geekosystem

Google's taken some flak in the past over the way YouTube handles copyright allegations. In order to stymie the flood of complaints from copyright holders, they implemented the flawed Content ID system that allows said copyright holders to essentially hold uploaded videos hostage. They can either take them down or place ads to monetize the content. The whole process is automated, and false positives run rampant. Thankfully, YouTube has announced that they're altering their algorithms and will even start reviewing some claims manually.

The footage obtained by NASA in its endeavors, including the recent landing of the Curiosity rover, are released into the public domain so that enterprising folks can spread the word far and wide however they desire. Unfortunately, when stuff like this then gets shown on television or elsewhere, YouTube's Content ID starts to freak out. After using the public domain NASA footage in a Google+ hangout video, tech writer Lon Seidman was hit with a grand total of five separate takedown requests.

As wonderful as it can be, YouTube is a nightmare when it comes to rights management. With the millions of people uploading one hour of footage with each passing second, it's nigh impossible to prevent all copyright infringement. Still, YouTube and rightsholders try, which often results in severely unfair takedowns. There are other methods though, like YouTube's Content ID, which lets alleged rightsholders slap advertising on videos that allegedly use their content. It's better than a takedown, but it's still pretty messed up. A company called BFM Digital, for instance, started slapping ads on a free video because they claimed to hold the rights to originally recorded wind sounds, and YouTube is helping them do it.

Way back in 2007, Viacom filled a billion dollar suit against YouTube claiming that YouTube was purposefully turning a blind eye to copyright infringing content in order to boost the site's popularity. The suit didn't last long however, and soon a court threw the case out based on the fact that YouTube, by cooperating with DMCA takedown requests and removing allegedly infringing content, fell under the DMCA's "Safe Harbor" protection, rendering the site protected from lawsuits so long as they were clearly trying to keep things under control. Now, the U.S. Court of Appeals has reversed that decision, and YouTube is back in the hotseat, apparently for not trying hard enough, which is utterly ridiculous. In fact, they're already trying too hard.

It's not uncommon for YouTube videos to be taken down due to copyright claims. Granted, some are justified, but the unjustified kind happen as well. One might even say it happens with alarming frequency. Usually, these takedowns involve some sort of media that someone could ostensibly copyright, making things an issue of who owns the rights to what. Recently, a YouTuber by the name of eeplox had a video flagged for copyright violation despite the fact that it contained nothing more than a discussion of wild salads, a few shots of plants, and some natural birdsong. Rumblefish, music licensing extraordinaire, seems to think it owns the exclusive copyright to one of those things.