[dthul]

I get that mistakes can happen, but companies filing frivolous DMCA notices should be barred from this avenue in the future. Further, YouTube's appeals process is fundamentally broken if it can't get such obvious cases right.

[techdragon]

Always remember that YouTube is for the most part not using DMCA notices. ContentID has nothing to do with the DMCA and everything to do with the Viacom lawsuit and YouTube’s persistent desire to avoid any further lawsuits of that nature.

It’s a rigged system in favour of traditional copyright holders and anyone who can weasel their way to the other side of the ContentID system to register themselves as a copyright “owner” and are thus blessed by YouTube as special and to be trusted with the task of only making legitimate claims against their own intellectual property… which we all know is bullshit and abused by almost everyone who has access to it. Notable exceptions being companies like Epidemic Sound who have made their access to that system/API into a valuable business differentiator… regardless it’s rigged against the individual content creators that made YouTube into the behemoth it is today.

[iamtedd]

In this case it was an actual DMCA notice, not ContentID. Real people were involved in this incomprehensible decision.

[1letterunixname]

Telemundo actively did this. Claim copyright of creators' material and file strikes against them.

Then there were the cases of extortion trolls (criminals) who demanded money from creators in exchange for removing strikes.

0. Fuck YouTube and criminals and 1. never depend on it as a primary source of income. (that's what merch is for).

[thinkmcfly]

It shouldn't be just the companies that are barred from filling new notices, but that the copyrighted item itself loses its protection. But how could a bunch of old people who don't care about tech have put that into law 20 years ago

[tremon]

How would that have worked in this case? User posts Blender video $X on youtube, $idiotCompany files frivolous DMCA suit claiming copyright on $X, Blender loses its copyright on $X?

[tinus_hn]

The notice is filed on penalty of perjury. All that should happen is whoever filed the notice actually be tried for perjury.

[voakbasda]

Perjury is not enforced anywhere but the most egregious cases. Courts are filled with lies told by professional liars and presided over by liars that made a career out of lying. They never eat their own, because it would shine too much light on their own practices.

[misnome]

Perjury based on _belief_ that they own the copyright, as I understand the DMCA. So being an idiot who doesn't understand copyright (or based on an erroneous automated process) is considered a defence.

So, worthless.

[andrepd]

Of course. Why can't you answer as many times as you want in an SAT? Because it would defeat the whole purpose. More than that: you need to give points for right answers, and negative points for wrong ones, so the expected value of guessing is 0.

Even in the context of the already fucked up copyright laws, this mechanism is especially broken.