Ladies And Gentlemen, We May Have A New Winner For Most Credit Card Data Leaked

YouTube's Itchy Trigger Finger Pulls Down Perfectly Legitimate Video

from the gee,-wonder-why dept

Fri, Jan 19th 2007 9:55am — Mike Masnick

With all of the attention YouTube/Google has been getting lately over the problems of unauthorized videos on their site, it's perhaps no surprise that the company has a bit of an itchy trigger finger in pulling videos down. But, it appears that sometimes that trigger finger is a bit too itchy. Earlier this week, we had a story about the future of the CD business, where we linked to a video interview that JD Lasica did with Russ Solomon, founder of Tower Records. Lasica apparently uploaded the video himself to YouTube, but discovered that the company pulled it down after an hour or two for no clear reason. The only thought that Lasica has is that there was a 15 second song clip that went along with the credits at the end. Except... Lasica got the song from a site that promotes music with Creative Commons licenses, and says you can use the song, as long as it's credited, which it was. So, it was his own video with legally licensed music, and yet YouTube pulled it. You have to have some sympathy for the position YouTube is in, with all the complaints and threats, but if they keep pulling perfectly legitimate videos, people are going to start going to the competition pretty quickly. That's why, for all the talk about how YouTube needs better copyright controls, the more they do, the more likely that the questionable content will just start showing up on other sites that are a bit friendlier.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

20 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 19 Jan 2007 @ 10:18am

This is YouTube's great flaw. As it moves from homemade content with alot of potential copyright violations to corporate content cleared by the copyright holders, it loses much of its draw. YouTube will basically turn into another TV channel with all the requisite challenges of a network while smaller challengers will fly under the copyright radar accepting that homemade, copyright violating content that once made YouTube so popular, hip, and cool.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jumped the shark, 19 Jan 2007 @ 10:21am

I think now that YouTube is making spyware and pulling legitimate videos, they have finally Jumped the Shark
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Alex, 19 Jan 2007 @ 10:21am

This is why the quicker CC licensed content becomes the norm, the better it'll be for everyone
[ link to this | view in thread ]
divyansh sharma, 19 Jan 2007 @ 10:26am

if i had to guess
if i had to guess he used a service called "splice" or something where u can remix music n create ur own

and you are allowed to use it in ur video as long as u credit it back, but the problem is, that this "splice" 's data base is user uploaded n alow contains copyrighted songs

so if i find.... snoopdog on splice, use his music n give credit.... it is still illegal

because splice cannot give away what they dont have...(rights)

just a guess
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Michael, 19 Jan 2007 @ 10:27am

A problem with the litigious age we're in is that businesses are crippled by success. Small companies aren't targets because they don't have the popularity and capital, but with some success comes an endless stream of lawsuits. This creates a cycle, where small companies grow to larger companies, which are then promptly destroyed, resulting the next in line ascending to the throne, receiving their prize of death by lawyer, and so on and so forth. The end result is instability, which in and of itself isn't necessarily bad, but I would argue that it's not meant to be the natural and continual state of things.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
ScytheNoire, 19 Jan 2007 @ 10:46am

actually small companies are often the prime targets, since they often don't have the financial resources to fight back or to be able to do the research needed to see if the claims against them can stand up in court. there are many small companies that have been blackmailed by legal threats and many that have suffered and failed because of them. Google has the funds to stand up against them, but the problem is that the RIAA and MPAA have paid too much money to politicians for any legit company to stand up against these corporate mafia's. they've paid off the legal system to look the other way and do their dirty work. until the government steps in and stops corporate mafia's, things will continue to degrade in the business world and for the public at large.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Nick D (profile), 19 Jan 2007 @ 10:56am

Maybe it is time to put CC notice at the beginning of every piece of music or video that is submitted to sites like YouTube or OurMedia.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
misanthropic humanist, 19 Jan 2007 @ 11:10am

fingerprints?
This is precisely why I said that the fingerprinting system developed by Phillips was a good thing.

So where is this magic technology? I expect it will turn out to be nothing but vapourware and its announcement was a saber rattling threat rather than an indication of anything useful to everyone.

Because if YouTube were to have run the video against this supposedly working system it would have given a green light wouldn't it?

