It's no army of interns, it's Content ID, Google's automated content identificaiton-and-removal system. Also an auto-intimidation system, since it's effectively programmatically spawning legal threats. No DMCA takedown required, Google and WMG have agreed to bypass that pesky law here.
More: http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/01/youtubes-january-fair-use-massacre http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/02/hey-warner-leave-those-kids-alone =T= On Mar 9, 2009, at 3:25 PM, Kevin Driscoll wrote: > Fair enough. YouTomb data always represent a subset contingent on our > somewhat arbitrary search criteria. > > > Kevin > > > On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 4:43 PM, Elizabeth Stark <[email protected]> > wrote: >> Kevin, I hesitate to quote that stat, as we're not tracking all YT >> videos, >> and given that the scanner was down for quite a long time in 08. >> We could >> say "YouTomb tracked 3 times as many claims..." but that still may be >> misleading. >> >> On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 4:03 PM, Kevin Driscoll >> <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> Cutest puppycam video ever, for sure. >>> >>> Per my earlier thread regarding fair use, I'm positively tickled to >>> re-read the Order Denying Motion to Dismiss written by Judge Fogel: >>> >>> "...in order for a copyright owner to proceed under the DMCA with 'a >>> good faith belief [...],' the owner must evaluate whether the >>> material >>> makes fair use of the copyright." >>> >>> http://www.eff.org/files/filenode/lenz_v_universal/ >>> lenzorder082008.pdf >>> >>> Unless there is an army of interns working overtime, it seems >>> reasonable to suspect that Warner Music Group may not be >>> proceeding in >>> "good faith" as they have submitted 1000s of claims to YouTube's >>> Copyright Office each month since December 08. >>> >>> YouTomb stats show that in the first few months of 2009, more than >>> three times as many claims were made than during all of 2008! >>> http://youtomb.mit.edu/blog/?p=32 >>> >>> Thanks again, >>> Kevin >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 3:11 PM, Ryan Prior <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>> On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 1:15 PM, Kevin Driscoll >>>> <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi folks, >>>>> >>>>> Anyone have updates on Lenz v. Universal? I haven't heard >>>>> anything new >>>>> in a few months. >>>> >>>> It bears mentioning that the video >>>> (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1KfJHFWlhQ) is still up and the >>>> little >>>> guy >>>> is cute as a button. >>>> >>>> Aside from that, you might try contacting Stanford Law and >>>> asking if >>>> they >>>> are still involved. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> http://www.eff.org/cases/lenz-v-universal >>>>> >>>>> Kevin >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Discuss mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Discuss mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss >>>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Discuss mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss >> >> > _______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://freeculture.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
