Content ID claims: Silent Blessing or Deadly Curse?

[TYTD]

Hi all,
Well I've had a bit of an interesting week regarding the Content ID system and I had a couple of questions that I was wondering about as a result.

This week I Uploaded 2 videos to my channel both of them got Content I'd'd but one of the 2 also recieved a worldwide block. So I took the footage down, re-edited it and uploaded it without the offending content in (I did so for the other video that got flagged as well) but it got me thinking...does having a video marked as containing someone elses content effect your standing on youtube? will you maybe be less favourably judged by the algorhythm? I cant seem to find anything online about whether it does or not and even youtubes own site just says something a bit wooley along the lines of "Theres nothing to worry about but the 3rd party will monetize your videos" which sounds interesting...

It also got me thinking about the content ID system in general...like...say for example I have 5 videos all on the content ID system and then a few months later the companies that were flagged up decide they dont want my videos on youtube anymore...if they happened to do that all at the same time would that effectivley mean my channel would be shut down or left in too poor a standing to even bother leaving it open? I always make sure to challenge ID claims and other than 1 video which I challenged and lost (Which I have been meaning to re-edit) 90% of the videos I upload that get content id's get relinquished shortly thereafter...so I guess what Im asking is...would you personally stand for having a lot of videos content I'd'd and see it as a way that you get to keep producing content while not being effected by takedown notices...or would you be paranoid and see it as a potentially grand hazard to let these ID notification rack up because at any moment you could be totally struck down.

At the moment Im leaning towards the latter (Hence why I prefer to re-edit my videos rather than have a content ID stick) but im interested to hear what you guys have to say on both points

 

[KatyAdelson]

I moved this to the copyright discussion forum.

 

[Idec Sdawkminn]

Personally I see it as a really helpful and effective tool for copyright owners and a nuisance for me. Copyright claims almost certainly won't lead to takedowns if you leave them alone. If anything, they'd change the claim type to blocked worldwide if they didn't want it viewed. And claims don't negatively affect your channel at all. The only performance hit would be claims that have viewing restrictions, like unavailable in some countries.

For me, I'd rather they just take down the video instead of putting a claim on it. I dispute all of them and most of them get rejected. I appeal those and they almost always get taken down. So, in my case, almost every claim represents a very delayed but inevitable takedown, so I'd rather it just get over with.

 

[Hirudov]

Hi all,
Well I've had a bit of an interesting week regarding the Content ID system and I had a couple of questions that I was wondering about as a result.

I have ContentID for almost 2 months now and I have been on the both sides of the fence - as I content owner who was receiving lots of claims (most of them invalid) and now I claim my content re-uploaded (the lighter wording for stolen) almost daily and I can say ContentID is nice. It's nice for the content creators that it can protect their works automatically and even receiving some monetary gains when your work is used by someone without your permission. But also ContentID is abused a lot by the bigger music labels and even some YouTubers. I have 6 (SIX) recorded abuses from Orchard music, where my videos where mismatched that I used their music. I dispute and they re-instate the claim. I sent them e-mail about their abusive usage of ContentID and they release the claim, but the stress and the time lost because of all this stays. YouTube copyright academy says a lots about invalid references and what shall not be uploaded in ContentID as references, but most of the labels and some YouTubers are not abiding in these rules. For example if a reference is getting too many false matches it shall be removed. Or that you shall not upload gaming videos as references, unless you are the game creator, but big YouTubers like Onisian have gaming references there and even game cut scenes!

Regarding your first question - having ContentID matches is not affecting your channel in YouTube eyes. But for me I use these claims to check the channels of the people who re-uploaded my content. This way I found a user who was deliberately avoiding the ContentID and getting more views on my videos on his channel, than I had on my own channel! I asked YouTube if they can enable me manual claiming tool. They send me a list of conditions that I must meet (most of them I do) but I still don't have it. May be in the future. So I had no other choice, but to issue copyright takedowns (3 of them) to this guy and YouTube said this was the best I could do in my situation. How he was avoiding ContentID? I know many users here would like to know, but let me say you something: ContentID is automatic, and even if avoided, the copyright owners are still there, and if they catch you stealing their content, they have no other choice than to issue copyright takedowns, and YouTube suggests to do so, even if lots of DMCA takedowns may be affecting YouTube overall picture as a platform for creators.

Your second question - all the matched videos that I have in ConentID - it a single button to issue a takedown on them at any time. Will I do it? Probably not unless, in some very specific situations of which I don't want to write now. Will the companies do it? Most probably not, but if for example they have limited time license for some videos and the license is going to expire, they may decide to takedown your videos, before the end of the license, you so can't earn from it latter. Nothing personal as for revenge, just business, if they can't earn anymore, why shall you.

ConentID is a big topic. You can read more about it in the creator's academy. If you have some more questions, feel free to ask. I will try to answer, unless it's in breach of the NDA.

 

[TYTD]

Personally I see it as a really helpful and effective tool for copyright owners and a nuisance for me. Copyright claims almost certainly won't lead to takedowns if you leave them alone. If anything, they'd change the claim type to blocked worldwide if they didn't want it viewed. And claims don't negatively affect your channel at all. The only performance hit would be claims that have viewing restrictions, like unavailable in some countries.

For me, I'd rather they just take down the video instead of putting a claim on it. I dispute all of them and most of them get rejected. I appeal those and they almost always get taken down. So, in my case, almost every claim represents a very delayed but inevitable takedown, so I'd rather it just get over with.

I suppose really its one of those incidents where when weilded properly it can be a very effective tool to help stop people stealing your intellectual property...but when its used by people who dont fully understand what it's there for or worse. DO know what its use is and choose to misuse it for there own ends that all the problems start up really...on the plus side I decided to challenge one of the 2 videos I uploaded that got content I.d'd this morning and within an hour I had a post back from the party releasing the claim (Im about 90% sure it was made in error anyway due to the fact it was for an odd period of time in a video that had no visuals or audio elements during the claimed extract...) so thats one down and one to go hopefuly I havent yet had a video taken down; but doing reviews of obscure films does tend to bring some very interesting characters out of the woodwork... xD[DOUBLEPOST=1511181502,1511180809][/DOUBLEPOST]

ContentID is automatic, and even if avoided, the copyright owners are still there, and if they catch you stealing their content, they have no other choice than to issue copyright takedowns, and YouTube suggests to do so, even if lots of DMCA takedowns may be affecting YouTube overall picture as a platform for creators.

Your second question - all the matched videos that I have in ConentID - it a single button to issue a takedown on them at any time. Will I do it? Probably not unless, in some very specific situations of which I don't want to write now. Will the companies do it? Most probably not, but if for example they have limited time license for some videos and the license is going to expire, they may decide to takedown your videos, before the end of the license, you so can't earn from it latter. Nothing personal as for revenge, just business, if they can't earn anymore, why shall you.

ConentID is a big topic. You can read more about it in the creator's academy. If you have some more questions, feel free to ask. I will try to answer, unless it's in breach of the NDA.

Thank you for the detailed response being predominantly a review channel it can be quite difficult to explain to 3rd party companies the concept of "Fair use" in fact I've even had direct corrispondence with one or two companies who have content I.D'd my videos in the past who refused to believe there even was a "Fair use" policy (That was a pretty heated conversation let me tell you!) as a rule I've found that bigger companies I've dealt with have been a lot fairer ,friendlier and reasonable about what content I've used in my reviews and for the most part they tend to release there claim after a few days or they simply let the clock run out. it's the weird claims from compaines with L337 sounding names like "Noahsrhelmxxxxxxx1976xxqxcqx4lyfe" that seem to be the more rampant and determined to hold the claims...I've had 2 or 3 of them in the past and they respond quicker than I can to try and uphold claims to videos that Im not even 100% sure they do own the rights for (I had one of those obscure and long lettered names try and claim A 30 second extract of a Universal movie I reviewed a few months ago) so I dont know really...while its reassuring that my channel isnt being effected by these claims it is a bit disheartening that the whole system only goes as far as:

3rd party: You stole my footage!
Me: No I didnt! it's a critique and covered under fair use!
3rd Party: I dont think it is!
Me: Well it is! watch it; its mainly me talking about cinemetagraphic composition, the acting quality and editing technique...
3rd party: ... ... Nice try! THEIF!
youtube: Well; i've done all I can do...take the video down or let him claim off it...thats yer choice matey.
(Obviously thats quite oversimplified and a bit more impolite than i'd normally be but thats been my experience thus far) xD

