Criticism of YouTube

The video hosting website YouTube has been the object of various criticisms.

Copyright

Content must be permitted by United States copyright law, the organization frequently removing upon request a vast quantity of infringing content. A decision in October 2007 allowed media companies to block their copyrighted video content loaded onto YouTube without seeking any prior permission. [cite news
url = http://in.news.yahoo.com/071016/139/6lzxa.html
title = YouTube allows media companies to block copyrighted content
accessdate=2007-10-16]

Despite this, a large amount of potentially infringing content continues to be uploaded, e.g. television shows/clips, film clips, commercials, music videos, or music concerts.

Until 2007, unless a copyright holder reported violation or infringement, YouTube generally discovered such content via indications within the YouTube community through self-policing. For a brief time, individual members could also report on one another. The flagging feature, intended as a means of reporting questionable content, has been subject to considerable abuse; for a time, some users were flagging other users' original content for copyright violations out of spite. YouTube proceeded to remove copyright infringement from the list of flaggable offenses.

Since 2007, changes to the interface mean that only rights holders are able to directly report copyright violations, even if they are obvious to casual viewers.

YouTube generally identifies video content through search terms that uploaders associate with clips. Some deceptive users create alternative search terms when uploading specific file types (similar to the deliberate misspelling of band names on MP3 filesharing networks).

Hollywood remains divided on YouTube, as "'the marketing guys love YouTube and the legal guys hate it.'"cite news
first = Ben
last = Jones
coauthors = Leamonth, Michael
url = http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117960880.html?categoryid=13&cs=1
title = Showbiz's site fright/Web seen as both a threat and a gold mine
publisher = Variety
date = 2007-03-10
accessdate = 2007-03-12
language = English] Further,

Content owners are not just targeting YouTube for copyright infringements, but are also targeting third party websites that link to infringing content on YouTube and other video-sharing sites, for example, QuickSilverScreen vs. Fox, [cite news
first = IPTV
last = Guy
title = TV Show Directory QuickSilverScreen.com Threatened by Fox
url = http://www.webtvwire.com/tv-show-directory-quicksilverscreencom-threatened-by-fox/
work = Web TV Wire
date = 2006-07-12
accessdate = 2006-10-12] Daily Episodes vs. Fox, [cite news
first = Lord
last = Thor
title = DailyEpisodes closed down by Fox, for LINKING to TV show episodes!
url = http://digg.com/tech_news/DailyEpisodes_closed_down_by_Fox_for_LINKING_to_TV_show_episodes
work = Digg.com
date = 2006-10-02
accessdate = 2006-12-10] and Columbia vs. Slashfilm. [cite news
first = Peter
last = Sciretta
url = http://www.slashfilm.com/article.php/20060726145607684
title = Columnia Pictures tells /Film to remove website link
publisher = SlashFilm
date = 2006-07-26
accessdate = 2006-10-12] The liability of linking remains a grey area with cases for and against. The law in the U.S. currently leans towards website owners being liable for infringing links [cite news
url = http://www.webtvwire.com/linking-to-infringing-content-is-probably-illegal-in-the-us/
title = Linking to infringing TV Shows is probably illegal in the US
publisher = WebTVWire
date = 2006-09-26
accessdate = 2006-10-12] although they are often protected by the DMCA providing they take down infringing content when issued with a take down notice. However, a recent court ruling in the U.S. found Google not liable for linking to infringing content (Perfect 10 v. Google, Inc.).

Examples of infringement complaints

On October 5, 2006, the Japanese Society for Rights of Authors, Composers and Publishers (JASRAC) finalized their copyright complaints regarding Japanese media on YouTube. Thousands of media from popular Japanese artists (such as Tokyo Jihen and other music including Jpop) were removed.

When CBS and Universal Music Group signed agreements to provide content on YouTube, they announced a new technology to help them find and remove copyrighted material. [cite news
first = Candace
last = Lombardi
url = http://www.news.com/YouTube-cuts-three-content-deals/2100-1030_3-6123914.html
title = YouTube cuts three content deals
work =
publisher = Cnet-News.com
date = 2007-12-02
accessdate = 2007-12-02
language = English]

TV journalist Robert Tur filed the first lawsuit against the company in the summer of 2006, alleging copyright infringement for hosting a number of famous news clips without permission. The case has yet to be resolved. [cite news
first = K.C.
last = Jones
url = http://www.informationweek.com/industries/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=190600029
title = Journalist Sues YouTube For Copyright Infringement
work =
publisher = InformationWeek.com
date = 2006-07-18
accessdate = 2006-07-28
language = English] [cite news
first = James
last = Montgomery
url = http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1536695/20060719/index.jhtml?headlines=true
title = YouTube Slapped With First Copyright Lawsuit For Video Posted Without Permission
work =
publisher = MTV.com
date = 2006-07-19
accessdate = 2006-07-28
language = English]

On November 9, 2006, Artie Lange said that his lawyers were in talks with YouTube, after Lange learned that his entire DVD, "It's the Whiskey Talking", was available for free on the website. He added that he will either demand money from them, or will sue. [cite web |title=Scripting News for 10/12/2006 |publisher=Scripting News Annex |url=http://scripting.wordpress.com/2006/10/12/scripting-news-for-10122006/ |accessdate = 2007-01-29 ]

Viacom and the British Broadcasting Corporation both demanded YouTube to take down more than 200,000 videos. [cite news
first = Greg
last = Sandoval
author = Sandoval, Greg
title = Does YouTube have a control problem?
url = http://news.com.com/Does+YouTube+have+a+control+problem/2100-1030_3-6156025.html
work = cnet
date = 2007-02-02
accessdate = 2007-02-04]

Viacom announced it was suing YouTube, and its owner Google, for more than $1 billion in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. Viacom claims that YouTube posted over 160,000 of their videos on the website without their permission. [cite news
first =
last =
author = Reuters
title = Viacom in $1 bln copyright suit vs Google, YouTube
url = http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=internetNews&storyid=2007-03-13T134200Z_01_WEN5351_RTRUKOC_0_US-VIACOM-YOUTUBE.xml&src=rss&rpc=22
work = Reuters
date = 2007-03-13
accessdate = 2007-03-13] [cite news
first =
last =
author = BBC News
title = Viacom will sue YouTube for $1bn
url = http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6446193.stm
work = BBC
date = 2007-03-13
accessdate = 2007-03-13] US District Court Judge Louis Stanton, on July 1, 2008 granted Viacom's request for data upon which YouTube viewers watch which videos on the website to support its case in a billion-dollar copyright lawsuit against Google. He debunked privacy concerns, directing Google to give Viacom viewing log-in ID / names of YouTube users and Internet protocol (IP) addresses (online identifier) and video clip details (totalling more than 12 terabytes of data). The judgement was criticized by Google and privacy advocates. Simon Davies said that the privacy of millions of YouTube users was threatened: "The chickens have come home to roost for Google." Stranton however, denied Viacom's pleas "to get its hands on secret source code used in YouTube video searches as well as for Internet searches, and to order Google to provide access to the videos YouTube users store in private YouTube files." [ [http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5gvFPgT3MNrzaN7r-Y37eFI-qv4bA Afp.google.com, Judge orders Google to give YouTube user data to Viacom] ] [ [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7488009.stm bbc.co.uk, Google must divulge YouTube log] ]

In May 2007, the English Premier League announced that it was suing YouTube for alleged copyright infringement, claiming that the website had "knowingly misappropriated" its intellectual property by encouraging Premier League football matches to be viewed on its site. [ [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/main.jhtml?xml=/sport/2007/05/05/ufnrup05.xml Premier League to take action against YouTube - Football News - Telegraph ] ]

In 2007 a 15-year-old Australian boy managed to get YouTube to delete over 200 YouTube videos belonging to the Australian Broadcasting Corporation using a fake DMCA take down notice. When the fake DMCA notice arrived, the ABC already had in place a long-standing deal with YouTube to freely share its videos. In his hand-written letter, the boy claimed that he was acting on behalf of the "Australian Broddcastingsic Corperationsic", giving his own Hotmail address as his business contact and demanded that hundreds of videos from ABC's "The Chaser's War on Everything" television program be deleted from YouTube's servers. Despite the boy not having any affiliation with the ABC and the spelling errors on his hand-written form, YouTube did delete all of the videos at the boy's request and replaced each with a message stating "This video is no longer available due to a copyright claim by Australian Broadcasting Corporation". [cite news
url=http://www.smh.com.au/news/technology/boy-dupes-youtube-to-delete-videos/2007/04/13/1175971361981.html
title=Boy dupes YouTube to delete videos
author=Jensen, Erik
publisher=The Sydney Morning Herald
date=2007-04-14] The boy was subsequently on The Chaser's War On Everything, when, upon closing, one of the Chasers said 'If you're quick, you can watch this episode on YouTube, unless some random Australian kid deletes them all'.

Philippine TV channel ABS-CBN also does not allow its videos to be on YouTube.Fact|date=September 2008

In August 2008 U.S. District Judge Jeremy Fogel of San Jose, California ruled that copyright holders cannot order a deletion of an online file without determining whether that posting reflected "fair use" of the copyrighted material. The case involved Stephanie Lenz, a writer and editor from Gallitzin, Pennsylvania, who made a home video of her 13-month-old son dancing to Prince's song Let's Go Crazy and posted the 29-second video on YouTube. Four months later, Universal Music, the owner of the copyright to the song, ordered YouTube to remove the video enforcing the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Lenz notified YouTube immediately that her video was within the scope of fair use, and demanded that it be restored. YouTube complied after six weeks, as required by the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, to see whether Universal planned to sue Lenz for infringement. Lenz then sued Universal Music in California for her legal costs, claiming the music company had acted in bad faith by ordering removal of a video that represented fair-use of the song. [cite news |first= |last= |authorlink= |coauthors= |title=Woman can sue over YouTube clip de-posting |url=http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/08/20/MNU412FKRL.DTL |quote= |work=San Francisco Chronicle |date= |accessdate=2008-08-25 ]

Use of acoustic fingerprints

On October 12, 2006, YouTube announced that because of recent agreements with high-profile content creators, they are now required to use antipiracy software, which uses an audio-signature technology that can detect a low-quality copy of licensed video. YouTube would have to substitute an approved version of any clip or remove the material immediately. Industry analysts speculated that removal of content with such a system might reduce overall user satisfaction.cite news
first = Alex
last = Veiga
title = Anti-piracy system could hurt YouTube
url = http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15240348/
work = Associated Press
date = 2006-10-12
accessdate = 2006-10-13]

On April 16, 2007, Google's CEO Eric E. Schmidt presented a keynote speech at the NAB Convention in Las Vegas. During the Q&A session, Schmidt announced that YouTube was close to enacting a content filtering system to remove infringing content from the service. The new system, called "Claim Your Content", will automatically identify copyrighted material for removal.cite news
first = Rafat
last = Ali
title = NAB: GoogleTube Close To Its “Claim Your Content” Filtering System
url = http://www.paidcontent.org/entry/419-nab-googletube-close-to-its-claim-your-content-filtering-system/
work = paidcontent.org
date = 2007-04-16
accessdate = 2007-04-17]

Google spokesperson Ricardo Reyes stated on June 13, 2007 that the company was seeking "a way to make video identification technology a reality" when they began to test the system in the next few days. [ [http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=199903572 Google Plans Video Identification Test For YouTube Next Month - YouTube Content Identification ] ] [http://money.cnn.com/2007/06/12/technology/youtube_id.reut/index.htm]

On October 15, 2007, Google announced the release of YouTube Video Identification, a tool that would go "above and beyond our legal responsibilities." [ [http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2007/10/latest-content-id-tool-for-youtube.html Official Google Blog: Latest content ID tool for YouTube ] ] In a blog posting on the release, YouTube product manager David King said YouTube Video Identification will help copyright holders identify their works on YouTube and choose what they want done with them.

