(UPDATED - Claim has been removed) The Linux Gamer's response video to LTT got claimed by Fullscreen

[savantskie]

Just now, Ryein Goddard said:

I got a copy claim ID thing on my channel as well.

 

Did I do something wrong? 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ei_IWwOreZo

 

I really have no idea.  I just post videos very rarely.  I didn't use any of Linus's stuff so I am confused.

No, it is YOUTUBE'S broken algorithm doing this. The ContentID system got changed for some reason and it's being REALLY heavy for some reason.

[fatmanmedi]

From reading this and watching the stream it's been blown out of proportions, Linux Gamer should have sent an email to LTT explaining the situation and got it resolved that way, it could have taken 10 mins tops to get sorted. YT's automated screening is useless, I've had videos up on youtube and have then reported by the auto systems and what was the most amusing thing is that I was being reported to myself, I had infringed on my own copyright according to youtube.

 

YT needs to relook at how they deal with matters like this in future.

 

Fats

[PendragonUK]

Mine was a video comparing Windows and Linux, where I ran Valley benchmark. LTT's video was a hardware video where one of the test run was the Valley benchmark. So large parts of the video were almost identical for some parts as both videos.

[Spotty]

1 minute ago, Ryein Goddard said:

I got a copy claim ID thing on my channel as well.

 

Did I do something wrong? 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ei_IWwOreZo

 

I really have no idea.  I just post videos very rarely.  I didn't use any of Linus's stuff so I am confused.

I haven't looked at your video, however in the past few days there have been a large number of false-positives generated by Youtube's automated ContentID system. If you believe that you are not infringing on LTTs copyright, then please file a dispute on the claim.

The copyright claims should be handled by LTTs MCN Fullscreen, however you can also reach out to the team at LTT using the email address found on their Youtube About page, or send a private message to @LinusTech or @nicklmg (click their names and it will take you to their profile, where you can then hit the Message button to send them a message) here on the forum and they may be able to assist you in the process or expedite the dispute.

If your video is monetised, then any monetisation will be held by Youtube for a period of time to allow you to dispute the claim, and if the claim is disputed and found to be non-genuine, you should not lose any ad revenue as a result of this.

[Spotty]

9 minutes ago, PendragonUK said:

I got one of these content claims today on one of my videos. As my video predated the LTT one by almost a year I put it down Youtube being Youtube and Youtube is a dick. I disputed it through Youtube system and I'll let Youtube sort it out. I don't have any issue with LTT or any of the team. Automated content screening is really dumb and I think everyone should know this by now.

 

1 minute ago, PendragonUK said:

Mine was a video comparing Windows and Linux, where I ran Valley benchmark. LTT's video was a hardware video where one of the test run was the Valley benchmark. So large parts of the video were almost identical for some parts as both videos.

That has been a common issue where Heaven's Valley benchmark is being flagged. It's a fault in whatever changes YouTube made to the Content ID system. As you have already done, dispute the claim and within a few days it should be resolved. If you need to reach out to the team at LTT, refer to the above post for ways of contacting them.

 

Just now, Spotty said:

The copyright claims should be handled by LTTs MCN Fullscreen, however you can also reach out to the team at LTT using the email address found on their Youtube About page, or send a private message to @LinusTech or @nicklmg (click their names and it will take you to their profile, where you can then hit the Message button to send them a message) here on the forum and they may be able to assist you in the process or expedite the dispute.

[Hyderpony (Gallop Crush)]

I had a content ID on Valley Benchmark before, got it fix soon after.

[Psittac]

I posted this idea on the live stream Linus just did, but thought I'd get a better audience here.

 

I honestly don't know if it's something about the internet bringing thing's out in people or just giving them a megaphone, but people really love to be angry/complain/cause drama.

 

I'm getting back into World of Tanks and went to watch the release video from WG about the Frontline mode....... And of course one of the top comment's was a guy bashing the game because he doesn't have enough time to play it to get the rewards........ I mean seriously? You have work and family obligations so the maker of the game needs to cater to you and you're going to pound your spoon and raise your pitch fork?  Your to busy to game, freakin own it.

 

Anyways far to many people have attitudes like this about many thing's.  I'm just a little worried that most of the world is literally that dumb and/or selfish.

[DasGanon]

Hank Green did a really good breakdown on the legality/methodology of youtube copyright

[Rohith_Kumar_Sp]

10 minutes ago, DasGanon said:

Hank Green did a really good breakdown on the legality/methodology of youtube copyright

really find it hard when he himself was a part of censorship at his own event, feels hypocritical.  

[A_Mediocre_Kangaroo_Farmer]

This is all completely uninteresting and boring. Why don't we focus on the more important stuff, why isn't WAN show up, and why can't I even watch it on floatplane?

