Interesting People mailing list archives

Re: Google Blinks, and Today the Internet is a Little Less Free


From: "David Farber" <dave () farber net>
Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 11:33:13 -0700




-----Original Message-----
From: Synthesis:Law and Technology Law and Technology [mailto:synthesis.law.and.technology () gmail com]
Sent: Wed 10/17/2007 9:25 AM
To: David Farber
Subject: Re: [IP] Google Blinks, and Today the Internet is a Little Less Free
 
Dave,

With respect I consider Dewayne's post a bit alarmist.

Yes it may temporarily (and I stress the word temporarily) deter some
people.

But for how long?  The internet is full of very creative people.
And perhaps even more important, with dual and quad core processors
proliferating on the desktop most people will have the processing power to
implement any one of a thousand possible workarounds?
It may put YouTube out of the frontrunner spot in internet video but it will
not kill internet video.  I am sure that the intent of the master reference
database was more than just Youtube.  It was most certainly to also
facilitate takedowns and removal wherever content is being stored. "That's
our movie. See, its in the reference database as ID#423595843.  Remove it
please".

But just as this will work for a short time it will most surely fall prey to
inventive minds.
What is to stop an encrypted service?  What is to stop a service that
performs a transform on the data and allows the user to do a reverse
transform just before viewing?
I would not try it on a P90 but anything recent?  Shouldnt be too strenuous.


In the interim I look forward to seeing all the creative testing and
re-engineering of the "match" algorithm.  Since there are way more YouTube
users than IPhone users I expect fairly rapid results.


Dan Steinberg

SYNTHESIS:Law & Technology
35, du Ravin phone: (613) 794-5356
Chelsea, Quebec
J9B 1N1


On 10/17/07, David Farber <dave () farber net> wrote:



Begin forwarded message:

From: dewayne () warpspeed com (Dewayne Hendricks)
Date: October 16, 2007 5:28:49 PM EDT
To: Dewayne-Net Technology List <xyzzy () warpspeed com>
Subject: [Dewayne-Net] Google Blinks, and Today the Internet is a
Little Less Free

Google Blinks, and Today the Internet is a Little Less Free


Submitted by Gigi Sohn on October 15, 2007 - 3:14pm.
<http://www.publicknowledge.org/node/1217>
Just a few moments ago, YouTube introduced the beta version of its
"video identification" system, the purpose of which is to control the
amount of infringing material that appears on the site. Under
enormous pressure from movie studios and record labels and their
friends on Capitol Hill to filter out copyrighted material, and with
the Viacom lawsuit looming, You Tube's parent Google has developed a
tool that will likely restrict the flow of legal content over the
Internet, and absolutely raises the bar for each and every entity
that serves as a conduit for copyrighted works.

Here is how the system works: A copyright holder uploads its works
into a reference database, which then generates identification files
by which uploaded videos are matched. When a user uploads a video
onto YouTube, that video is matched with the identification file. If
there is a "match" (more on that later), then the video is subject to
whatever action the rights holder has decided to apply to it; for
example, it could be blocked, "tracked" or "monetized." If the video
is blocked, the user will be notified, and can immediately contest
the claim by clicking onto a link. Once YouTube receives the user
contest, it will put the video back on the site. At that point,
notice and takedown provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright
Act (DMCA) would kick in. If the copyright holder continues to want
the video removed, it would have to send a takedown notice required
by the DMCA. The user can send a counter-notice, whereupon the video
would be reinstated, etc.

This being the beta version of the system, there are still a lot of
kinks to work out. Chief among them is the definition of what
constitutes a "match." We were told at a briefing that a few seconds
would be insufficient for a match, but not much else. Right now,
YouTube limits videos to 10 minutes, but it seems unlikely that
YouTube will adopt a minimum of that length. Where YouTube sets this
minimum may be the single most important factor to determine whether
there will be a proliferation of false positives, that is, legal
content blocked by the copyright holder.

While YouTube should be be praised for making it easy for a user to
contest a block, it should also recognize that permitting a copyright
holder to have "block" as a default setting will likely limit the
free flow of legal content over the Internet. Regardless of whether
their use of copyrighted material is legal or fair use (such as
commentary or criticism, which can legally use large portions of
copyrighted works), many users will simply give up after being
blocked (particularly if they fear a possible lawsuit). Or others may
not bother to post to YouTube at all. This is why it is critically
important that when YouTube sends notices to those users who do get
blocked, that they also provide information about users rights,
including fair use, so users can make an intelligent choice about
whether to challenge their accusers.

YouTube was also not clear about exactly what it would mean for a
copyright holder to be "tracked." Rights holders would have a special
portal that would tell them how many times matched content is viewed
and how many times their content is blocked. According to YouTube,
the only personal information the rights holder would get is the
email address of the user if they contest the blocking of
information. But keeping in mind the recording industry's failed
battle to get personal information about P2P file sharers from
Verizon, you can believe that the content industry will want to use
this tool to get as much personally identifying information as
possible from YouTube.

[snip]


-------------------------------------------
Archives: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com




--

-------------------------------------------
Archives: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com

Current thread: