How does youtube work, ethically?

  • Thread starter Thread starter patricius79
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
1neophyte said:
You seem to be under the impression that that an owner has to specifically submit something to YouTube to be included in content ID matches. This is not the case.
Click to expand...
**YouTube **explains (quote):

Using Content ID

Content ID is YouTube’s automated, scalable system that enables copyright owners to identify YouTube videos that include content they own.

YouTube only grants Content ID to copyright owners who meet specific criteria. To be approved, you must own exclusive rights to a substantial body of original material that is frequently uploaded by the YouTube user community.

YouTube also sets explicit guidelines on how to use Content ID. We monitor Content ID use and disputes on an ongoing basis to ensure these guidelines are followed.

As the copyright owner, you provide YouTube with a reference copy of your eligible content. YouTube uses the reference to scan uploaded videos for matching content. When a match is found, YouTube applies your preferred policy: to monetize, track, or block the video in question.
 
Bookcat said:
**YouTube **explains (quote):

Using Content ID

Content ID is YouTube’s automated, scalable system that enables copyright owners to identify YouTube videos that include content they own.

YouTube only grants Content ID to copyright owners who meet specific criteria. To be approved, you must own exclusive rights to a substantial body of original material that is frequently uploaded by the YouTube user community.

YouTube also sets explicit guidelines on how to use Content ID. We monitor Content ID use and disputes on an ongoing basis to ensure these guidelines are followed.

As the copyright owner, you provide YouTube with a reference copy of your eligible content. YouTube uses the reference to scan uploaded videos for matching content. When a match is found, YouTube applies your preferred policy: to monetize, track, or block the video in question.
Click to expand...
You said earlier that it would be impossible to track the billions of copyrighted works. I don’t see anything in these guidelines that says that YouTube can only handle a limited number of content ID submissions.
 
1neophyte said:
You said earlier that it would be impossible to track the billions of copyrighted works. I don’t see anything in these guidelines that says that YouTube can only handle a limited number of content ID submissions.
Click to expand...
Yes they track only what is submitted to them - how would they do all that is copyrighted if it is not submitted to them practically?

The point being was that only certain limited things are actually “submitted” to youtube.

Out of the billions of copyrights.

I assume Youtube does not have the means to know all that is copyrighted in the world.

Only what is submitted goes into the “Content ID” search.

Hence the “other way” (Content ID claim -after the upload) - if someone discovers someone has uploaded their thing to youtube and the they must submit to them to take it down.
 
Bookcat said:
The point being was that only certain limited things are actually “submitted” to youtube.

Out of the billions of copyrights.

I assume Youtube does not have the means to know all that is copyrighted in the world.

Only what is submitted goes into the “Content ID” search.

Hence the later need if someone discovers someone has uploaded their thing to youtube and the they must submit to them to take it down.
Click to expand...
Just so I’m clear, your contention is that there are content creators/copyright owners out there whose works are posted on YouTube without their knowledge or authorization, and they would assert their rights but for the fact that they are completely unaware of the situation. And we, as viewers, must make some sort of effort not to be complicit in this illegal and immoral activity? Please correct me if I have this wrong.

If I don’t have it wrong, what effort is it that we are obligated to make?
 
1neophyte said:
Just so I’m clear, your contention is that there are content creators/copyright owners out there whose works are posted on YouTube without their knowledge or authorization, and they would assert their rights but for the fact that they are completely unaware of the situation. And we, as viewers, must make some sort of effort not to be complicit in this illegal and immoral activity? Please correct me if I have this wrong.

If I don’t have it wrong, what effort is it that we are obligated to make?
Click to expand...
Oh it is not a “contention”. I simply clarified some things and asked a further question.

What l wrote up above is:​

Ok so Artists/record labels have “their channels”…

But they are not the only ones who say post songs there.

That is an aspect not sure on.

(how does one know the copyright holder of the music is fine with those…?)
So then in researching found the information on youtube as to how things work. That there are those two ways that youtube “checks” regarding copyrighted matters when they are posted - all based on what has been actually submitted by the copyright owners.

