"angry" gamers/critics

[Count groudon]

True as that may be, the problem is that YouTube's honoring copyright claims by people who don't even own the damn thing to begin with. You figure someone would take a look and ask "Why the fuck is this guy claiming copyright for something Warner Brothers made, yet did jack shit on?"

I've actually heard stories of assholes who add samples of royalty free versions of songs to their music, and then claim copyright on anyone else who uses the same version that's still technically listed as royalty free. It's a completely broken system with no real depth on the rules that runs solely on a he said/she said basis, but that being said I can actually understand why Doug would get copyright claims considering 80% of his show is just him straight up showing a recent movie in its entirety.

 

[Kamen Rider Black RX]

 

[nonnewtonian]

IHE talks about a fake company making false copyright claims over content that wasn't even in his videos.

 

[MarvinTheParanoidAndroid]

When the Nostalgia Chick is the only Channel Awesome vet who actually understands how this shit works.

Much as he's had this and so much worse coming to him, I won't give Doug shit for his complaints on Youtube being a cruel, selfish, and arbitrary institution of takedown abuse, corporate crookery, and hypocrisy.

When a Channel Awesome vet knows better than people posting on this forum...

True as that may be, the problem is that YouTube's honoring copyright claims by people who don't even own the damn thing to begin with. You figure someone would take a look and ask "Why the fuck is this guy claiming copyright for something Warner Brothers made, yet did jack shit on?"

I would agree with you but the thing is that Youtube is mostly run by scripts, not people. If I recall correctly, the way it happens is that when something gets flagged, if the system recognizes content in the video on a list it has, such as images & audio, it'll react with a specific tier of procedure. Then when you file your defense claim, someone has to look over it & determine the final course of action themselves.

In case you're wondering why it's not just all run by people, imagine overseeing the entirety of Youtube on your own or even getting other people to do it for you. Then consider the possibility of human error and the consequences that could erupt from that error.

 

[MarvinTheParanoidAndroid]

Oh no Alfa, not you too...

By the way, apparently Revver still owe Channel Awesome $10,000.00 when they closed down.

 

[Jewelsmakerguy]

I would agree with you but the thing is that Youtube is mostly run by scripts, not people. If I recall correctly, the way it happens is that when something gets flagged, if the system recognizes content in the video on a list it has, such as images & audio, it'll react with a specific tier of procedure. Then when you file your defense claim, someone has to look over it & determine the final course of action themselves.

In case you're wondering why it's not just all run by people, imagine overseeing the entirety of Youtube on your own or even getting other people to do it for you. Then consider the possibility of human error and the consequences that could erupt from that error.

Well, in that case, they should be overlooking those scripts a little more often and asking why the system's even accepting those false claims to begin with. I swear the copyrighting system is just as flawed as the so-called updates they do to the layout.

 

[AnOminous]

Lindsay raises some very good points:

The initial argument is incorrect, though. Fair Use is a defense because without such a defense, copyright would entirely trump First Amendment rights to comment on and transform existing rights. The First Amendment is why the defense exists.

Unfortunately, it does a piss poor job of serving its purpose.

Here's a brief explanation of the concept in the context of parody.

ETA: To clarify, she is correct that fair use is raised procedurally as a defense, but the substance of the legal doctrine is rooted in protection of First Amendment rights.

 

[MarvinTheParanoidAndroid]

Well, in that case, they should be overlooking those scripts a little more often and asking why the system's even accepting those false claims to begin with.

Because that's the way they designed it. I don't know why people apparently think a computer can weigh options, have an opinion & use better judgment. Programming scripts are comprised of nos, yeses, ifs, ands & buts, not maybes. If the parameters of a claim fit within a certain condition, an "if" script has been fulfilled & it will perform the intended function.

Not only that but what motive does Youtube have to really be proactive about this? It's ultimately no skin off their ass. Their #1 concern is their own safety. You could argue that it wastes more of their time but you're also asking them to redesign their script, update it across all their servers all to accommodate a niche market on their site that they actively booted off in the mid 2000s.

I don't think this is exactly a major priority to them.

 

[DrChristianTroy]

https://youtube.com/watch?v=d9mTOq6mP2I

Look at this goober. Just the wackest looking motherfucker.

 

[Jewelsmakerguy]

Because that's the way they designed it. I don't know why people apparently think a computer can weigh options, have an opinion & use better judgment. Programming scripts are comprised of nos, yeses, ifs, ands & buts, not maybes. If the parameters of a claim fit within a certain condition, an "if" script has been fulfilled & it will perform the intended function.

Not only that but what motive does Youtube have to really be proactive about this? It's ultimately no skin off their ass. Their #1 concern is their own safety. You could argue that it wastes more of their time but you're also asking them to redesign their script, update it across all their servers all to accommodate a niche market on their site that they actively booted off in the mid 2000s.

I don't think this is exactly a major priority to them.

But that's the problem, if they did, no one would be worried about some average Joe not affiliated with any big corporation deciding that he might want to flag someone else's video for shits and lols. That's the big issue. The major film studios and other such companies can have reason if they so wanted to. But just the average person or smaller company flagging for something they clearly don't own the rights to in any capacity, that's a huge flaw right there.

 

[waffle]

Yeah, I don't know why people get mad a youtube when the real bad guys are the people who file the baseless claims. Under the current law law youtube has no choice but to process the claims as filed unless they want to loose safe harbor under the DMCA. It's broken but youtube didn't make the law. Now the content ID deal is a different matter, but still.

 

[A Random]

Since we're posting '#WTFU' videos here, I'd like to know if this one has a valid argument or not:

 

[Somar]

Since we're posting '#WTFU' videos here, I'd like to know if this one has a valid argument or not:

https://youtube.com/watch?v=2eHbJ9U8YLY

Well TFS never monetize most of their videos, so I say it's fair if they were only making money off other things and not the stuff they put the most work into.

 

[Jewelsmakerguy]

Since we're posting '#WTFU' videos here, I'd like to know if this one has a valid argument or not:

https://youtube.com/watch?v=2eHbJ9U8YLY

Well they have gone on record that they only do it as a hobby before (I forget when they said it though). So them not monetizing the videos is probably a good move on their part. Which is more than I can say for Doug and most of his group.

 

[Sinner]

Totalbiscuit has joined the #WTFU situation as well:

It's impressive that Doug, for how incompetent he is, managed to convince motherfucking TB to be on his side.

 

[Adamska]

Totalbiscuit has joined the #WTFU situation as well:
https://youtube.com/watch?v=1ExS1-pPZvM
It's impressive that Doug, for how incompetent he is, managed to convince motherfucking TB to be on his side.

It hits them all in the wallets, that's why.

 

[Anonimo]

Should we make a thread for the #WTFU movement if we haven't already?

 

[MarvinTheParanoidAndroid]

Should we make a thread for the #WTFU movement if we haven't already?

Yes, please.

 

[JP 307]

So, apparently LordKat retired from making podcasts just a few days ago because all of the shit he said about CA and its contributors.

Edit: The supercut videos are private now.

 

[MarvinTheParanoidAndroid]

Ver archivo adjunto 75717

So, apparently LordKat retired from making podcasts just a few days ago because all of the shit he said about CA and its contributors.

Edit: The supercut videos are private now.

Why would LordKat feel guilty over everything he said about Channel Awesome? What did he do that was so bad? I mean, I would understand why he would feel guilty about Spoony considering he joked about Spoony becoming a transvestite or some shit in a livestream with Lupa but what did he say about the others?