YouTube's content ID system. AGAIN.



  • Ok so today I got this lovely message:

    @ContentID said:

    "X-PLAY-X-PLAY (4S)", visual content administered by:

    Comcast Entertainment Group

    It's a 20-minute video. That's all the notice says. That's it in its entirety.

    What visual content infringes? Do you have an image of it? Nope? ... ok, what timecode of the video should I look at? It's a 20-minute video, it could be literally any frame infringing? Nope? No timecode?

    Do I want to dispute this copyright match? HOW THE FUCK CAN I EVEN FUCKING ANSWER THAT IF I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE FUCKING MATCH IS!!!!!

    All the previous matches have been from companies who were obviously practicing fraud. This one very well may be legit-- I literally have no way of telling. No way of resolving the issue except POSSIBLY COMMITTING PERJURY. No way of contacting anybody at YouTube other than a fucking newsgroup I'm sure nobody reads.

    I used to be a staunch supporter of copyright. After seeing the kind of pain inflicted on the average joe by YouTube's buggy, badly-designed, full-of-scammers ContentID system, I'm rapidly changing my mind.



  • Oh and BTW, my video is BLOCKED WORLDWIDE and my account is PENALIZED because it "may" include the content. Because YouTube is TOO FUCKING LAZY TO CHECK!

    rage



  • @Google's ContentID help page said:

    I don't understand this! I have other questions! Help me more! How can I contact you?

    Please understand that we are not in a position to offer legal advice. We will not be able to answer questions about your rights or about copyright law. It is your responsibility to understand the law and your rights, and if you have questions we suggest you consult your own legal counsel. We will not answer concerns or hypothetical questions about our policies, though we will read them and take them into consideration for the future as appropriate. Please also note that we will not answer questions which are already answered on this page or elsewhere in the Help Center. If you have specific questions about the claims against videos on your account, or the processes described on this page, we may be able to help you. You can write to us at copyright@youtube.com.

    So I composed an email (a pretty fine one if I do say so myself) and sent it to the address listed. The response?

    @Google's evil ContentID robot who hates me said:

    This is an automated response, and your message will not be reviewed.

    Your message does not appear to contain a complete DMCA related notification. This email address is for correspondence regarding DMCA related notifications only.

    YOU TOLD ME TO SEND THE EMAIL THERE YOU FUCKING DICKBITCHSHITSDashdauwi yhviuryhiu gagdawdasgda gd



  •  Copyright is what big companies use to keep the little people from being creative, right?

    which game are you showing in this video?



  • It's Saints Row the Third, which is part of the problem... the game has music from tons of popular artists. However, I'd been careful about always turning off the in-game radio and that along with the fact that our commentary is really never silent long enough for a full song to be on the audio, we haven't gotten dinged for any audio content.

    The weird thing here is the "visual content". I understand that X-PLAY is a TV show, but I've never seen it. It's possible there's an in-game billboard for it? But without knowing what it looks like, reviewing a 20-minute video for a image that could for all I know be 20 pixels tall is ridiculous. I don't even know what the billboard would look like; I'd gladly edit it out if I knew where in the video is was.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    I understand that X-PLAY is a TV show, but I've never seen it. It's possible there's an in-game billboard for it?

    If that's the reason, then this is really hilarious. Or maybe Youtube is just butt-hurt that someone is getting a free ad on their site.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    The weird thing here is the "visual content". I understand that X-PLAY is a TV show, but I've never seen it.

    X-play is a game review show. You probably got unlucky enough to be driving through the same part of the game as X-play used in a review, even for one frame.


    It might be entirely possible to fix Content-ID to handle fair use and public domain, but why risk having the copyright cartels change the law?



  • Oooo! You have provided insights. It does have part of a cutscene in it called "Professor Genki's Super-Ethical Reality Challenge" which is exactly as insane as the title makes it sound, I bet when they reviewed it they showed that cutscene. Because it's awesome.



  • 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.



  • YouTube shouldn't even HAVE automated copyright checking. If a company notices that it's losing money because of a video, there's already DMCA. YouTube seems to think anything displayed on any TV show is completely owned by that TV show.

    If a video game gets reviewed by a TV show, that entire video game belongs to that TV show, no matter what.

    The problem is that Google doesn't review games, so they've never had the problem. All of Google's videos are of Google products or Google employees talking about Google products.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    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)

    They may have improved their content recognition system, but not long ago it was possible to trick it by horizontally mirroring the video. I don't know whether your video would be seriously negatively affected by that, but it not then you could try it.