And that of course copyright owners if they find their things there - can have them taken down by submitting the information needed.
So on the one hand I had asked “how can one know” what has been permitted by the owner?- and *some *of that is cleared up.

On the other hand the question of - ok what about the rest?

In life in the world outside the internet - * I do not say "hey the guy did not watch his stuff well enough - so I guess I can use it? * At least not if I want to act morally in justice.

So again: Are there various ways to tell the company has “ok’ed” the posting by “joe-uploader” or other entity? What are they?

And then what about the rest?

These are real questions - both practical and moral.

(anyhow I got to run now…have a blessed evening)
 
I would say, youtube might link in to copywrite data bases for individual countries.

And music recording and film producers would also have easily accessible , and linked in data bases.

Being the 21st century and ARPA, which became DARPA, originally gave us the internet,
 
Bookcat said:
So again: Are there various ways to tell the company has “ok’ed” the posting by “joe-uploader” or other entity? What are they?
Click to expand...
There’s really only one way: if YouTube hasn’t taken it down, it’s been ok’ed.
 
twf said:
Yes some posters have implied such on past threads. They don’t understand how YouTube works.
I also think the analogies to stealing a physical CD is a poor one. Yes piracy is intellectual content theft and it’s wrong, but as you are literally duplicating content rather than removing content (as in the case of stealing a physical object) I see it as a less grave species of sin- even if it’s the same genus.
Click to expand...
‘Piracy’ and ‘theft’ are purposefully chosen words to try to convince people that using material without rights is stealing. But it isn’t. Violating Intellectual Property (IP) law is violating criminal or civil law but it isn’t stealing. Stealing deprives a person of a specific thing. Violating IP doesn’t.
 
exnihilo said:
‘Piracy’ and ‘theft’ are purposefully chosen words to try to convince people that using material without rights is stealing. But it isn’t. Violating Intellectual Property (IP) law is violating criminal or civil law but it isn’t stealing. Stealing deprives a person of a specific thing. Violating IP doesn’t.
Click to expand...
That depends. If the violation deprives an owner of income that is rightfully theirs, then it is stealing. Of course, this does not apply to watching YouTube videos, despite the confusion of some in this thread.
 
Roseeurekacross said:
I would say, youtube might link in to copywrite data bases for individual countries.
Click to expand...
No they do not…they explain what they do and how they do it. With billions of copyrighted things out there - and all the different languages etc that would seem practical/possible.
 
Bookcat said:
No they do not…they explain what they do and how they do it. With billions of copyrighted things out there - and all the different languages etc that would seem practical/possible.
Click to expand...
Yes they do. There are many things that take place in this day and age which would have been considered impractical and impossible a few years ago. It’s a pretty amazing era.
 
1neophyte said:
Yes they do. There are many things that take place in this day and age which would have been considered impractical and impossible a few years ago. It’s a pretty amazing era.
Click to expand...
Again no they do not.

According to youtube - that is not how things work there.
 
Bookcat said:
Have already.

And I have explained how youtube handles copyright and does not/cannot handle it.

See above.
Click to expand...
No you haven’t. If you have, please re-post the link to the offending video.
 
1neophyte said:
Why are you so determined to spread misinformation?
Click to expand...
What?

How is what youtube says - disinformation?

Even your fellow youtube’er said I was correct.

I quoted even from them.

Just read their own material.
 
1neophyte said:
No you haven’t. If you have, please re-post the link to the offending video.
Click to expand...
\

Not a video.

I meant a description example: content belonging to another that has been put up on youtube without permission but where as of yet there nothing has been submitted to youtube from the owner.

I am not going to give you an actual example for that is part of the very questions of the thread - aside from those channels owned by the copyright owner - how is one to know if something is permitted!

The very fact that though that when a copyright owner realizes that his song Z is up on youtube or this or that is there - and then he can submit a take down action - and then youtube then verifies he is the owner and takes it down - means that content gets put up all the time that is not permitted. For that is part of they way they try to fix such events. But they do not know to fix them until the CR holder lets them know either before or after the fact.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top