YouTube Takedown, Part III
I’d take it down, but I’m afraid that YouTube could later construe that as me acknowledging some wrongdoing. So there sits half of the film. The implications of the Google corporation effectively making an edit to a film produced by young people earnestly trying to better the conditions of their communities are massive.
Q: If Content ID is a powerful enough search and destroy tool to find Pipeline’s use of copyright material, why don’t they simply mute that section of the audio track?
A: Because it would be outrageous for YouTube to make an edit on a film based on their legal interpretation of a third party’s copyright claim.
So instead they cut the entire soundtrack off, leaving Pipeline eviscerated.
With the recent reporting around YouTube’s plans to move away from user-generated content and towards big money licensing deals, I get the impression that they’d be happy to see folks like us just get frustrated and walk away. This being the last week in my job, and no-one replacing me because of budget realities effecting all non-profits next year, it’s entirely likely that GAP will just move to Vimeo or Blip.tv and pray that those platforms don’t start doing something similar. I’d rather see YouTube say they’re sorry and repost the video.