Google's automatic copyright recognition system is absolute crap. I've spent hours upon hours emailing them different documents showing them that we have the licenses (purchased from the exact company that is claiming infringement through the automatic system) and just get automated responses back. Eventually it gets cleared up, and then 3 months later, the same thing happens again.
Now I've started getting infringement claims against classical music that we are using (that we have also licensed) because a different company owns the license to a different performance of that piece. When I stated we had a license to this piece through another company, it was rejected and the video was removed from monetization. The only way to get out of that black hole was to contact the CEO of the company directly and appeal to him to read the license agreement we had.
I don't have the links handy, but when I started researching this problem (automatic copyright detection and fair use or works in the public domain), I found hundreds of people experiencing the same problem. Google is in a really tough place. Wedged between the typical youtube uploader and the recording and movie industries, this system makes sense. The problem is that all of the well intentioned people are getting swept up in the solution, and now high profile people are showing how broken it is. A system that makes your genuine users frustrated and exasperated does not have a bright future.
At the very least it seems like the system would benefit from a graduated-tier of trust. Once you've demonstrated to them that you're very likely to have the licenses for your content, it seems the burden of proof and benefit of the doubt ought to shift in your favor.
Something like that probably wouldn't last very long, since it could be easily gamed.
1. buy a cheap license to something that will get flagged by the auto-detecting algorithms
2. go through the red-tape of proving you have licensed the material, thereby flagging your account into a higher level of trust
3. post mad amounts of commercial content on your account and monetize the pants off of it, making insane amounts of cash before finally getting noticed and shut down
4. set up a new account, rinse and repeat (maybe even with the same licensed material you used the first time)
Currently there is no incentive for claimants not to spray out take-downs like a firehose. They need something to motivate them to take more care.
Google should implement a cost for incorrect claims as an incentive for claimants to get it right the first time. Somethink like, say, a $1000 for each claim that is obviously negligently submitted.
I'm going to be launching a (free) film I've spent years on in the next few months, and I've been debating which video sharing site to use. Obviously, having it go offline whilst popularity is at its peak would be a disaster - so your information here inclines me away from YouTube and toward a smaller provider or self-hosting.
If your video is totally free, you have a much easier time because you can use vimeo or another video hosting site. If your video is commercial, besides hosting it yourself, there aren't really any other monetization rental strategies beside Youtube.
What has me confused is how these automated take downs, without automated appeals, don't constitute fraud. I can't go down to the local county courthouse, spamming it with grossly erroneous and frivolous claims documents, and expect to just walk away. There are laws against that sort of thing.
Now I've started getting infringement claims against classical music that we are using (that we have also licensed) because a different company owns the license to a different performance of that piece. When I stated we had a license to this piece through another company, it was rejected and the video was removed from monetization. The only way to get out of that black hole was to contact the CEO of the company directly and appeal to him to read the license agreement we had.
I don't have the links handy, but when I started researching this problem (automatic copyright detection and fair use or works in the public domain), I found hundreds of people experiencing the same problem. Google is in a really tough place. Wedged between the typical youtube uploader and the recording and movie industries, this system makes sense. The problem is that all of the well intentioned people are getting swept up in the solution, and now high profile people are showing how broken it is. A system that makes your genuine users frustrated and exasperated does not have a bright future.