{"id":46153,"date":"2017-01-22T11:22:32","date_gmt":"2017-01-22T10:22:32","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/papacitoyen.reves-connectes.com\/?p=46153"},"modified":"2018-12-24T21:32:02","modified_gmt":"2018-12-24T20:32:02","slug":"robocopyright-or-the-problems-of-the-anti-piracy-algorithm-of-youtube-and-other-content-hosts","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/papacitoyen.reves-connectes.com\/en\/2017\/01\/22\/robocopyright-or-the-problems-of-the-anti-piracy-algorithm-of-youtube-and-other-content-hosts\/","title":{"rendered":"RoboCopyright or the problems of the anti-piracy algorithm of Youtube (and other content hosts)"},"content":{"rendered":"

If you post videos on Youtube you are probably already familiar with this email \u201cA claim for copyright infringement has been created for the content of this video …\u201d<\/strong> And this, whether your video is 5 minutes old or has been there for a year, as in my case.<\/p>\n

\"Robocopyright-content-ID-Google-Youtube-Revo-Rama-IMG_2631\"<\/a><\/p>\n

What is Content ID?<\/h2>\n

It is an automated Youtube system benefiting rights holders (record companies, studios and apparently artists too …). They provide the host site with the digital signatures of the works to be protected, and the Content ID system, which analyzes the content put online by the users on its platform, informs them when this signature is found in another video.<\/p>\n

Unfortunately, I have never seen the system from the \u201cright-holder\u201d side, and can only imagine how it works for them. Sometimes the notification arrives very quickly, other times it may take over a year, as in my example. I assume that there are automatic instructions such as monetizing the video on their own account, blocking it in various ways (completely, on mobile, in some countries, or without sound), or inflicting what is called a “strike”. I’ve never had one, but it seems to be the worst of punishments because it can lead to banishment from the host site and the loss of your work (channel, videos). When the process takes longer, I imagine that it is handled manually or that the beneficiary has had a change of mind.<\/p>\n

Why call it the RoboCopyright system?<\/h2>\n

The term comes from \u201cLa Quadrature\u201d during the debate on ACTA. The video below parodies a famous scene from the movie Robocop (you can activate subtitles as needed).<\/p>\n

But to get back to Youtube, it was perfectly summed up, with humor, in this video by Mozinor<\/p>\n

I find this term quite appropriate in this case, because the robot in the quadrature video acts according to the artificial intelligence that has been implanted in it and this data is incorrect. And in Robocop, we have this duality between AI and the human soul. It\u2019s not my favorite movie but you get the gist.<\/p>\n

So am I a “pirate \/ hacker” if I get notification from RoboCopyright?<\/h2>\n

You know that I am convinced that artificial intelligence, along with big data and robotics, will continue to advance and revolutionize our society. We will not escape it and we will have to make choices before they are imposed on us. But today these technologies are still in their infancy and as such they pay for the errors of those who set them up (the GAFAs on the other side of the Atlantic).<\/p>\n

First of all, I find it rather odd to see so many videos on Youtube that clearly violate copyright (music videos or songs, which are found on legal streaming platforms), while people of “good faith\u201d will be flashed by Content ID. There are people who listen to all their music on Youtube, as you can find almost anything, no problem (including some elements that streaming platforms like Spotify or Apple Music struggle to propose … despite us requesting them for a while\u2026 but that\u2019s another topic).<\/p>\n

This SCINFOLEX article, which I invite you to read, discusses the case of the \u201cDancing Baby\u201d video<\/a> which used \u2013 because it was the song that was playing when the event occurred – a Prince song whose rights are protected by Universal. The author of the video won the case on the principle of Fair Use, a notion in American law:<\/p>\n