Copyright madness: YouTube seems to doubt whether Shakespeare is in the public domain.
-
Shake more beer, Willy!
-
To DMCA takedown or to not DMCA takedown? That is the question.
-
Not so much a Youtube issue as a modern copyright issue.
But I'm curious, is that recommendation meant for users or creators? And don't say "both", I know it's a chicken and egg thing, I'm asking what you think comes first.
-
Whether tis nobler in the mind to suffer the sponsors and ads of free content, or take cards against premium content and by supporting skip them.
-
-
Read the article - in this case the problem is YouTube not reacting to the DMCA counterclaim.
he promptly sent YouTube a counter-notice, as the DMCA contemplates, and assumed that would the end of the matter. After all, he reasoned, Shakespeare is in the public domain, and besides, Shakespeare by the Seas assured him that it had not relied on Coallier’s claimed version of the Shakespeare plays in crafting the script for its performances; indeed, Shakespeare by the Sea had never heard of Coallier or seen his supposed copyrighted versions of Shakespeare, and hence could not have copied them. Even so, YouTube, ignoring the DMCA’s procedures, refused to honor his counter-notice or even forward the notice to Coallier so that Coallier could file suit for copyright infringement. Instead, it issued a copyright strike against Underwood’s channel and told him that he would have to work things out with Coallier.
All they had to do was to (and are legally required to do) is forwarding that counterclaim and then restore the content. Then the crazy dude claiming to own the copyrights to Shakespeare could try to sue the uploader. A sane legal system should throw out that quickly.
But instead YouTube didn't forward that message, did issue its own copyright strike and might ban your account if you get too many of those strikes and then told them to negotiate with some nutcase.
-
Content has to arrive first for users to consume. It really is a "both" type of response to some extent.
In my opinion, the solution is for content creators to simultaneously release on alternative platforms while also maintaining a YouTube presence so they're still making money from that. However, they should start heavily advertising the alternative platforms on every video and transitioning to a different payment model (e.g. Patreon, Ko-fi, Indiegogo, etc). Content creators could organize with other creators and coordinating the transition. If you got huge channels like Digital Foundry, Linus Tech Tips, GamersNexus, etc (for the PC gaming scene, as an example) to agree, then that's already millions of users.
-
It's mine. I own the Shakespeare copyright.
Pay up.
-
Alternatives such as? I see people say his but none of the so-called alternatives have anywhere near the functionality or availability.
-
Just gonna leave this Tom Scott video here because I think it is an interesting watch.
-
Hmmmm bet Gemini is trained on lots of Shakespeare. Book em Danno!
-
They have fuck all content. Fortunately both peertube and yt I regrate into pipepipe seemlessly so don't even need a second app.
-
Agreed, and curious to see what “solution” the OP comes up with.
-
The naval battle flag of the knights Templar?
-
“We’ll clear things up only after we hear from the original creator “
-
A good article on Walled Culture, marred by its being illustrated with AI slop. Surely a normal, real public domain Shakespeare image could have illustrated the point of the article just as well, if not better.
-
Pericles, Prince of Tyre. Act IV, Scene 1
[Enter pirates]
First Pirate: Hold, villain!
-
There's no consequences to filling out a false claim. That's been a problem with the DMCA that existed even before YouTube.
-
Check out the pinned post at [email protected] about channels to follow. Maybe you find something interesting.
-
You’ve never heard of the Jolly Roger lmao???