After some trials and burn-in time the system could become so good that YouTube or other user submitted content sites would have a policy to pull a video only if it fails the fingerprinting test.

This could be adapted to allow fair-use too, detecting videos that use appropriately small clips and passing them.

Right now the policy seems to guilty until proven innocent, shoot first ask questions later. That is insulting to people contribute to the site. YouTube should not forget that without their users they would have no site at all.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
David B, 19 Jan 2007 @ 11:10am

Much Ado About Nothing
They pulled down a video that may have been legal, big deal. Who care? Guess what, it will happen again. Guess what, they will also not pull down some video's that are illegal.

The fact that it made Techdirt when they may have got one video wrong is a testament to their great record. So what is the score now 1,000,000 to 1?

Is the fact that Wikipedia had some information posted incorrect really news? I expect more from a tech site.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Overcast, 19 Jan 2007 @ 11:15am

Let them police it too much - it'll pave the way for another service indeed.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Passive Observer, 19 Jan 2007 @ 11:47am

Re: Much Ado About Nothing
I have to agree 100% with you David B.

TechDirt has quite a tendency to sensationalize the "news".
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Damon baird, 19 Jan 2007 @ 1:11pm

Re: if i had to guess
With the CC license, it doesn't matter. If you give credit where it is used, non commercially, its fine. Using Blender taught me fast about that.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
wolff000, 19 Jan 2007 @ 1:12pm

It is News.
The fact it happened once doesn't change the fact that it happened at all. Say I am a cop and I accidentaly shoot the wrong person does it mean it no one should care since I shot the right person 100 other times? This is news cause of it continues to happen people will go elsewhere and youtube will die. If you don't like what you read here why do you come back and continue to read?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
zeromus, 19 Jan 2007 @ 1:14pm

Someone has to popularize these incidents. Oftentimes it takes a specific anecdotal example to drive home the point and make people angry.

You cant go to the supreme court with a vague theory. You go with a test case. Likewise in the supreme court of public opinion.

If this stuff didnt hit the public radar at all, would we be better off?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John, 19 Jan 2007 @ 1:59pm

Damon baird:

But if I put a chapter of JK Rowling's next book up on my site with a CC license, and someone puts it on their site with a CC license...we are **both** guilty of copyright infringement, because I didn't have the right to put the CC license next to her work...and the person who copied it may have not realized they were breaking the law, but they were still doing so.

So if Lasica took the song from a site that claimed CC...but had no right to claim it...it still violated copyright, and it was still appropriately taken down.

That's what Divyansh was suggesting...though it is a guess, and there is no evidence either way.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
cwg1960, 19 Jan 2007 @ 2:40pm

legallities
when its legal to start shooting lawyers most of this kind of thing will stop!!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Kenbo (profile), 19 Jan 2007 @ 2:44pm

Re: Re: Much Ado About Nothing
Especially when they don't seem to have even tried to get YouTube's side of the story. This could have been nothing more than some glitch. Did the guy even check it when he uploaded it. Maybe he screwed something up.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonomya, 19 Jan 2007 @ 4:52pm

they gave in
What ever happened to You Tube saying that they are only a video hosting site? When did they give in and agree that they were responsible for the actions of their users? By policing content, they are taking on that responsilbity. Another "community" site that can't stick to its guns. I thought at least with Google behind them they would grow a pair. Oh well.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
David B, 20 Jan 2007 @ 4:24pm

Re: It is News.
Are you comparing removing a post from a hosting site to a cop shooting someone? I think we can expect a little more accuracy (and as such, news worthiness) in the latter.

Also in case you're interested I would expect a little more coverage about an accidental atomic bomb explosion also.

Youtube feels compelled to start monitoring posts for the same reason myspace now does, the public blames them if something bad happens and they are connected in any manner. Plus as owner of the site they can take down any post they want and just because they do, it's not news.

Why do I "continue to read", well I love my children too, but I don"t let them get by with every stupid comment they make.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
J.A.P., 22 Jan 2007 @ 7:16pm

Nothing New
You Tube has been quick to pull videos whenever there's a complaint. This has resulted in blatent censoring of perfectly legitimate yet politically incorrect views for a while now.
[ link to this | view in thread ]