enforceable, they are between YouTube and the visitor as you mentioned, so getting permission from Blakeyrat is still not required, because that's not in YouTubes terms (which do have to be agreed to before uploading videos). The only thing Blakey is miffed about is that he wasn't asked first, despite him not needing to be, and the fact that asking would not have had any affect on the outcome. It's just Blakey being Blakey, having a good moan about something which doesn't really matter and largely exists in his head.

Daniel_Beardsmore

@dhromed said:

@Daniel Beardsmore said:
It's a no-op.

You're not a robot.

I am too!

dhromed

@Daniel Beardsmore said:

@dhromed said:
@Daniel Beardsmore said:
It's a no-op.

You're not a robot.

I am too!

I dare you to fail this turing test.

Medinoc

Politeness is in people's heads now?

Damn, I thought this site was The Daily WTF, not /b/.

ASheridan

@Medinoc said:

Politeness is in people's heads now?
Damn, I thought this site was The Daily WTF, not /b/.

This isn't a question of politeness though, it was all about Cassidy watching them in a more convenient way. I don't think any reasonable person would expect this to require permission or the need to ask at all. It's pretty much a case of fair use, but Blakey somehow thinks he's entitled to remain in the loop once he puts his videos onto a 3rd-party website. The ironic thing is, the organisations that share this sort of viewpoint (about requiring permission to format switch, note that's the permission and not the actual format switch itself) are the very same ones that are beyhind his recent problems with YouTube locking his account...

boomzilla

@ASheridan said:

This isn't a question of politeness though, it was all about Cassidy watching them in a more convenient way for which blakeyrat had previously registered approval. I don't think any reasonable person would expect this to require permission or the need to ask ~~at all~~ more than once.

FTFY

Daniel_Beardsmore

@dhromed said:

I dare you to fail this turing test.

Error: Turing test not found in HASH(0x35c1c) ( 304191) at human.pl line 19048.

@blakeyrat said:

I DO NOT CARE IF PEOPLE DOWNLOAD MY VIDEOS AND WATCH THEM OFFLINE.

Except, that isn't true. In that very same post you said: @blakeyrat said:

It doesn't matter what he was doing with them, it only matters that he didn't have permission to do it and didn't bother asking me for permission.

and@blakeyrat said:

the thing I'm upset about is not being asked for permission

So, in reality, your true position is -- I DO NOT CARE WHAT PEOPLE DO WITH MY VIDEOS, BUT I DEMAND THAT YOU GET MY PERMISSION BEFORE YOU DO ANYTHING.

We get it. You keep claiming that nobody gets what you are saying, but we do. It's you who don't get it. Insisting that people must have your permission to do something might be technically correct, and if you were running some sort of business or somehow trying to make money from your videos, then it would be understandable that you would be mad if someone used one of your videos without permission. However, considering that there is no money involved and that you have said several times that it's not about the money, then you're just being a dick.

Lorne Kates

@Daniel Beardsmore said:

@dhromed said:
I dare you to fail this turing test.

Error: Turing test not found in HASH(0x35c1c) ( 304191) at human.pl line 19048.

Heehee, I love it, but I want to make sure you do too. How does "Error: Turing test not found in HASH(0x35c1c) ( 304191) at human.pl line 19048." make you feel?

bgodot

I would try contacting the game company.

Having a third party company block reviews of my game by claiming that they own the copyrights to it would have me calling my lawyer.

"Slander of Title" I think is the legal term.

Daniel_Beardsmore

@Lorne Kates said:

Heehee, I love it, but I want to make sure you do too. How does "Error: Turing test not found in HASH(0x35c1c) ( 304191) at human.pl line 19048." make you feel?

Like a robot who's being seduced by another bot – bot-on-bot action … Except I am not fully functional like Mr Data is.

Cbuttius

My music is on youtube. They've never sent me a single penny for those who watch my own stuff. Not that I've had that many hits, but my recording name is Grimbitch.

They did put a "content ID" on my "Don't Panic" video. Scrappy Hood of Milk Kan who wrote the song is up on stage with me. And he was drunk and forgot most of the words and it was unrehearsed.

The main reason for putting all my own music on there is the first step to ensuring it remains eternal, and lives on after my death. There is no intention whatsoever to make any money from it, although if I did, that would obviously be a bonus. And if anyone else made any money off it, I would rightly expect my cut for being the composer.

Lorne Kates

What the hell is up with the crazy floating half-highlighted double text? What chat program are you using, and what exactly is the correct dosage of acid it needs?

@Daniel Beardsmore said:

Daniel_Beardsmore

@Lorne Kates said:

What the hell is up with the crazy floating half-highlighted double text? What chat program are you using, and what exactly is the correct dosage of acid it needs?

ICQ 3 for Mac – haven't used that in eight years. At the very top-right where it says “toocooltoquit”, the erratic letter spacing indicates that it's the Carbon version (using ATSUI to render text, and Mac OS 9 doesn't support fractional character sizes or positions, plus ATSUI in Mac OS 9 would apply smart quotes everywhere it shouldn't, such as to screen names and HTML source).

