How Would You Handle a Copyright Complaint?

[jawn_tech]

There's one issue that is shared among many websites, from video-sharing communities, to short-story outlets and article distribution sites. That is the dreaded issue of copyright infringement. It deals with what to do when someone claims that their (or someone else's) copyright has been treaded upon, and whether or not the complaint has any merit -- or an attempt at arbitrary censorship.

Let's take one example, as mentioned in an article at wired.com. A Finnish YouTuber who went by the name of STSanders rose to fame by his hilarious parodies of rock guitarists and bands, in what was called "shreds". It gained the attention of some famous musicians depicted in these parodies, and his creative humor even earned him a guest spot on Jimmy Kimmel. However, according to a YouTube insider, all it took was complaints from 3 artists without a sense of humor (in contrast to the many that had one and praised his work), for YouTube to deactivate his account.

However, just as there is copyright protection, there are also protections in place that cover parodies and "fair use". The same YouTube insider also said that in order for STSanders to get his account (and his work) reinstated, he would have to hire a lawyer to appeal the infringement claims.

It's worth noting that this wasn't a court ruling -- it was solely YouTube's decision to pull the plug based on complaints (3). This also begs the question, to take it a step further -- can anyone along with a few cohorts get just about any video removed from YouTube , for arbitrary reasons under the claim of copyright violation? In this case, the burden of proof seems to rest on the accused, not the accuser. And as we all know, hiring a lawyer to appeal can be costly.

Legal fees can also be realized by YouTube, who may not want to shell out dollars for every instance of copyright complaints just to see if the case has merit. Therefore, it's much cheaper and easier to simply pull the video and leave the legal fees to the accused to make their own appeal.

Where am I going with this? Perhaps any of you have, or are thinking of starting a website where you would publish user-generated content. Though there are some safeguards you can put in place, such as having a disclaimer for them to acknowledge that they are the creative owner of the work, such safeguards are only good until a complaint is made. Perhaps the complaint is legally valid. Or perhaps it's a case of someone simply not liking someone else's article / story / video for other reasons. Or yet, maybe it's just malice.

Then you are faced with a decision. What would you do?

[cw1865]

Then you are faced with a decision. What would you do?

You really have to take it on a case by case basis. The first question that you have to ask yourself is if the person making the complaint actually the owner of a copyright? Secondly, even if the person is the owner of the copyright, does the use constitute a 'fair' use? (Really all you can do is to look at the content itself to make that determination. Some content can be borderline of course, ie. is it newsworthy? constitute a parody, etc. etc.,) At some juncture, you also have to put some business sense into it as well, ie. is it worth it for me to bother with this, or is it simply easier to remove the content?

YouTube is a private entity, the first amendment does not apply as between the user and you tube.

[Tig]

The DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) actually has very detailed information for web site owners on what to do, how to do it, and how to determine if the complaint is real.
It also protects web site owners in the case of actual copyright infringement, provided you follow the directions...

Wikipedia has good information on the DMCA at:
Digital Millennium Copyright Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And here is the actual text of the DMCA
http://www.copyright.gov/legislation/dmca.pdf

[bj]

Regardless of what the DMCA says, youtube is going to take down a video at even a sniff of copyright infringement, and no matter if it's unsubstantiated. The reason? The RIAA and MAFIAA are looking over Google's shoulder and waiting for a slipup, and google owns youtube. Many illegal filesharers find their content using google, and google has been playing the "we just give results, we don't have control of the content" angle for all it's worth. In other words, it's political, in a sense.

[craigmn3]

Always inform the Domain Holder/ Hoster of the offending account about the infringement, if they are a reputible hoster they will suspend the offending website.

If they are disreputible, you're out of luck...but it's the first step.

[fathom]

YouTube did what it was suppose to do to be protected under Title II of DMCA... the insider neglected to mention that in order to be "protected" YouTube must follow Title II to the letter... which means...

it is up to the account owner to counter-claim...

On receiving a counter-claim YouTube must then go back to the original claimants and advise them to commence court proceedings...

It is here where the accuser tends to get a leg up...

If the claimants don't show proof of court procedings within 14 days YouTube MUST reinstate the account...

If they don't - the account holder can now file action against YouTube for wrongful termination and coercion with the original claimants.

DMCA Title II Safe Harbor for Designated Agents is explicit in its details.

[beachconnection]

This is a bigger problem than many acknowledge, and I don't blame YouTube for yanking some content at just a whisper of copyright issues. There's a ton of stuff on there that definitely infringes copyrights, but hasn't been yanked.

The band King Crimson is well known for seeking out violators when it comes to bootlegs, but i'm really surprised Robert Fripp hasn't gone after those that have proliferated YouTube with their music, without their permission.

Bloggers are terrible violators of copyrights. As owner of a travel, science and entertainment news site for the Oregon coast, (Oregon Coast Daily Travel: Oregon Coast Vacation Rentals, Lodging, Dining, Map, Oregon Coast Info) we get victimized a lot by bloggers. Many are highly ethical, and post teasers of our articles with links to the whole thing.

Others, however, copy and paste OUR original news content into their blogs, including our pics. I had to chase one guy down, who whined "it's a shame, there's a lot of interest in it." Well then link TO it, moron....don't steal it!

Some of these bloggers i can't contact, and most i just don't have time to track down. It's frustrating to have stuff stolen on the Net.

[NateDesmond]

1.
I would say the first step would be to contact the person posting to copyrighted content. If it was posted on a website try to contact the owner of the website. If it is something like YouTube try to contact the user.

2.
The second step would be to contact the company hosting the copyrighted content and ask them to remove it. If the copyrighted content is on a website contact the web host. If it is on YouTube contact the administrator.

3.
The last resort would be to take the infringer to court. This is very expensive and should only be used as a last option.

[beachconnection]

An addendum to my last post:

I had to go after two bloggers over this stealing content issue, and it turned out google itself was the host of these blogs.

In both cases, the only response i got from Google was that i had to fax them something about this complaint. And although i can't remember all of what they needed, I believe they wanted some proof of ownership of the article.

It sounds like Google is talking from two sides of its mouth. On one hand, they yank material easily from one part of their operation, but when it comes to blogs...well it sounds like Google is mumbling from that side of its mouth.

[NateDesmond]

Here is a strtegy for removing copyrighted content from a blogspot.com blog.

1. First, flag the blog by clicking the "flag blog" button at the top of the page. When you have clicked this button the words will change to "unflag blog".

2. Next, contact the blogger and tell them that you have flagged their blog, but that you will unflag it when the copyrighted content is removed from their blog.

3. Finally, if they do remove the content from their blog, you simply click the "unflag blog" button at the top of the page and you are done.

or,

3. If they still will not refuse the copyrighted content from their blog, get all your friends to flag the blog also. When enough people have flagged a blog, blogger will check the blog and might (but probably will not) remove it. Read more about how blogger uses the "flag blog" button here.