[monocasa]

> The accepting false DMCA claims is something that the DMCA system sort of requires them to do.

No, the DMCA allows for counter claiming and it not being an issue. Google's policies go beyond what's required for the DMCA, and stem from the early several billion dollar copyright lawsuit they settled out of court with the major labels fairly early on. It's an extralegal system negotiated between Google and the labels.

> However they have in the past sued people who have issued false DMCA claims.

Can you give an example of someone they've sued for making false claims?

[neotek]

>No, the DMCA allows for counter claiming and it not being an issue. Google's policies go beyond what's required for the DMCA, and stem from the early several billion dollar copyright lawsuit they settled out of court with the major labels fairly early on. It's an extralegal system negotiated between Google and the labels.

You're conflating two different things, perhaps intentionally.

Content ID, which is the additional system you're referring to, does not and cannot cause an account to be closed[1]. If content in your video is flagged by Content ID, all that happens is that the advertising revenue from your video is directed to the purported copyright holder, or the video is removed from YouTube. You do not receive any strikes and your channel is not limited in any way.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/howyoutubeworks/policies/copyright/#...

Copyright strikes[2] are a completely different kettle of fish, and Google is bound by the DMCA to immediately and without question remove the allegedly infringing content. In fact, they are expressly forbidden by law to perform any sort of investigation before making the content unavailable or they risk losing immunity under the safe harbour provisions.

And far from accepting DMCA claims "with no recourse" as you suggest, they openly publish a variety of training materials to teach users exactly how to file a counter-claim[3], and they routinely accept those counter-claims and restore the content.

[2] https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2814000

[3] https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2807684

>Can you give an example of someone they've sued for making false claims?

Christopher Brady.

https://www.engadget.com/2019-08-20-youtube-lawsuit-false-ta...

https://www.theverge.com/2019/10/15/20915688/youtube-copyrig...

[monocasa]

This guy this whole thread is about is getting his channel shutdown "with no recourse." You still get copyright strikes after they restore your content.

The whole copyright strike system is in addition to the DMCA, and is part of what was negotiated with the labels (in addition to ContentID).

Also, what are you quoting "with no recourse" from?

[neotek]

>The whole copyright strike system is in addition to the DMCA, and is part of what was negotiated with the labels (in addition to ContentID).

That's completely false, and all you need do is click the links I provided to see that it is. Copyright strikes are only issued in conjunction with DMCA takedown requests, Content ID does not and cannot cause you to receive strikes, and does not and cannot shut your channel down.

>Also, what are you quoting "with no recourse" from?

From a parent comment at the start of this thread, which I've only now realised wasn't made by you, so please ignore the phrase "as you suggest" and focus on the substantive portions of my comment that address the inaccuracies in your claim.

[monocasa]

> That's completely false, and all you need do is click the links I provided to see that it is. Copyright strikes are only issued in conjunction with DMCA takedown requests, Content ID does not and cannot cause you to receive strikes, and does not and cannot shut your channel down.

I never disputed any of that. I'm saying that the copyright strike system used by youtube on takedown requests:

* goes above and beyond what's required by the DMCA.

* is part of what was negotiated by Google and the labels (in addition to ContentID). The labels were concerned about people spamming their content and just uploading faster than they can takedown. This gives them a mechanism to shut down accounts for 'bad actors' who just keep uploading faster than the labels can issue takedowns.

* doesn't always remove strikes even when a counter-claim is filed because of above.

I never brought up ContentID, and my arguments are orthogonal to it's implementation and history.

[gundmc]

This requires very minimal effort to find.

https://www.theverge.com/2019/8/19/20812144/youtube-copyrigh...

[monocasa]

It's not the copyright claims that they had a problem with (or else they'd go after any of the other false copyright claims), it's using their platform for extortion. The "I'm going to file false copyright claims unless you pay me" thing.