Spurious Or Vindictive Copyright Claims

D

doco

Member
How likely is it that a copyright violation claim is purely vindictive - someone just being an *******? Also, I recently had two such claims on two videos from a couple years ago. Not wanting to get bogged down in the pending ******* match, I deleted the videos that were claimed to be "blocked worldwide". Yet the videos continue to show up in searches and play. How is this possible?

And, what does that say about the ban?
 
Not very possible, only 200 or so companies have Content ID and most that do have clear technology and procedures.

All of them are under contract with Google to protect against them claiming content that isn't theirs, when there is an issue it tends to be more on the side of an issue on the YouTube side of things rather than the claimant.
 
It seems odd to me. A couple videos from a couple years ago separated by a year's time, and no attempt to inform what the offending content was. Interestingly, music used in those two videos has been used often in my more than 280 videos over the past four years. Yet two seemingly random, videos from antiquity were banned; or claimed to be banned as it turns out.

Any music I have ever used was gotten from royalty free sites. I do not monetize my channel and have no plans to ever do so. YouTube is a great learning tool: learn by watching and learn by doing. It would be a shame to let spurious claims ruin it. Claims based merely on suspicion not air tight proof, regardless of having possession of "ContentId".

Two claims were made against me and I hear more and more lately that this sort of thing is on the rise. How about Google/YouTube publish who is making the claim(s) and specifying the offending content instead of just banning videos based on some 'contentid' nerd with a bot making a claim? Guilty until proven innocent is a tough concept. And particularly difficult when defending yourself against an unknown foe for an unknown offense(content).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top