Hacker News Reader

Comment by only_as_i_fall | Hacker News Reader

Is that true? YT claims otherwise

https://creatoracademy.youtube.com/page/lesson/respond-to-co...

>Monetization during Content ID disputes is enabled when both the video creator and the Content ID claimant want to monetize the video. Throughout the dispute process, we'll hold the revenue separately and, once the dispute is resolved, we'll pay it out to the appropriate party

Or does that only apply if it's content-id and there's some other kind of copyright claim with a different resolution pipeline?

View on HN

This video was not monetized, but TROLL flipped it into monetization. marcan_42 will be able to verify this YT claim. Either he gets the money from hostile monetization, or Google is lyi^^^using misleading lawyer speak.

Only applies for Content ID, which seems to be the case in this particular situation. For a DMCA claim the video comes down while the dispute is being worked out.

> once the dispute is resolved

Do all disputes get resolved?

What is the median resolution time?

What is the maximum amount of time a claimant can drag out the resolution process?

Yes, all disputes will get resolved in some way. Worst case is that they drag it out for 60 days.

Source: https://creatoracademy.youtube.com/page/lesson/respond-to-co...

But presumably some number of uploaders never bother to go through the dispute process--in which case this could indeed be a viable business model for a troll?

Yes, the issue is getting access to the full Content ID dashboard requires at least some form of social engineering or pressure to make it seem like you have enough of a media library/client base to warrant access to the tool.

So Google just keeps it instead and then flips a coin on who should get the escrowed funds when they deem they "resolved" it.

Google generally doesn't weigh in as it's all handled between the uploader and the claimant. If the claim is disputed by the uploader then the claimant can accept/reject that dispute. The uploader then has the chance to appeal; if they do so then the claimant has to either release the claim or escalate to a DMCA takedown. Of course if it gets to that point then the video is coming down and no one will be making money.

Source: https://creatoracademy.youtube.com/page/lesson/respond-to-co...

Additionally, if it's a DMCA request, there are stipulations that it needs to be made in in good faith under penalty of perjury, so hopefully that makes it a bit less likely to go that far for a spurious case, but I'm not sure anyone has ever been found guilty of perjury for this, when AFAIK there are plenty of cases where it was obviously the case, so... who knows.

> if it's a DMCA request, there are stipulations that it needs to be made in in good faith under penalty of perjury

I seem to recall those being notoriously lax.

https://smallbiztrends.com/2015/05/fraudulent-dmca-takedown-...

The part of the DMCA that requires paying out compensation for knowingly issuing false claims is rarely used.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com