YouTube announces ContentID escrow "soon", a feature that should have been there DAY ONE those fuckers
-
Seriously.
How was this not in-place on day one? And still no delivery date promise. "The coming months" my ass.
The team also restricts feature access and even terminates a partner’s access to Content ID tools if we find they are repeatedly abusing these tools.
BULLSHIT.
That might be what they are supposed to be doing. But saying they are doing it is a flat-out lie.
-
Isn't this the thing that I said they should do and everyone yelled at me for saying?
-
Even though Content ID claims are disputed less than 1% of the time
+
As of July 2015, there are 8,000+ partners using Content ID — including many major network broadcasters, movie studios and record labels — who have claimed over 400 million videos, helping them control their content on YouTube and make money on videos containing copyrighted material.
=
Only 4 million videos were wrongly accused of copyright violations as of July 2015.
-
@ben_lubar said in YouTube announces ContentID escrow "soon", a feature that should have been there DAY ONE those fuckers:
Isn't this the thing that I said they should do and everyone yelled at me for saying?
Probably not, since it's the common-sense thing they should have been doing since day one.
-
@ben_lubar said in YouTube announces ContentID escrow "soon", a feature that should have been there DAY ONE those fuckers:
Only 4 million videos were wrongly accused of copyright violations as of July 2015.
Wow, the way they worded that 1% thing just makes me angry. Yes, it is 1% but that's a huge number of videos. Also considering the number of false claims that people don't dispute, as @ben_lubar points out below, they're really just trying to hide the faults in their system.
-
@LB_ I would like to clarify my statement to
Only 4 million videos were caught being wrongly accused of copyright violations as of July 2015.
-
Everything Thats Wrong With Youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vjXNvLDkDTA
Hmm no onebox for YouTube?
@blakeyrat said in YouTube announces ContentID escrow "soon", a feature that should have been there DAY ONE those fuckers:
"The coming months" my ass.
Yeah they should listen to blakey with 10 views per month (seriously, sneak in some boobs in a frame and use it as thumbnail to get more views), that is how to prioritize their free service
-
@dse It's not just to steal money from people when they win a conflict over ownership. By definition, if they win, that money was owed to them from the first place.
I don't monetize my videos on purpose; I give no shits about making money on YouTubes. But for people who do, what YouTube was doing was grossly unfair and unethical.
-
Because groups like Channel Awesome's website aren't primarily using YouTube, even though they upload to YouTube.
What changed is that YouTube has now started to lose the trust of viewers like me. For channels I really like, I just go to their homepage first now. That way if YouTube takes down their video, I can still watch it. And guess what Channel Awesome isn't using on their site...
-
@xaade said in YouTube announces ContentID escrow "soon", a feature that should have been there DAY ONE those fuckers:
And guess what Channel Awesome isn't using on their site...
I hope it's that shitty "magic gun" that Doug Walker used to shit out every ten seconds.
-
@blakeyrat said in YouTube announces ContentID escrow "soon", a feature that should have been there DAY ONE those fuckers:
It's not just to steal money from people when they win a conflict over ownership. By definition, if they win, that money was owed to them from the first place.
I tried to watch the video, but the notification from your next post killed the video and won't let me view it again.
From what I can tell, the monetization stopped, but was also handed over to the person contesting during the contest. And even when the channel won, that monetization wasn't redirected back to the channel because YouTube already paid that money out to someone else (rather than... I don't know... holding ONTO IT..... )
@#$&@# mother fucking ^^@# ^@#$^
So, it's stupid both ways.
- You put in a contest and win. You only get the monetization from the point of the claim forward.
- Someone contests your video. Your monetization stops, and the other person keeps if it they claim, and you never get that back, even if you win a counter claim later on. Your monetization simply starts back up after you win the counter claim.
So, who gets fucked? It's not the person that wins.... it's the smallest person.
And that's the problem with YouTube.
The smallest person ALWAYS LOSES.
-
@ben_lubar said in YouTube announces ContentID escrow "soon", a feature that should have been there DAY ONE those fuckers:
Even though Content ID claims are disputed less than 1% of the time
+
As of July 2015, there are 8,000+ partners using Content ID — including many major network broadcasters, movie studios and record labels — who have claimed over 400 million videos, helping them control their content on YouTube and make money on videos containing copyrighted material.
=
Only 4 million videos were wrongly accused of copyright violations as of July 2015.
That doesn't actually compute, you know...
Disputing a claim is not the same thing as prevailing in a dispute.
-
@blakeyrat said:
YouTube announces ContentID escrow "soon", a feature that should have been there DAY ONE those fuckers
Fucking finally!
I won't hold my breath for when the changes roll out though.It's an improvement, but what they actually need to do is disincentivise making an invalid claim in the first place. If someone makes too many invalid claims maybe they could claim-ban them or even fine them, fines would nip it in the bud very quickly.
-
I take this to mean some corporate content creator got hit by a ContentID troll.
-
@Weng said in YouTube announces ContentID escrow "soon", a feature that should have been there DAY ONE those fuckers:
I take this to mean some corporate content creator got hit by a ContentID troll.
i'd put decent money on this being the case.
i really really hope that it was Youtube that the copyright troll claimed. because that would be awesome karma.
-
@ben_lubar said in YouTube announces ContentID escrow "soon", a feature that should have been there DAY ONE those fuckers:
Only 4 million videos were wrongly accused of copyright violations as of July 2015.
-
@dse said in YouTube announces ContentID escrow "soon", a feature that should have been there DAY ONE those fuckers:
Yeah they should listen to blakey with 10 views per month (seriously, sneak in some boobs in a frame and use it as thumbnail to get more views), that is how to prioritize their free service
I'm pretty sure you just become popular enough that you're allowed to upload custom thumbnail picture for your videos. Then you don't need to fuss around with trying to get that single frame in the video and at exactly the right place so the thumbnail maker grabs it.
-
@anotherusername said in YouTube announces ContentID escrow "soon", a feature that should have been there DAY ONE those fuckers:
I'm pretty sure you just become popular enough that you're allowed to upload custom thumbnail picture for your videos.
I'm 99% sure custom thumbnails are either:
- Everybody gets them
- Everybody who's eligible to monetize ads gets them
(My channel's in category 2 there. I made myself eligible to monetize so I could use the scheduling feature. Even though I've never turned on monetization on a video ever. It's really stupid that YouTube ties features like that together.)
-
@blakeyrat The support answer for that is, "If your account is verified and in good standing, you may have the ability to upload custom thumbnails for your video uploads. ... The ability to upload custom thumbnails may be revoked for creators who consistently use thumbnails that don't follow our guidelines."
-
@anotherusername Thanks for reminding us all how useless YouTube's support pages are.
"You may have custom thumbnails. You may be standing on Mars. Maybe. Who can say? Just because we wrote the software, doesn't mean we know!"
-
@blakeyrat they could say. They just won't. It's a measure of security by obscurity.
-
@anotherusername may have said in YouTube announces ContentID escrow "soon", a feature that should have been there DAY ONE those fuckers:
@blakeyrat they may say. They just may not. It may be a measure of security by obscurity.
I may have fixed that for you.
-
@anotherusername I bet they don't know.
I bet it's like, "we hired some super 'smart' MIT grad to come up with some algorithm, and what he came up with is so convoluted and counter-intuitive that even we can't figure out how to describe it in a support page."
That seems to be how most Google features work.
-
@accalia said in YouTube announces ContentID escrow "soon", a feature that should have been there DAY ONE those fuckers:
@Weng said in YouTube announces ContentID escrow "soon", a feature that should have been there DAY ONE those fuckers:
I take this to mean some corporate content creator got hit by a ContentID troll.
i'd put decent money on this being the case.
i really really hope that it was Youtube that the copyright troll claimed. because that would be awesome karma.
There was a big outcry recently when a popular youtuber detailed some bullshit claims against him almost to the point of it going to court. He also spelled out how the income for that period was kept from him even though he came out on top. I think that was a big factor here.
On another note, kotaku just ran this article about a game critic who's dumping varous flagged footage into his videos on purpose to trigger competing claims against his video. Apparently this has the effect of deadlocking the claims process.
-
@fwd said in YouTube announces ContentID escrow "soon", a feature that should have been there DAY ONE those fuckers:
kotaku just ran this article about a game critic who's dumping varous flagged footage into his videos on purpose to trigger competing claims against his video. Apparently this has the effect of deadlocking the claims process.
That... doesn't make sense?
Oh I see what he's doing. His intention is to make his video non-monetized, so he's "gaming" the system to ensure that ContentID matches that he knows are set to "cannot be monetized" (like those from Nintendo) outweigh the ones set to "monetized by copyright owner".
Still stupid, but I guess if the scammers game ContentID I have no problem with this guy gaming ContentID, especially when his intent is to keep his videos ad-free.
-
"various flagged footage"
"trigger competing claims"His goal is to troll a bunch of content "owners" into all throwing in claims saying "hey that's mine" on the exact same video, then let the system deadlock on trying to figure out who, if anyone, should get to monetize it.
-
@anotherusername You could have just posted the video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cK8i6aMG9VM
Filed Under: Now everybody can watch it themselves and form their own opinion
-
This post is deleted!
-
@Kuro you don't need to watch the video to form an opinion. I didn't. I did read what they quoted him as saying in the article, but it just reinforced my original interpretation of what @fwd said, and he posted the link. And the linked article had the video. So... yeah.
-
@Kuro No, don't watch the video. Instead click through to a bullshit site who steals his content to make money by slapping ads on it.
What people should do is have a sockpuppet account. Anytime they upload something, INSTANTLY claim it via the sockpuppet. That will keep other people from monetizing it.
-
He's another example of how shit YouTube is:
Fox 'Stole' a Game Clip, Used it in Family Guy & DMCA'd the Original * TorrentFreak
This week's episode of Family Guy included a clip from 1980s Nintendo video game Double Dribble showing a glitch to get a free 3-point goal. Fox obtained the clip from YouTube where it had been sitting since it was first uploaded in 2009. Shortly after, Fox told YouTube the game footage infringed...
Fuckers
-
@DoctorJones Yeah. They could do some DATE checking, too, when it comes to claims.
That said, Fox is a shit and Family Guy is shit and I'm shocked and depressed to learn they're still making new episodes of that shit.
-
@blakeyrat said in YouTube announces ContentID escrow "soon", a feature that should have been there DAY ONE those fuckers:
They could do some DATE checking, too, when it comes to claims.
Agreed. Someone there should have known that the lack of date checking would lead to prior art being falsely flagged. I think jail time is indicated.
-
@blakeyrat said in YouTube announces ContentID escrow "soon", a feature that should have been there DAY ONE those fuckers:
Fox is a shit and Family Guy is shit
That's actually pretty surprising.
Seth seems right up your alley.
-
@xaade said in YouTube announces ContentID escrow "soon", a feature that should have been there DAY ONE those fuckers:
right up your alley
?
-
@xaade said in YouTube announces ContentID escrow "soon", a feature that should have been there DAY ONE those fuckers:
That's actually pretty surprising.
Seth seems right up your alley.Uh no.
And I have no clue why you'd think that.
Improving Content ID for creators