[Spotty]

13 minutes ago, A_Mediocre_Kangaroo_Farmer said:

This is all completely uninteresting and boring. Why don't we focus on the more important stuff, why isn't WAN show up, and why can't I even watch it on floatplane?

This was due to a technical issue on Youtube's side of things. You are still able to watch the video, albeit in 360p. When you open the video up, before attempting to play the video, go to the settings icon and change the resolution to 360p. The 720p version which the platform attempts to automatically play is broken, however the 360p version works fine.
Typically speaking Youtube fixes problems like this itself after a few days

[atxcyclist]

YouTube has turned into a monster lately, full-on Gamera. I've read about this happening like a plague recently, did someone turn the content strike algorithm up to 11 all of the sudden? 

 

In all seriousness though, it seems like through a bunch of hoop-jumping by LMG staff this has been settled. Hopefully YouTube can tune their system to require some sort of feedback from a content creator before it produces a strike automatically. It almost seems stupid to have a system capable of flagging things without a human making a claim that there's an issue.

[A_Mediocre_Kangaroo_Farmer]

12 minutes ago, Spotty said:

This was due to a technical issue on Youtube's side of things. You are still able to watch the video, albeit in 360p. When you open the video up, before attempting to play the video, go to the settings icon and change the resolution to 360p. The 720p version which the platform attempts to automatically play is broken, however the 360p version works fine.
Typically speaking Youtube fixes problems like this itself after a few days

don't you just hate it when Youtube's technical issues deletes twitch vods? I sure do.

[Spotty]

8 minutes ago, A_Mediocre_Kangaroo_Farmer said:

don't you just hate it when Youtube's technical issues deletes twitch vods? I sure do.

I believe, however I don't know any more about it than you do, that the Twitch video was removed so that they could edit out some personal information that was shown on stream. YouTube has a built in edit tool that will allow you to do this without the need to remove the full video and re-upload, which is why it's still, somewhat, available on YouTube.
It's currently a long weekend in Canada due to a holiday (Canada Family Day or some such), so if the above is indeed the case, it's likely it won't be until Tuesday at the earliest that the videos will be edited and reuploaded.

[DePhoegon]

On 2/15/2019 at 10:02 AM, LinusTech said:

This is an excellent explanation of how these things work. 

 

I'd like to add that as long as the creator who gets the automated claim disputes it in a timely manner, there is no lost revenue during the period while it was "claimed". 

 

I've been down at IBM Think for the last couple of days and this thread is the first I'm hearing of this issue.. Aaaand it's already resolved. 

 

So, as far as I can tell, everything is working as it should...ish

 

We have noticed a significant uptick in copyright claims in the last couple of weeks, though, with some of them being in really really old content which suggests youtube has made some kind of change to ContentID and we've been trying to figure out how to address it.

 

We are generally pretty supportive of the creation of derivative works by our community and we want to make sure that they aren't being algorithmically claimed, but this change has caused other issues for us too. I woke up the other morning to a handful of claims made against Tech Quickie by LTT... Can't have that. 

 

I'm sure this will be resolved, but it's probably going to take some time for youtube to get their crap in order, as usual. 

I'll be honest with you..

 

Your video does you zero favors.

1. You spend the first 5+ minutes, trying to get people to not only question their own views to the point of being placid, but you also avoid mentioning it directly.

-- No,  We don't know who the f you are.. you are not your real self online (and more power to you for it), you are not honest with your audance, and you operate so far in the dark when it comes to anything with 'drama' or 'conflict' that you could easily be the  kind of petty person who would do such things... We just do not know.

----  the fake stage beef that you have with others is for entertainment .. and as cool as that is, it is not who you are.

2. While you think 'Drama free' to the point of aboslutely none to exist, is a virtue..  it isn't.    

-- I acknowledge that it's smarter to not get dragged into a fight, but it's quite another & as bad as to operate completely in the dark and not even address the issues at hand, then blame those who are 'reacting' instead of .. having a response to it.

3. TB (I feel for his family, to no end), has always been that douche level extreme prick.   He's never once appologized or retracted anything past 'professional' mistakes, and only minor ones that were not agenda driven.

-- saying that, the fact that he would hold you accountable for your users.. because he was a special snowflake is nothing short of typical for him.

4. Perhaps.. you know .. the problem is on you...  or your highered hand.    The automated system is with how flawed it is, only responding to how you or your authorized agents set it.

5.  Maybe instead of blaming the audiance for being appauled on the system using your approved rule set against others, you appologize and promise to fix what is a mistake on your or your agents hands.  This is not their (the ones who got claimed), or the users faults.  it is YOURS.

6.  You literally tossed someone under the buss, and assuming the internet isn't OCD enough to find the claimed person who went public, that also failed to get hired by you isn't a far stretch.

-- bad form... for someone who doesn't want drama.

