YouTube is the most popular video platform in the world, but that doesn't make it exempt from intellectual property laws. In fact, with the spotlight on YouTube, it makes him even more vulnerable. This means that any video that infringes trademark or copyright laws can be removed from YouTube, often without prior notice..
These deletions can be erroneous, affecting both the content creator and the viewer. YouTube is also vulnerable, as it has been embroiled in a legal battle against Viacom since 2007, and the media company claims that the online video platform turned a blind eye to copyright laws during its creation. Although YouTube ultimately won the case, as well as subsequent appeals, it marked a turning point for YouTube and the videos that reside on it..
Let’s take a look at what all this means, some examples of content assertions and how it affects you. Because we suspect that you, like us, have found one of your favorite videos suddenly and inexplicably, removed from YouTube. And it's extremely annoying. So you might well understand the reasons behind this..
Intellectual property laws are a murky business. The two that mainly apply to YouTube videos are trademarks and copyrights. Often you will see these terms used indistinctly indistinctly; They have distinct and distinct meanings. Let’s take a look at these in a very broad way, but we know that laws vary from country to country and have many complexities. Oh, and I'm not a lawyer.
A brand distinguishes its brand How to create copyright symbols and trademarks through keystrokes How to create copyright symbols and trademarks through keystrokes Read more about a competitor. Think a company name or logo. These can be registered trademarks to protect someone else using them for their own benefit or damaging the reputation of their brand. A registered trademark can be valid indefinitely, as long as the owner continues to use it..
Brand ownership depends on context and use. It is possible to have a trademark in one industry for a specific application, but not in another. But if I use a trademark in a way that causes confusion as to the true source, I am infringing.
On the other hand, copyrights do not have to be registered. It is automatically granted to an author when he creates an original work, granting him exclusive rights of use and distribution. For example, if I upload a video to YouTube of me singing a song I wrote and doing some killer dance moves, I have full copyright over that content.
Someone who re-uploads that video to their own channel is guilty of infringement, even if interpreting a cover of that song could be a copyright infringement. Is her YouTube song legal? Is your YouTube song legal? A popular method for those who desire a quick and easy rise to stardom is to post popular music cover songs on YouTube. But consider this:what are the legal ramifications of covering a song? Read more I would need to license my song, either for monetary returns or through an open system like Creative Commons What is Creative Commons, and should I use it? What is Creative Commons, and should I use it? Creative Commons is a set of licenses that automatically gives you permission to do several things, such as reuse and distribute content. Find out more about this and how to use it. Read more .
Generally, copyrights expire around 100 years after the author of the content dies, although that number varies by region. The work(s) will enter the public domain, free of charge for anyone to use as they wish. For example, I could film an exciting word-for-word rendition of a Shakespeare play and upload it to YouTube without worrying about copyright. I won't, but I could.
The entire YouTube copyright system is based on automation. At the time of writing, more than 400 hours of video are uploaded to YouTube every minute. That's a staggering amount, and manually guaranteeing that every second of those videos complies with current copyright laws is impossible.
It is why YouTube has a content identification system. This group brings together more than 8,000 partners, including broadcasters, music labels and film studios, and automatically scans their content against what is being uploaded to YouTube. To date, this system has helped claim more than 400 million videos. Manual copyright claims can be made, but most are automatic..
One of the main uses of this system is to prevent people from re-uploading music videos or full movies. In fact, if I tried that, I'd probably find the video is blocked before it gets published. Have you ever come across a clip from a movie that looks reflected or the audio triggered weirdly? This is the uploader that attempts to avoid automatic copyright detection..
YouTube's detection system favors those who claim infringement. If a video is claimed, the creator will generally have several options. They can accept the claim, which could mean the video was deleted altogether. Alternatively, it could mean that the claimant could fully monetize the video through ads..
Other options include things like muting video or blocking video used on particular platforms, depending on the individual case. The claim can also be disputed, if the system has incorrectly marked the video.
Popular content creators The Fine Bros are well known for their React series on YouTube. In short, they show various demographic data, allow them to watch some videos, then film their reactions and ask questions. These videos get millions of views. Although The Fine Bros were not the first to create this type of content, they definitely popularized it on YouTube. Well for them.
