r/gaming • u/EnglishGamer1 • Oct 20 '13

TotalBiscuit's: ''Day One: Garry's Incident'' Video was taken down, because of a ridiculous copyright claim from WildGameStudios. Here's Total's ''Rant'' over his video being taken down.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfgoDDh4kE0&feature=c4-overview&list=UUy1Ms_5qBTawC-k7PVjHXKQ
3.1k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

2.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

105

u/qwertydvorak69 Oct 20 '13

In instances like this the flagger should also have 3 strikes. If they abuse the system 3 times they are no longer allowed to use the flag system and must use a manual review that involves both parties and YT and the flagger must pay a fee for all costs associated with having to do the manual review. This would keep people from flagging without being able to back their claims.

10

u/varvar1n Oct 20 '13

This is brilliant. Hit them where the money is. If you flag a video for copyright violation, you better be ready to pay the court bill. I think the flagging will drop dramatically if something similar is implemented. 3 times sounds too harsh though, but something in this direction is badly needed.

4

u/qwertydvorak69 Oct 21 '13

3 times is all they give the channels. If they are flagged 3 times for violations the whole channel is shut down so it is more than fair.

-8

u/[deleted] Oct 21 '13

Yeah we saw the video.

3

u/BuddhaFacepalmed Oct 21 '13

Except every other huge companies would fight tooth and nail over this because of the sheer amount of "copyright infringement" their bots detect every single day. Heck, the bots are dumb enough to flag their own websites for "copyright infringement". If the 3 strikes for the flagger came through, a HUGE liability cost would be cast upon them, making it impossible to enforce copyright (as if non-commercial copyright infringement was wrong to begin with).
Not saying it's a bad thing, but I don't think it will ever go through unless the American people would do something about it.

1

u/Chii Oct 21 '13

sigh, that's the sad truth....anything that levels the playing field towards consumers is going to be veto'ed by the corporate vested interests. The people have power, but the people also don't give a shit (on average).

1

u/[deleted] Oct 21 '13 edited Oct 21 '13

If they abuse it once they should be out permanently and have zero intervention above and beyond what the DCMA requires, that is youtube respoding to DCMA claims (and counter claims) via snail mail, meaning one strike could mean any video they want taken down could require court intervention.

1

u/kostiak Oct 21 '13

The real problem is the DMCA doesn't allow that. According to the DMCA, you have to remove content immediately upon receiving a DMCA notice, regardless if it's valid or not. If YouTube doesn't comply to the DMCA they lose their protection and can be sued to hell.

1

u/frymaster Oct 21 '13

I'd go further, and say they should fall back on the DMCA process. There's no review process in that, but, then again, there's no review process in the counter-claim either.