 

I suspect that most .. who watch you.. while holding no ill against you, could tolerate being around you  for longer then a day.. and if I am honest,  I respect you and what you built.. but I geniunely can not see myself tolerating you in person for too long either, and yes it's the fact that you'll go passive aggressive, and 'dark' if conflict comes up.

[Syntaxvgm]

It amazes me that people accuse @LinusTech of this kinda shit or even blame him when we hear a new story every day of how broken youtube is, mostly because of changes to their content ID system.

Youtube is out of control, the tail rotor stopped moving and they're just riding it down until it's basally a place to watch shit like Jimmy Kimmel and not user created content like the original "broadcast yourself" slogan. It's probably going to be reborn as this new corporate friendly thing- instead of replacing network television it will become the new version of network television. 

Of course it's automated. I would assume FSM had this shit on content ID as a lot of people simply reupload and monetize videos (happened to lmg many times I think) and it's literally shitty enough that if you do not content ID your content, you have a higher chance of getting your own content hit. I mean it wasn't even LMG that had the ID in the system it sounds like, just FSM. 

The mistake was assuming everything would continue to be bad like youtube always has been, not this new level of what I personally would call platform destroying- if it's kept up. 

I have no idea why anyone would give LMG shit for this.

Even before this recent content ID problem people's own voice, videos of static, or blank videos would be hit with content ID in tests. Do people just not assume it's youtube being the raging refuse fire that it always has been? 

 

[Amused]

I made this account for this topic. 

If people are going to publish thier work on youtube, they agree to the terms. If you dont like them use something else....

So if you are going to use a part of someone else's work in your video you have the obligation to explain it when asked. No one told you to do it or use it and you did not prearrange the use. Thus you have the obligation. 

Linus must police his works to protect the value of his company. People could use them in a mannor that they may not support ie include parts in hate speech. Thus they must protect them. Using a 3rd party who specializes in this is far more effective then them doing it on thier own. 

Using rules like YouTube or fullscreen is far more fair then using emotion. Linus having a soft spot for people using his companies product should not expose him to the possibility of people using it for instructions on how to make a neonazi server, forum or website how to video. This is why they have these systems. This is why you must police your work. Is it perfect? No, but this is the reality. His face and his voice and the people that work with him will end up in a situation like that. So would yours. He has an obligation to his employees, sponsors and fans to protect the use of his content. 

[Syntaxvgm]

The only thing I found wrong with his video is that on the Content ID disputes, they very rarely are successfully disputed for smaller channels or even some larger channels- in fact they are pretty much auto denied for a lot of CR holders. People who are large enough to rely on ad revenue but small enough not to matter are sucked dry by this. 
There's a working theory that with some channels that "work with youtube" (have some kind of partnership, have at least talked to a rep before) and things like the channels that upload stuff Jimmy Kimmel, they pretty much have the benefit of the doubt or may see manual review. But again I'd like to stress that disputing content ID usually does nothing from what I'm able to gather, but I have little personal experience here. I've been told in some cases even auto CID is up to the claimant to approve disputes/appeals for most channels, but I do not know if that's true. If it is it explains the mixed experience- where some seem auto denied and some seem to work and have some sort of manual review. But that I do not know.  I basically suspect that the same forces are at work that file DMCA takedown requests in places like google- it might be entirely automated for some companies who hire third parties to protect their IP- like WMG. It's certainly all automated in a lot of cases, it would not surprise me here. They could in that case just be denying everything where others actually review it. 

[Amused]

8 minutes ago, VegetableStu said:

i don't exactly agree that contentID mechanisms should be used as a means of libel takedown ._. the best way to address hate speech is to point out where the migivings are at the same level it was posted at

 

also can't speak for LMG if they ever did this. or would ever consider. from their recent impromptu livestream i have good faith that they don't do this

It wouldn't be a question of libel. By not acting to stop the use you would by definition allowing the use. Because you did not act to stop it. 

You dont thing they police thier work? They have to. 

[Spotty]

3 minutes ago, Amused said:

It wouldn't be a question of libel. By not acting to stop the use you would by definition allowing the use. Because you did not act to stop it. 

You dont thing they police thier work? They have to. 

Quote

Linus must police his works to protect the value of his company. People could use them in a mannor that they may not support ie include parts in hate speech. Thus they must protect them.

Just because you don't like what someone is saying, does not mean it is infringing on your copyright. You can't use copyright claims or takedown notices for anything other than copyright infringement. Libel, slander, offensive behaviour, hate speech, death threads, etc cannot be challenged by using a DMCA takedown notice or copyright claim. There are other avenues available to deal with those types of behaviour.