Come January 2016 and the couple posts a video announcing their React World initiative. Blatantly announcing his intention to “change the world”, It was a revelation of his plans to license the React series. Essentially, The Fine Bros were trying to put a door around reaction videos like theirs. If you wanted to create something similar, in their eyes you would have to join their program and share the revenues with them..
In their video, the duo highlights that React World would allow people to create their own reaction videos in a “legal” way. They presented a brand for the word. “react.” In entertainment contexts, along with other terms like “Kids react” and “Teens react,” in 2015. This means that if he had to create his own video with that word or phrase in the title, then he could have lawyers calling their virtual door.
Whether this is ethically correct is questionable, but that is irrelevant in the eyes of the law. In fact, The Fine Bros have previously shown their intent to control what they see as their format, having called out Ellen DeGeneres and Jimmy Kimmel for allegedly cheating on them. This is despite the fact that they did not invent the idea of filming reactions, nor did they have the legal basis to support it..
Going after the best dogs is one thing, but there have been reports that The Fine Bros filed applications for small YouTube content creators who have their own videos with the word “react” In the title. And keep in mind that the trademark hadn't even been approved, either at any time..
Legally, trademark owners have to protect their property. A trademark can only continue to be valid if it is shown that those who registered it are protected. Otherwise, the mark could be lost..
“Escalar” and “Trampoline” used to be a trademark, but these words have entered the common language and can now be used by laymen and companies alike. Brands like “Coke” and “Google” are often used generically in everyday language, but you can be sure that the two companies will vehemently defend those registered trademarks until the day they die..
The Fine Bros controversy calmed down when they announced that they had rescinded their trademarks, abandoned the React World scheme and dropped all previous claims of video removal. They pulled out his ad video and swept it under the rug..
Whether this debacle will actually hurt the viewing figures of React videos in the long run is debatable, but The Fine Bros lost hundreds of thousands of subscribers and damaged their reputation.
Good question. Why should you care, especially if you don't find the reaction video genre interesting? It is because this situation is indicative of the corporate nature of YouTube. Take this quote from Kelly Merryman, Vice President of YouTube content partnerships, when The Fine Bros announced their plans:
There's nothing stopping The Fine Bros from trying this again in the future, or anyone else. YouTube favors these popular content creators because they are the ones who bring a large number of consistent viewings, attract advertisers and consolidate YouTube’s position as a powerful entertainment platform..
Behind many of the most popular YouTube channels are networks. These join many YouTube channels to provide them with assistance in a variety of areas such as market research, advertising opportunities and promotion. This is important because these networks have the resources available to protect their brands..
Some of them have people who will explore YouTube and manually detect content they believe infringes their intellectual property, even if it is not a valid claim. However, many smaller content creators will back down, regardless of their legal situation, and allow their video to be deleted..
Combine the power wielded by big companies with intellectual property laws and you’ll be left with a situation that could mean some of your favorite YouTube videos will suddenly disappear someday, with a removal notice of everything left in its place.
Let’s take a look at some real-world examples of YouTube video removal and where they lie on the intellectual property spectrum..
Smosh is one of the original YouTube stars and they are still going strong today. Having started as two guys in a bedroom, they have expanded into an empire. With multiple channels, millions of views and the backing of a full production team, Smosh is a YouTube powerhouse that continues to grow stronger..
When YouTube was still in the beta version, Ian Hecox and Anthony Padilla started uploading videos to the site. One of the first was lip syncing with the Pokemon melody of the theme. It exploded and was at one point the most viewed video in all of YouTube, after having amassed more than 24 million views. In 2007, the video was removed after a copyright claim by The Pokemon Company, so it is the highest profile content claim at the moment.
There is an aspect of copyright called fair use. This grants an exception to copyright whenever the work is under a certain commitment. This includes, but is not limited to, criticism, news reports and parody. It could be argued that the Smosh video was a parody; contained images of them hitting a Pikachu toy, jumping like a Pokémon and licking a Jesus figure.
But ultimately, the determining factor of whether something is fair use is in the hands of a judge. And it's likely that YouTube and/or Smosh didn't feel it was worth their time or money to defend the video. However, in 2010 the couple posted a “revenge” Video teasing the situation. With music reproduced and lyrics changed, this video clearly lies within the territory of parody and is available on YouTube with over 27 million views to date..