I had tried to select the text to copy it (TRWTF) and it threw a wobbly. I break everything – thinking about school IT, I was once playing with the Folio WYSIWYG word processor for the BBC Micro (old 8-bit machine) during lunchbreak at school. I don't know what keys I hit, but the program got really confused and pooed itself all over the disk and died. The teacher wasn't best pleased. 8-bit software tended to be very robust – Folio brought about the dawn of the Third Age of mankind, the year that software became too complicated to function properly.

OhNoDevelopment

@blakeyrat said:

I think I have the whole story figured out now. So a Comcast show named "X-PLAY" reviewed this game and showed a portion of that cutscene. (Since the cutscene is the only thing in the video not from my moving camera viewpoint.) That alone isn't enough to ding my YT account.

BUT! There are 3 other claims active in my account, not because they're "active" but because the copyright holder is sitting on them and has been for a week. So combined that gives 4 claims which is above the threshold for YouTube to ding the account.
The bigger problem is at the moment my choices are to either:
1) Delete episode 7 of Saints Row until one of those companies stops sitting on the copyright claim
2) Not upload any new Robots in the News until the ding goes away (virtually all our episodes are longer than 15 minutes)
3) Continue to struggle to get a human being to look at this situation and do something about it. The claim by CollegeHumor is obviously trash; and if the "review of the game" theory is true so is the claim by Comcast. If those were thrown out by an actual human, I'd be back in shape
4) Get pissed off, toss everything off YT, move to another video hosting service that doesn't suck shit (if one exists)
So anyway. I have no clue what to do.

I want to see you start counter-claiming copyright on your videos. Copyright trolling is the best trolling.

Zecc

Goddammit, YouTube's content id.

Michael Zhang / Aug 26, 2021

UMG Seems to Think it Copyrighted the Moon

Filmmaker Philip Bloom was surprised when UMG claimed copyright to a generic moon video he shot and uploaded to Facebook.

Except this was Facebook.

Steve_The_Cynic

@Zecc said in YouTube's content ID system. AGAIN.:

Goddammit, YouTube's content id.

Michael Zhang / Aug 26, 2021

UMG Seems to Think it Copyrighted the Moon

Filmmaker Philip Bloom was surprised when UMG claimed copyright to a generic moon video he shot and uploaded to Facebook.

Except this was Facebook.

Well, that, and also that he's an idiot. He seems to think that the complaint was because it was a picture of something that UMG had copyright over (the Moon, except that they don't have copyright over it, yes, I know), but my guess is that it was a complaint that he had copied their picture / video of the moon rather than taking his own that merely looked like theirs.

boomzilla

@Steve_The_Cynic said in YouTube's content ID system. AGAIN.:

@Zecc said in YouTube's content ID system. AGAIN.:

Goddammit, YouTube's content id.

Michael Zhang / Aug 26, 2021

UMG Seems to Think it Copyrighted the Moon

Filmmaker Philip Bloom was surprised when UMG claimed copyright to a generic moon video he shot and uploaded to Facebook.

Except this was Facebook.

Well, that, and also that he's an idiot. He seems to think that the complaint was because it was a picture of something that UMG had copyright over (the Moon, except that they don't have copyright over it, yes, I know), but my guess is that it was a complaint that he had copied their picture / video of the moon rather than taking his own that merely looked like theirs.

Eh...I think he was making a joke about that since he knew he shot the video himself.

Zecc

Google Drive Flags Text Files With "1" or "0" As Copyright Infringements * TorrentFreak

Google Drive's algorithms are flagging text files that only contain a "1" or "0" as copyright infringements.

loopback0

@Zecc

GitHub - dikey0ficial/zero: If Google Drive says that 1 is under copyright, 0 must be under copyleft

If Google Drive says that 1 is under copyright, 0 must be under copyleft - dikey0ficial/zero

Tsaukpaetra

@Daniel_Beardsmore said in YouTube's content ID system. AGAIN.:

I had tried to select the text to copy it (TRWTF) and it threw a wobbly. I break everything – thinking about school IT, I was once playing with the Folio WYSIWYG word processor for the BBC Micro (old 8-bit machine) during lunchbreak at school. I don't know what keys I hit, but the program got really confused and pooed itself all over the disk and died. The teacher wasn't best pleased. 8-bit software tended to be very robust – Folio brought about the dawn of the Third Age of mankind, the year that software became too complicated to function properly.

Things that remind you of TDWTF members...

sh_code

@blakeyrat try sending the mail again, except start it by full (textual) quotation of the content id notification.
and add some more "contentId" into the email text.
and a few "dmca", just for good measure.

and two or three more "fuck you, you fucking fucks", just to make us at tdwtf happy.

good luck

sh_code

@blakeyrat said in YouTube's content ID system. AGAIN.:

Get pissed off, toss everything off YT, move to another video hosting service that doesn't suck shit (if one exists)

... rumble? as i understand they also have video monetization now, and they also still have youtube auto-sync