    I've had problems in the past with YouTube and classical music. Now, it's true that a recording of classical music is still protected by copyright even though the music isn't - but their system assumes that just because someone with e.g. Sony released a CD with a recording of Für Elise then all videos with Für Elise are infringing it, even if they're new recordings.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    I used to be a staunch supporter of copyright. After seeing the kind of pain inflicted on the average joe by YouTube's buggy, badly-designed, full-of-scammers ContentID system, I'm rapidly changing my mind.

    I dunno, you get worked up over someone simply downloading a YouTube video without asking (you should be grateful that you have nothing better to do with your time than fielding pointless questions about downloading videos). Somehow I doubt that you are entirely with “us” and not “them” 😉

    For me, “piracy” implies a loss of some kind. My best guess is that you're getting money from YouTube on a pay-per-view basis (I don't know how they operate) and that anyone who tries to save bandwidth and time by taking copies of videos, is actually losing you money compared to if they had to visit the clip page and download it again.)



  • @Daniel Beardsmore said:

    My best guess is that you're getting money from YouTube on a pay-per-view basis

    Nope. Just doing it as a hobby.



  • @Ben L. said:

    YouTube shouldn't even HAVE automated copyright checking.

    Yes it should, but only because imagining Blakey's little face crumpling with helpless rage is so entertaining.



  • @zipfruder said:

     Copyright is what big companies use to keep the little people from being creative, right?

     

    Copyright was that thing created by the Aristocracy to prohibit the population from learning and postponing the enlightment at the end of the Midle Age / start of the Modern Age. In all those centuries, the main goal didn't change.

    For a while scientists subverted it, using copyrights to make science run faster (a Modern Age equivalent to the GPL). Also, some noobs tried to use it to protect artists, but that last one never worked out well. More recently there was Free Software... But all of those are ninche initiatives.

     



  • @blakeyrat said:

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

    So, you found the obvious answer. Give jobs for people outside of the US.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    I used to be a staunch supporter of copyright.
    After seeing the kind of pain inflicted on the average joe by YouTube's
    buggy, badly-designed, full-of-scammers ContentID system, I'm rapidly
    changing my mind.
    Why should your views on copyright change because YouTube voluntarilly implemented a broken system that enforces big contents warped view of copyright?  YouTube's contentID system doesn't actually understand
    copyright law, it doesn't understand fair use, it doesn't understand
    public domain, it doesn't understand production music libraries/licences, etc.

    @Ben L. said:

    YouTube shouldn't
    even HAVE automated copyright checking. If a company notices that it's
    losing money because of a video, there's already DMCA. YouTube seems to
    think anything displayed on any TV show is completely owned by that TV
    show.
    YouTube's ContentID system is simlply a concession for big content, YouTube has no legal responsabilty to implement the system (though it could have be part of a settlement with viacom, but i don't know,) but YouTube bent to the will of big content, and now we have automated system trampling on the rights of users!

    @blakeyrat said:

    Do I want to dispute this copyright match?
    Yes; its it sounds like your video falls under fair use (most reviews would), so unless you know you did something out of bounds it's probably safe to dispute. By that I mean you know the contentID system is broken with respect to fair use, you know your video is almost certianly fair use, and you seem to have discovered that X-PLAY is a review show.

    BTW the definiton of Perjury is "The willful giving of false testimony under oath or affirmation, before a competent tribunal, upon a point material to a legal inquiry." (emphasis added) I highly doubt that disputing the contentID with good faith that your use is fair, could ever be construed as perjury; however I am not a lawyer.

     

     




  • @blakeyrat said:

    Nope. Just doing it as a hobby.

    I find the concept of piracy without any loss … curious.



  • @blakeyrat said:

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

    Have you looked into blip.tv? SF Debris moved from Youtube to them after he got dinged for his videos and it doesn't seem too bad.



  • @esoterik said:

    because YouTube voluntarilly implemented a broken system that enforces big contents warped view of copyright?
    YouTube's actions are "voluntary" only in the same way that paying your taxes is voluntary.  If you don't "voluntarilly" pay your taxes, you go to prison.  If YouTube doesn't "voluntarilly" take down content that is "infringing" they risk getting sued for a lot of money (enough money that even Google couldn't afford to pay it).

    More important however, is the fact that YouTube doesn't care.  Not long ago YouTube won a copyright infringement lawsuit brought by Viacom, one of the biggest of "big content".  They won because they were able to convince the judge that they had a system in place that takes down content that is "infringing".  The fact that YouTube's system is horrendously broken and makes thousands of mistakes every day, is irrelevant.  As long as it provides them with the protection they need to prevent expensive lawsuits, then it will continue.@blakeyrat said:

    Do I want to dispute this copyright match?
    My experience with YouTube is that disputing a takedown is pointless.  They will simply ignore you.  There's nothing you can do about it, and they know it.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.