Edited February 18, 2019 by Spotty

[Syntaxvgm]

3 minutes ago, Spotty said:

Just because you don't like what someone is saying, does not mean it is infringing on your copyright. You can't use copyright claims or takedown notices for anything other than copyright infringement. Libel, slander, offensive behaviour, hate speech, death threads, etc cannot be challenged by using a DMCA takedown notice or copyright claim. There are other avenues available to deal with those types of behaviour.

in theory yes in practice no

[Amused]

1 minute ago, Spotty said:

Just because you don't like what someone is saying, does not mean it is infringing on your copyright. You can't use copyright claims or takedown notices for anything other than copyright infringement. Libel, slander, offensive behaviour, hate speech, death threads, etc cannot be challenged by using a DMCA takedown notice or copyright claim. There are other avenues available to deal with those types of behaviour.

Actually the hate speech and offensive behavior are not protected by fair use. And thus would infect be an infringement.  To take their property or to stream a YouTube video on a hate site would violate terms of use. To RIP the video from YouTube then distribute it on another site would be copyright infringement. 

 

[Spotty]

Just now, Syntaxvgm said:

in theory yes in practice no

Well, obviously not in practice or else the whole Verge/Bitwit thing wouldn't have happened
The system is, unfortunately, open to abuse.

[Adama]

1 hour ago, DePhoegon said:

I'll be honest with you..

 

Your video does you zero favors.

1. You spend the first 5+ minutes, trying to get people to not only question their own views to the point of being placid, but you also avoid mentioning it directly.

-- No,  We don't know who the f you are.. you are not your real self online (and more power to you for it), you are not honest with your audance, and you operate so far in the dark when it comes to anything with 'drama' or 'conflict' that you could easily be the  kind of petty person who would do such things... We just do not know.

----  the fake stage beef that you have with others is for entertainment .. and as cool as that is, it is not who you are.

2. While you think 'Drama free' to the point of aboslutely none to exist, is a virtue..  it isn't.    

-- I acknowledge that it's smarter to not get dragged into a fight, but it's quite another & as bad as to operate completely in the dark and not even address the issues at hand, then blame those who are 'reacting' instead of .. having a response to it.

3. TB (I feel for his family, to no end), has always been that douche level extreme prick.   He's never once appologized or retracted anything past 'professional' mistakes, and only minor ones that were not agenda driven.

-- saying that, the fact that he would hold you accountable for your users.. because he was a special snowflake is nothing short of typical for him.

4. Perhaps.. you know .. the problem is on you...  or your highered hand.    The automated system is with how flawed it is, only responding to how you or your authorized agents set it.

5.  Maybe instead of blaming the audiance for being appauled on the system using your approved rule set against others, you appologize and promise to fix what is a mistake on your or your agents hands.  This is not their (the ones who got claimed), or the users faults.  it is YOURS.

6.  You literally tossed someone under the buss, and assuming the internet isn't OCD enough to find the claimed person who went public, that also failed to get hired by you isn't a far stretch.

-- bad form... for someone who doesn't want drama.

 

I suspect that most .. who watch you.. while holding no ill against you, could tolerate being around you  for longer then a day.. and if I am honest,  I respect you and what you built.. but I geniunely can not see myself tolerating you in person for too long either, and yes it's the fact that you'll go passive aggressive, and 'dark' if conflict comes up.

You have no idea how content id works, fullscreen configures and uploads footage to the system, the system then crawls and flags videos based on settings only youtube can control, you do have some control on how agressive you want the system, but the thing your whole tldr falls apart on is this, the video in question has been in yotubes contentid system for months, and it doesnt take content id that long to crawl, the video was not flagged until now, coincidentally the same time we see a massive uptick in claims all around, also around the time of article 13 dealings, almost like maybe youtube is messing with some settings making fullscreens perfectly reasonable settings go haywire, but no, linus is a demon in disguise, its not like anyone on this forum has interacted with linus outside ltt and confirmed thats basically how he acts, its not like thats a major draw for some people, nope.

Edited February 18, 2019 by Adama
Typos

[Randy R]

A bit of a tangent, but I don't upload to youtube that much. Being that almost everything I had tried to upload in the past, give me some sort of strike. I mean I upload then it tells me 1 of 3 strikes while its still in processing even. Ok I get that it might have copyrighted content. but why not just tell me "bro, its got copyrighted content, we can't publish the video", instead of striking me the instant I upload. I mean its not like I know every piece of copyrighted material that is on their system to know before I upload. So unfair, I don't know whats copyrighted before I upload, and the instant I upload to know/find out that it has copyrighted, its a strike!!!!!! Am I doing something wrong, is there some testing function I can run video through and have it tell me its a clean video, or not, but not kill my channel over it? I mean crap, youtube even went on to explain that even though the video isn't visible to anyone, its still a strike, just due to the fact I uploaded a video that I didn't know had something in it. one time it gave me a strike because I uploaded a video with the nyan cat jingle in it.

 

I have mixed feelings over floatplane, but I do like the way they are developing it, hopefully it won't have this crazy content match scheme that prevents people who are new from creating videos.