 

[Hirudov]

3rd party: You stole my footage!
Me: No I didnt! it's a critique and covered under fair use!
3rd Party: I dont think it is!
Me: Well it is! watch it; its mainly me talking about cinemetagraphic composition, the acting quality and editing technique...
3rd party: ... ... Nice try! THEIF!
youtube: Well; i've done all I can do...take the video down or let him claim off it...thats yer choice matey.
(Obviously thats quite oversimplified and a bit more impolite than i'd normally be but thats been my experience thus far) xD

Fair use is a very controversial topic and actually it exists only in some countries, but its not worldwide. In countries like Germany, there is no fair use doctrine at all and GEMA is very aggressive. Other countries are more open like France with their Loi sur la Confiance dans l'Economie Numérique. All gaming videos fall under fair use, yet they rarely get taken down or claimed by third party (exception being Nintendo). On the other hand the film and music industries hate the fair use and they claim even short clips. But only a judge can decide if content usage falls under fair use or not. If you want your channel to grow very big, don't rely on fair use, but try to obtain permission from the right holders. Sometimes its actually as easy as sending an e-mail, other times it can be next to impossible, but better try than feeling sorry at later date. Remember, even PDP got video taken down that was falling under fair use (gaming video), because the game creator didn't like the video at all. Or I have seen Supercell's Clash Royale video taken down, because it was revealing yet unreleased cards, even if that video was again falling under fair use.

What still gets me mad in the ContentID is the existence of public domain references in the library. I have experimental channel where I uploaded computer generated performances of very old public domain songs and guess what - I got random claims for TOROK INDULO music composition from ARTISJUS_CS for Turkish Rondo by Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart and Acoustic Guitar Solo No. 1 - WCPM - Non-Stop Producer Series Music composition by AdRev Publishing for Minuet by Johann Sebastian Bach. Also rag_dance2-49 Music composition by AdRev Publishing for Ragtime Dance by Scott Joplin. This is clear abuse of ContentID and these ARTISJUS_CS, AdRev Publishing , Orchard music and similar abusers deserve their CMS disabled just for the stress they cause by scaring young YouTubers. I am dealing with such random claimants since years and I have all my documents ready (including permission from my synth manufacturer - yes I got this far), but imagine some young piano performer does his best to perform a perfect Minuet, only to get demotivated by seeing a random claim from random party, which shouldn't have existed in first place. You said you review very old movies - if they are already in the public domain or you have the necessary rights, you can dispute the claims stating that you own all the necessary rights.

 

[TYTD]

Fair use is a very controversial topic and actually it exists only in some countries, but its not worldwide. In countries like Germany, there is no fair use doctrine at all and GEMA is very aggressive. Other countries are more open like France with their Loi sur la Confiance dans l'Economie Numérique. All gaming videos fall under fair use, yet they rarely get taken down or claimed by third party (exception being Nintendo). On the other hand the film and music industries hate the fair use and they claim even short clips. But only a judge can decide if content usage falls under fair use or not. If you want your channel to grow very big, don't rely on fair use, but try to obtain permission from the right holders. Sometimes its actually as easy as sending an e-mail, other times it can be next to impossible, but better try than feeling sorry at later date. Remember, even PDP got video taken down that was falling under fair use (gaming video), because the game creator didn't like the video at all. Or I have seen Supercell's Clash Royale video taken down, because it was revealing yet unreleased cards, even if that video was again falling under fair use.

What still gets me mad in the ContentID is the existence of public domain references in the library. I have experimental channel where I uploaded computer generated performances of very old public domain songs and guess what - I got random claims for TOROK INDULO music composition from ARTISJUS_CS for Turkish Rondo by Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart and Acoustic Guitar Solo No. 1 - WCPM - Non-Stop Producer Series Music composition by AdRev Publishing for Minuet by Johann Sebastian Bach. Also rag_dance2-49 Music composition by AdRev Publishing for Ragtime Dance by Scott Joplin. This is clear abuse of ContentID and these ARTISJUS_CS, AdRev Publishing , Orchard music and similar abusers deserve their CMS disabled just for the stress they cause by scaring young YouTubers. I am dealing with such random claimants since years and I have all my documents ready (including permission from my synth manufacturer - yes I got this far), but imagine some young piano performer does his best to perform a perfect Minuet, only to get demotivated by seeing a random claim from random party, which shouldn't have existed in first place. You said you review very old movies - if they are already in the public domain or you have the necessary rights, you can dispute the claims stating that you own all the necessary rights.