In late 2015, Sony attempted to register the term “Let’s Play,” which created concern. “Let’s play” is a widely used term for those who record themselves playing video games and the idea that Sony would have a trademark on the phrase is concerning. The trademark was initially rejected (which is very common), but not for the reason I could think of; was rejected due to a company called Let'z Play of America, which organizes play events, that the trademark was deemed too similar.
Sony now has time to counter the rejection. While it is possible that the company wants to use the trademark for advertising purposes, to avoid competitors like Microsoft and Nintendo using it in similar campaigns, the problem is that the intent is not provable. In fact, if Sony obtained the trademark, it would be within its rights to order the withdrawals of any YouTube video that uses the phrase “Let’s play.”
Nintendo also has a rocky relationship with the creators of Let's Play. In 2013, Nintendo began taking 100 percent of the revenue from any videos that included Nintendo copyrighted content, such as game videos. There were also reports that the videos were simply deleted.
A few years later, this changed with the introduction of Nintendo's creators Program. Content creators must have their videos reviewed by Nintendo before publication. After that, 60 percent of the total ad revenue for a video will go to Nintendo..
If it wanted to, Nintendo could file the removal requests for all these types of videos because they could infringe copyright. It could be argued that video games are different from traditional media such as music or cinema because, most of the time, a gaming experience is unique to an individual. In fact, the creators behind Minecraft credit the people who play their game on YouTube as an important factor in the success of the game. Como tal, muchas empresas permiten Let's Plays o hacerles la vista gorda; a menudo es publicidad gratuita.
Aunque no es uno de los canales más grandes en YouTube, Channel Awesome está creciendo en popularidad y aún cuenta con cerca de 400,000 suscriptores, lo cual no es una hazaña. Es principalmente el hogar del crítico de nostalgia, también conocido como Doug Walker, un tipo que ofrece sus opiniones sobre películas, programas de televisión y más..
Walker recibió una notificación por correo electrónico de que algunas de las funciones de su cuenta de YouTube habían sido desactivadas, lo que incluía la monetización. Como alguien que se gana la vida en YouTube, eso es algo que no debe tomarse a la ligera. La causa de esto fue el resultado de una reclamación de derechos de autor de Studio Ghibli por su revisión de Mi vecino Totoro .
El video ofensivo está hecho completamente de clips de la película, con la voz en off de Walker ofreciendo sus pensamientos y opiniones. Esto debería estar cubierto por un uso justo, pero nuevamente, eso sería decisión de un juez. El verdadero problema provino del hecho de que YouTube no era nada comunicativo con Walker, al no ofrecer ninguna interacción humana en sus afirmaciones contrarias.
Walker dice que tuvo que esperar tres semanas antes de que todo esto comenzara a resolverse. Toda esta situación plantea una serie de preguntas, no solo sobre la confiabilidad de obtener ingresos de YouTube, sino también sobre la confiabilidad de su sistema de identificación de contenido y el soporte al cliente..
El sistema de YouTube se basa en la automatización y está abierto al abuso. Si un video tuyo favorito ha desaparecido repentinamente, es posible que se deba a un reclamo de contenido. Incluso si se trata de un reclamo falso, es posible que no veas ese video nuevamente si el usuario no conoce sus derechos o no está dispuesto a pasar por el proceso de disputa..
YouTube ahora ofrece asistencia legal a algunos videos que son claramente de uso justo y que han sido retirados por un demandante demasiado entusiasta. La compañía mantiene estos videos en vivo en los Estados Unidos y cubre los costos de cualquier demanda.
Aunque este servicio solo se prestará para un número muy pequeño de personas, es al menos un paso en la dirección correcta. Sin embargo, muchos argumentarían que toda la naturaleza del sistema de identificación de contenido debe ser revisada, junto con las leyes de propiedad intelectual en la era digital..
En el futuro, puede mitigar la posibilidad de que sus videos favoritos de YouTube sean eliminados al organizarlos en una lista de reproducción y luego usar un descargador de listas de reproducción de YouTube. ¿Quieres ver videos de YouTube sin conexión? Le presentamos cinco aplicaciones y herramientas que le permitirán descargar una lista de reproducción completa de YouTube con unos pocos clics. Leer más para guardarlos y almacenarlos fuera de línea.