That's its own thing and it's just as absurd as this, but this person got a strike for "violating harmful and dangerous policy".
I don't upload any videos, but if their AI for reviewing videos is as bad as their AI for reviewing comments then both should be completely scrapped. Because it's not a regex matching or whatnot, but AI, it's impossible to predict which comment or a livechat message will get through. In practice it's virtually random. And the worst part is that they don't even bother to mention that your comment was 'problematic' to them, you have to have two windows open, one for posting and one on private mode to verify which of your comments actually showed up.
Just as a disclaimer, I haven't tried it in a while, so maybe it's somewhat better now, I don't know.
Something I never quite understood... couldn't Google have just said "no" and required them to submit DMCA takedowns? The law doesn't require the level of broken proactivity that Youtube has.
They absolutely could have, and have been entirely within the rules of the DMCA. My best guess is that the ContentID system is either (a) a bribe to get media companies to partner with youtube's paid streaming, or (b) a bribe to convince media companies that it isn't worth lobbying yet again for stronger copyright monopolies.
They don't care about your average Joe user. Just look at their search results and see what comes up. What they want is to transfer the 'legacy media' to their platforms.
“Congress shall have power… to promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries.”
As I read it, the law should be formed to maximize progress, not to maximize value of an idea.
But, a large amorphous group of citizens will never overcome a small, highly-concentrated self interested group. I doubt you'll ever see the copyright-opening version of the NRA or SPCA.
Groups like NRA are as powerful as they are, despite their relatively small membership numbers, because said membership is really dedicated to one particular issue, to the point of coordinated single-issue voting in the primaries. So if you can find enough people who are willing to vote solely on copyright in the primaries, it might actually work.
