Youtube uses puppets to explain copyright on the site.

[saintdane05]

<youtube=Cp1Jn4Q0j6E>
This... this is the most amazing thing I have ever seen.
<quote=http://boingboing.net/2013/06/24/youtube-fair-use-and-takedown.html>
Here's Fred von Lohmann, one of the senior copyright attorneys at Google -- and formerly head of the Electronic Frontier Foundation's copyright practice -- describing how YouTube takedowns and fair use claims work, with generous use of excitable puppets. It's the role he was born to play!




If you haven't seen these guys before, here is there best stuff.
<spoiler=Best of Glove and Boots>
<youtube=jbTI7eWaQbk>
<youtube=IyYo3Hm6pS4>
<youtube=NFrrISiXKCQ>

 

[Gunner_Guardian]

This is the best explanation video ever!

 

[Pink Gregory]

Unrelated, but that 'hipsters' video made me foam at the mouth.

Assuming so much while knowing so little.

 

[Altorin]

Unrelated, but that 'hipsters' video made me foam at the mouth.

Assuming so much while knowing so little.

a hipster WOULD say that.

jussayn.

 

[Weaver]

This was pretty funny!
Though, it ignores that disputes on youtube basically don't work at all.

 

[Private Custard]

Decent enough video, but it totally skirted over the issue where large record labels claim copyright on videos that fall well inside the terms of fair-use, and then add a strike to the account of the person who disputes it using fair-use as the reason.

You can throw around as much copyright bullshit as you like, simple fact is the system's broken and the little guys still have to do what the big guys say, whether it's legal or not!

 

[Shinsei-J]

Well I pretty much love these puppets now.
Time to marathon them.

 

[omegaweopon]

Glove and Boots? On Escapist? I legit, just tabbed over from watching a few episodes on Youtube, to see "Uses Puppets" and all I could think was...no way. Yes way.

To contribute more to the conversation: Look up a lot of their stuff, they are absolutely fantastic. One of the most interesting Youtube channels.

 

[Rylingo]

Well that's nice and all but I got a copyright strike for doing a review...so... I wouldn't trust the video entirely.

 

[Roxas1359]

This was pretty funny!
Though, it ignores that disputes on youtube basically don't work at all.

Ding ding! We have a winner folks.

The video is very informative and funny, but it doesn't mention how companies often times will not get back to you, will file false claims against your videos, and best of all the fact that the scan itself cannot differentiate a review, Let's Play, eulogy, etc.

The YT copyright system is extremely broken and is in dire need of being fixed. LPers know this as we must constantly fight copyright claims from false flaggers. For example, I got 2 Content ID Matches from The Orchard Music who claimed I used music they licensed in 2 of my KH videos. However, the part of the video they flagged for having "their content" had no commentary nor any game audio. So yes they claimed a copyright on silence. XD
They have also been known to flag videos that contain music licensed under Creative Commons which allows for the use of that music/video/content without needing written permission from the creator.

 

[Phrozenflame500]

Almost completely accurate! Just remove those parts about disputes and fair use and you have an accurate representation of YouTube's copyright system!

 

[Sir Thomas Sean Connery]

Great stuff! I'm probably going to watch more of these two. Very interesting explanations.

Buuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuut....... And, as Yahtzee says, it's a big stinky butt....... Youtube needs to get their shit together on the Fair Use thing.

There are too many videos to count that have had their audio cut out or taken down because they have a clip from a movie or song, despite CLEARLY being trans-formative.

 

[Private Custard]

Oh, and to add to my earlier post, I can't watch anything from (UK based) Channel 5......and I live in the UK!!

I think the word 'clusterfuck' is pretty apt!

 

[Something Amyss]

Almost completely accurate! Just remove those parts about disputes and fair use and you have an accurate representation of YouTube's copyright system!

Yeah, that gave me a bit of a laugh. They've got this explanation of fair use even as they're tearing down videos that should fall under it.

In fact, saying ignoring fair use while ignoring fair use is kind of dickish.

 

[MiskWisk]

Nice to know that youtube at least gets the theory of how copyright is supposed to work.

Now if they could actually apply that then things would be great!

 

[Total LOLige]

Oh, and to add to my earlier post, I can't watch anything from (UK based) Channel 5......and I live in the UK!!

I think the word 'clusterfuck' is pretty apt!

Yeah me neither, tried watching the music video for Feeder's song Buck Rogers got told to fuck off, I didn't even know Channel 5 showed music in 2001 or the past 12 years. Maybe it was on one of those countdown shows hmm.


OT: I tried to upload an R.E.M cover of the Velvet Underground song "There she goes again" and got those content ID match wotsits. Now I know my use probably doesn't fall under the "Fair Use Policy" but what I want to know is how can one record label claim to own the work of an artist they haven't signed? Or is it just the recording? Good job I'm not a lawyer, wouldn't have a clue. Would showing(technically educating to the existence of said song) people a cover fall under fair use.

Slightly more on topic(SMOT, I'm gonna use that alot take note): I liked the video, it was very informative. They should be in the next Muppets movie.

 

[CrystalShadow]

Almost completely accurate! Just remove those parts about disputes and fair use and you have an accurate representation of YouTube's copyright system!

Yeah, that gave me a bit of a laugh. They've got this explanation of fair use even as they're tearing down videos that should fall under it.

In fact, saying ignoring fair use while ignoring fair use is kind of dickish.

Yeah... That seems to be kind of broken, doesn't it?

But on a tangential note, both the video, and youtube's policies seem to have a very US focused bias (unsurprisingly).

Believe it or not, 'fair use' is a concept that doesn't strictly exist in a lot of countries. (The UK for instance has no generic 'fair use' provisions, although it has some fairly specific cases of stuff you're allowed to do with copyrighted works...)

Copyright laws are such a mess, especially when you consider the combined (and possibly contradictory) effects of the laws of however many countries an international site such as youtube has to take into consideration...

Still seems the US rules over-ride everything else though, even where they'd force something which is against the law in another country.
Because... Screw other countries apparently. >_<

 

[Something Amyss]

Yeah... That seems to be kind of broken, doesn't it?

But on a tangential note, both the video, and youtube's policies seem to have a very US focused bias (unsurprisingly).

Believe it or not, 'fair use' is a concept that doesn't strictly exist in a lot of countries. (The UK for instance has no generic 'fair use' provisions, although it has some fairly specific cases of stuff you're allowed to do with copyrighted works...)

Copyright laws are such a mess, especially when you consider the combined (and possibly contradictory) effects of the laws of however many countries an international site such as youtube has to take into consideration...

Still seems the US rules over-ride everything else though, even where they'd force something which is against the law in another country.
Because... Screw other countries apparently. >_<

As they're an American company that's been heavily under attack by American Media and American law, I can sort of understand it. Though I admit, to someone not in the US, that has to be annoying. I'm from the imposer, not the imposed, so I only follow one set of laws. Well, sort of, as it's been established that fair use often doesn't count with Google.

To some extent, service providers are kind of grabbed by the lower horn, because they're so vulnerable to legislation and shutdown. Dating back to the Napster days, companies have been quick to pull content even if the claims aren't legitimate. Now, this may be American bias in American media, but from over here it seems like the American media has been a lot heavier than most other countries. And since we're still point of origin for a lot of these companies, they can be hit especially hard.

Also, in a digital era, regional discrepancies can be a pain in the ass at best. I really wish we could sort this out, but getting dozens of countries to agree on anything can be tough. I can only imagine how big a mess a BUNCH of countries can make considering how big a mess any one can make.

 

[piinyouri]

Well that was....yeah.

"You can't censor people."

Excuse me but isn't that just a tad bit hypocritical?