Hacker News Reader

Comment by colin-de-vries | Hacker News Reader

I dont understand why youtube has no Sopa/Pippa issues? I searched but didn't find a good answer. Could somebody expain that please?

View on HN

What do you mean? If SOPA or PIPA had passed, YouTube would certainly have issues. Did the article suggest otherwise to you? As it is, YouTube receives DMCA takedown requests probably every single second, and they comply with them. So they stay alive. It seems the situation was the same with Megaupload, except that they didn't exactly comply all the time.

I know about the DMCA takedown requests. But as I understand it YouTube has to do their own investigation with each upload. At the rate of 60 hours per minute. That seems a bit difficult if not impossible. In that respect YouTube should be taken offline like they did with mega upload and many other sites. So, why is YouTube not burned like many other websites. There are complete series seasons on YouTube. I guess i was just expecting more commotion around YouTube then there currently is. (For the record, I oppose to Sopa and Pipa)

I believe that most of the DMCA compliance can be done automatically through the use of Content ID.[1] Basically, for partners that they have a Content ID relationship with (e.g. the big entertainment companies), they can automatically determine infringement and whether they should take the content down, or if it's OK to leave it up.

Obviously there are plenty of people who aren't using the Content ID system and are sending in traditional DMCA requests, but I imagine that the automated system takes care of a big chunk of the work.

[1] http://www.youtube.com/t/contentid

AFAIK YouTube can't self-censor and remain in the DMCA safe harbor.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_Copyright_Infringement_L...

This is why Justin.tv can go on when its top channels are obviously illegal. It has to receive notice as such instead of simply monitoring what's currently broadcast and killing things like football.

Thank you for the answers. The replies makes sense to me. I just read that if you upload a Michael Jackson song you can get 5 years in prison. That's one year longer then what the doctor who killed him got.

By my reading of SOPA (and I think PIPA is very similar), youtube could not be construed as a foreign site and therefore would not be (directly) affected by SOPA. Of course google, being a DNS service provider, a search engine, and an ad service, would definitely have been affected by SOPA.

SOPA did not limit it's self to international websites. 1/2 the bill focused on foreign sites the other half applied to US sites.

I'm almost sure you are incorrect (the entire purpose of SOPA was to provide the same copyright enforcement to "foreign sites" as already exist for domestic sites). Can you point me to the section/paragraph of SOPA that you are thinking of?

Read:

TITLE II--ADDITIONAL ENHANCEMENTS TO COMBAT INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY THEFT

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c112:1:./temp/~c112Ggu...:

PS: You replied several days after that post, but on the off chance you see this, I figured why not respond.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com