Hacker News Reader

Comment by mosquito242 | Hacker News Reader

This is super interesting - it seems like facebook's more likely to get away with it too because the people being ripped off are smaller independent YouTube Channels.

It seems like YouTube's main incentive to build out copyright infringement tools was all of the record labels that had songs being uploaded and re-uploaded on the platform.

I can see YouTube getting really aggressive in fighting FB on this legally, because they need to defend their own content providers before they move to Facebook (or start uploading to both facebook/youtube).

View on HN

The content producers should file DMCA notices with the hosts if they don't want their content there.

It seems like it would be in the interest of producers to register their works in well-known repositories so that viewers can have a high degree of confidence that the content they are viewing has the claimed provenance.

If youtube could provide DMCA tools to the everyman then things will get interesting. If Google could tell me when and where my video is being pirated I could see this be a HUGE boon to their content distribution system. Everyone would want to distribute with them.

> The content producers should file DMCA notices with the hosts if they don't want their content there.

If you even know it's there. Is a Facebook video with a million view likely to cross your particular feed? Especially if it's in another country? Especially if someone took pains to remove identifying characteristics?

> It seems like it would be in the interest of producers to register their works in well-known repositories

YouTube seems like a pretty well known repository to me ...

YouTube will have a hard time fighting this directly, since they don't own the content. Much like craigslist couldn't directly go after 3taps for copying, but only the scraping. And in this case, Facebook isn't doing the scraping.

Maybe YouTube can make it easier for content owners to flag FB content. Or maybe YT can ask the content owner for transfer of ownership (i.e. buy it from them), so they can then turn around and sue FB for violation?

This is a temporary problem, probably.Youtube has a much bigger problem on their hands - once facebook starts to sell ads on videos and share profits, with them behind the main distribution channel for video, most content authors will post content there.

I wish Google would start fighting dirty.

Want to access Facebook mobile? Hope you have an iPhone, because Google pushed a mandatory update last night which banned Facebook from all Android devices.

Want to access Facebook through Chrome? Sorry, it seems that site has been flagged as a malicious piracy hub; however, you might enjoy this 302 redirect to an automatically-generated clone of your Facebook profile hosted on a safer alternative called Google Plus.

andddd then this happens: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Corp_v_Commission

That's when you get slapped with an antitrust lawsuit.

I could maybe see an antitrust lawsuit if Google dropped Facebook from search, because of their dominant market share there. But neither Android nor Chrome is a monopoly, so it's unclear to me how much legal risk they have if they stopped playing nice with Facebook there. Am I missing something?

Are you sure this is the kind of thing you'd want to have happen? Really, really sure?

Because this kind of censorship and manipulation may be acceptable to you when it's Facebook that's targeted at the moment. But what would you do when this kind of action is taken against some other entity that you want to access?

You wanna bet how fast people will ditch chrome for FF and android for Windows?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com