Oh I totally agree with the the idea of trying to get permission as a first. and more often than not I do try the main issue usually lies in trying to pick apart the hornets nest of "Who owns what" with some of these films (I dont review mainstream cinema as a rule at all and to date I've only been able to secure permission from 2 independent film makers as a result of contacting them...the rest predominantly ignore me) I mean, obviously if my videos get content id'd and I challenge it and lose I always go for re-editing over challenging further and if I ever just got an out and out copyright strike I would have to seriously re-evaluate how I operate going forward (Maybe as much as to boycotte specific companies) but I understand that "Fair use" is a bit of a murky area...in the UK it exists but as you mention it can often be up to a judge to decide whats legal or not...not that I'd ever get as far as a court case to resolve what I effectively do for fun...it's not worth that xD ...my own understanding of "Fair use" is that you are allowed to use a small portion of a bigger production as long as appropriate credit is given and that the portion of footage being used is for the purpose of Review, Critique/criticism or parody.

And the public domain thing bothers me too man! Most of my films are from the early 70's through to the early 90's most are either low/no budget independent films where most of the cast crew and rights holders have died or they're TV movies which have been aired once or twice and then never seen again in 30-40+ years xD I keep a track of all the material thats public domain that I've reviewed and so far there are 4 public domain films up since my channel opened with another 2-3 planned for the new year though even now 2 of the ones uploaded have had content ID issues I had to wait the full term to get them released as well which was a pain...I mean non of my videos are monitized (And I dont think I would monitize them even if I could) but its still not nice to be on the reciving end of something like that...

 

[Idec Sdawkminn]

Actually, if you're in the US, Fair Use would cover anything you do, because that's the law of the country that the video was uploaded to (YouTube is in the US). It even says that if it goes to court, it will take place in the nearest US federal court of the uploader. If they aren't in the US, it takes place in a specific US federal court.

And Fair Use doesn't consider whether you gave appropriate credit at all. The content is treated like it is in the public domain if the way you use it ends up being ruled as Fair Use.

I've had some of those conversations with publishing companies before. One even said, "You used our content without permission. You have no rights," and then later, "The claim type we have on the video is a worldwide block, so how can you think you have any rights?"

By the way, I just got 3 more videos taken down today as a result of me appealing rejected disputes. Luckily they were all done with one DMCA takedown notification, so they count as 1 strike total. But I now have 5 strikes, lol.

Lastly, I'd really like to see your review of Starcrash, Pocket Ninjas, and Nukie.

 

[TYTD]

Actually, if you're in the US, Fair Use would cover anything you do, because that's the law of the country that the video was uploaded to (YouTube is in the US). It even says that if it goes to court, it will take place in the nearest US federal court of the uploader. If they aren't in the US, it takes place in a specific US federal court.

And Fair Use doesn't consider whether you gave appropriate credit at all. The content is treated like it is in the public domain if the way you use it ends up being ruled as Fair Use.

I've had some of those conversations with publishing companies before. One even said, "You used our content without permission. You have no rights," and then later, "The claim type we have on the video is a worldwide block, so how can you think you have any rights?"

By the way, I just got 3 more videos taken down today as a result of me appealing rejected disputes. Luckily they were all done with one DMCA takedown notification, so they count as 1 strike total. But I now have 5 strikes, lol.

Lastly, I'd really like to see your review of Starcrash, Pocket Ninjas, and Nukie.

Your experience sounds quite similar to mine whenever I've gone through official channels to try and get in touch with the copyright holders...it's usually split between "Its our material you touch it we take your fingers" to "You want to review our movie? excellent! $10,000 please for the priviladge" I have had a small handful of "You want to talk about MY film!? SURE!" but they've been sadly too few and far between :/ luckily I havent yet had any copyright strikes and other than my review of "The Stuff" all my reviews have either been released from there Content ID or the dealines passed without any kind of a challenge.

And thanks for checking my channel out man! All I can say is stay tuned at least one of those 3 will be coming in the New year (I went a little overboard on the pre-planning front xD)