And if that Content is determined to be "Fair Use," Claimants should be held to some degree of accountability. They should be disincentived to make other Claims if they are not valid and they are hurting Content Creator's livelihoods.
-
Show this thread
-
I think it is exacting and punishing to have entire streams of revenue on Content halted or stopped during a Content ID Claim, and I think it is unfair that Claimants are allowed to harm, particularly, American Citizens who are entitled to "Fair Use."
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread -
My fear is that even this can result in a "death by a thousand cuts" scenario. So take this with a grain of salt.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread -
You can go even deeper with Revenue Ratios and be even fairer with Claimants: -1 second /600 seconds (1second in 10 minute video) = 1 second / 284 second (4 minute 24 second song) = x / total ad revenue Solve for x
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread -
Disclaimer for
@TeamYouTube : Before I started this tweet storm, I hadn't watched all of https://youtu.be/BOXD34FaWuE Because around 36:40 into the video,@AngryJoeShow basically articulated this idea. I think you'd have to go an extra step and have an "escrow" pending approval.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread -
If you don't have some certain amount of time for Content Creator to either address by way of removal of Content ID Claim and infringing material, or by challenging it, even this type of solution can be abused; micro revenue cuts can be abused as heavily as Content ID.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread -
Gosh, even then if the Claim was valid, but the Content Creator chose to remove the material, that Escrowed Revenue could still be subject to an algorithm calculating the fair value of exposure by clicks, view time and/or Ratios. This is just a math problem.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread -
There is no reason why Content ID Claims and the use thereof cannot be figured out by you all at
@TeamYouTube It's an algorithmic problem. And there is another potential ratio: the market value of any particular Copyrighted material is not fixed.....1 reply 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread -
....e.g. the value of certain songs or other copyrighted material that may have been used by Content Creators and Content ID claimed is not equal to the total revenue of a particular piece of Content and its ads. They are not equal. Period.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread -
So I think it is a fair suggestion that you start treating YouTubers' Content with the idea in mind that the value of their Content is proportional to any media that gets Claimed. They are not equal, and I think it is unfair to treat them as such.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread
More often than not, YouTubers and their Content are proportionally more valuable than any material that got Claimed, especially if the YouTubers are for the most part playing by the rules and popular.
For the record, I love you all @TeamYouTube and @AngryJoeShow
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
: