YouTube supremo says vid-streaming-slash-piracy giant can't afford EU's copyright overhaul

Time for change

When I come to power hypocrisy will be made illegal (along with adverts claiming using their product will make you more attractive to the opposite sex - basically all of them)

I've had enough of American corporations. Probably why the apes will take over - more integrity

IMHO

You Tube is believed to pull down between 10 and 15 BILLION $ per year ........................

it's been raking in this cash for over a decade, but now, when asked to ensure that the ones creating the product, are catered for / paid for or product removed .................

NOW it's all too much like hard work ........................

you have NO idea how hard I would be prepared to function to ensure that the goose kept on laying those golden returns ffs

When did YouTube add Slash to its video streaming and piracy portfolio? Can't wait to read what Susan Wojcicki, Satya Nadella, and Sundar Pichai get up to on their bi-annual team building workshops in Las Vegas...

Well, if Wojcicki wasn't fully occupied with fucking with legitimate YouTubers uploading original content, maybe YouTube wouldn't have problems with sustaining on copyright-infringing mass-uploaders

Eff the E.U.

America and American companies should leave these freetard loving idiots behind. Take our defense system with us and let Mother Russia invade. Read these forums. Not a single person who has ever worked an honest day in their life. Just a bunch of free loaders. They will love communism.

get some regulation happening

and if youtube has too much content to even try to be compliant, maybe its time for smaller more responsive entities to move in.

No monopoly will ever willingly let someone else into what they see as their patch, but if they have become so big they arent serving their customers (users - not advertisers), its time to start swinging the axe.

Copyright? What's that?

Google/TouTube don't give a toss about copyright. Their attitude has always been to just publish it first, consider saying "sorry" (with fingers crossed behind their back) later, and/or get the lawyers involved. Take google books, for example.

Digital Music News has a good analysis of the OpEd piece, addressing all the issues. If YT is supportive of Article 13, as thely calim, why spend more than $36M trying to prevent it from passing?

Copyright industry rules..

So youtube has problems with new EU copyright directive? Latest problematic youtube copyright problem we've seen was when someone posted to an irc channel a youtube video which had remixed parts from commercial blockbuster movies + some idiot explaining whatever is happening in the scene + some video editing tricks. Whoever posted the video got some heat for posting the content without a license, but guess the real problem is that the video was allowed in youtube's platform. Given that the video (with clearly infringing content) is available in youtube, other people might also see it without knowledge that the author of the video had no permission to publish the content on youtube.

Youtube clearly has problems with following copyrights, given that they rely on DMCA to protect them against copyright lawsuits. Guess that isn't suitable plan in EU area, so they should use http request code: "451 Unavailable For Legal Reasons" for EU citizens until they can get their copyright story working properly.

EU residents are at risk of being cut off from videos

Is it a piece of FUD in your pocket, or are you just displeased to see me?

Surely...

"Pointing to global music hit "Despacito," Wojcicki said the video has multiple copyrights, and while YouTube currently has deals in place to pay royalties, some of the rights holders aren't known to the company."

Surely at this point, you'd work with the content creator to identify and credit all the copyright owners. After all, it's barely two years old; it's not like they're trying to confirm ownershop of the various plays Homer is claimed to have written.

Hell, even Wikipedia has a stab at a credit list - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Despacito#Credits_and_personnel

I'm guessing that there's some aspect of their "safe harbour" defence which would be weakened if they were to work with content producers to sort out copyrights, but claiming it's outright impossible for a song which has racked up over 5 /billion/ views and earned it's creator some $10 million in revenue[*]? Disingenuous at best.

[*] https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-earnings-of-the-song-Despacito-on-YouTube-alone - presumably, that also means that Youtube has earned at least the same amount of revenue, if not significantly more.

If copyright wasn't absurdly long then I might have some sympathy but you're not going to get a coherent argument from BIG media because it's in their interest to maintain the status quo. I'd be for tougher enforcement if it were for a reasonable period of 20 years say but death + 70 is quite ridiculous and I wish the pirates well until BIG media is willing to give something to get something.

"EU residents are at risk of being cut off from videos that, in just the last month, they viewed more than 90bn times."

ok, ok. so i watched *that* tiktok video clip a few too many times.

Errm do people realise that this will affect any streaming service as soon as it hits a certain "size".

The only streaming EU will have is back to the old media giants who will vet and produce their own content at a cost. Also it won't affect Google as a business, they will just sell their own gated service to EU, maybe called YouTube Red where EUizens can consume produced content just as they would from Amazon, Netflix, Sky, and all the other media giants.

The real question is what will happen to all the independent content creators? This isn't about jumping platform as they will either need to sign up to a big company and be produced or lose the EU market.

I admit I have watched copyright material on Youtube before, but most of what I have watched that is copyrighted is not available to watch legitimately anywhere else even if I were to pay for it. In the last couple of weeks I have watched unreleased pilot episodes of US versions of Peep show and Red Dwarf. And no doubt stuff like this would be removed if the big media companies get their way and Article 13 goes ahead.

I think there is a better solution to the problem of piracy on Youtube than those proposed in Article 13, and it would start with reducing the copyright length from its current ridiculously long term to one more reasonable such as 25 years. But that is never going to happen with big media companies having so much influence with the worlds governments.