Shocking & gore films

Youtube allows videos showing aftermath of fatal accidents. These films are not always flagged and even if they are, the text doesn't explain why it's so. For example one video shows chopped human bodies lying in blood. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3nJNE8jbUg] Other depicts a person being torn apart by a car [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zA0pcAu_ptU] . Youtube explains that it would be too costly to review uploaded content and the current flagging system is enough. [cite web | title =YouTube attacked by MPs over sex and violence footage|author=| publisher = Daily Telegraph| url = http://www.telegraph.co.uk/connected/main.jhtml?xml=/connected/2008/07/31/dlyoutube131.xml|accessdate= 2008-08-21 ]

Violence

YouTube and similar sites were reportedly used by teenagers who record fights on mobile phones. [June 1, 2006, the evening ITV News bulletin] In July 2007, such an incident happened at a school in Hayling Island, U.K. [ "Police remove film of girls fighting from You Tube" Daily Telegraph Saturday 21 July 2007 (Number 47316) ] A video was uploaded at the end of 2006 of an arranged fight in Scarborough, England of two 16 year olds fighting, one of them then getting beaten up by at least 20 others. Additionally, in July 2007, a Briton urinated on a dying woman while a friend made a video of the incident. He reportedly yelled "This is YouTube material!" [ USA Today: [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/tees/7002627.stm BBC: "Man admits urinating on ill woman... shouted "this is YouTube material"] ] [ [http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/11/07/school.shooting/index.html Teen dead who opened fire on Finnish classmates, police say - CNN.com ] ] On March 30, 2008, a group of six girls and two boys beat up 16-year-old Victoria Lindsey. They planned to post the video on Youtube. [ [http://edition.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/04/10/girl.fights/index.html?iref=newssearch Suspects in video beating could get life in prison - CNN.com ] ]

Finland school shootings

YouTube appears to have removed 89 videos linked to an 18-year-old gunman who on November 7, 2007 killed at least eight people in Finland. Many of the videos featured Nazi imagery. One of the videos, uploaded days before the incident, called "Jokela high school massacre 11/7/2007", showed a picture of a building by a lake and two photos of a young man holding a gun. [CNN Finland School Shootings Story http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/11/07/school.shooting/index.html]

Corruption

Criminal charges in Honduras

An unknown individual posted various recordings of high government officials in Honduras on YouTube, including of the President Mel Zelaya, implicating them in a corruption scandal concerning Hondutel, the state run telephone service [ [http://www.laprensa.hn/ediciones/2007/11/08/casi_300_mil_visitas_a_las_grabaciones La Prensa - Casi 300 mil visitas a las grabaciones / 08 / 11 / 2007 / Ediciones / La Prensa ] ] . After Zelaya made a complaint to the police they launched an investigation to find who had made the recordings, which are considered espionage and a violation of Honduras' privacy laws, that included searching the mansion of the CEO of Hondutel, Marcelo Chimirri [ [http://www.laprensa.hn/ediciones/2007/11/10/policia_catea_vivienda_de_chimirri Policía catea vivienda de Chimirri] ] , an action condemned by Zelaya [ [http://www.laprensa.hn/ediciones/2007/11/11/zelaya_condena_accion_policial_en_allanamiento_de_casa_de_chimirri Zelaya condena acción policial en allanamiento de casa de Chimirri] ] . On November 14 Chimirri appeared in court and was charged with various crimes related to the appearance of these clips on YouTube [ [http://www.laprensa.hn/ediciones/2007/11/14/aparece_marcelo_chimirri La Prensa - Chimirri se defenderá en libertad / 14 / 11 / 2007 / Ediciones / La Prensa ] ] .

Animal abuse

YouTube has been criticized by animal welfare groups for hosting videos of animal cruelty, including dog fighting, live animals being fed to another, hunting, and other apparent abuses. [Times online, [http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/the_web/article2284380.ece "Animal cruelty films on YouTube"] August 19, 2007, retrieved August 25, 2007.] [ Practical Fishkeeping, [http://www.practicalfishkeeping.co.uk/pfk/pages/item.php?news=1255 "Uproar at fish cruelty on YouTube"] May 17, 2007, retrieved August 25, 2007.] [Honolulu Star Bulletin, [http://starbulletin.com/2008/03/04/news/story03.html "Marine Tosses Dog from Cliff on Youtube] March 4, 2008, retrieved March 21st 2008.]

Neo-Nazis and genocide denial

On December 18, 2007, CNN reported about the prevalence of neo-Nazi propaganda and Holocaust denial videos on YouTube.cite news
url = http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/world/2007/12/17/pleitgen.neo.nazis.on.you.tube.cnn
title = Neo Nazis on YouTube
publisher = CNN
date = December 18, 2007] Hundreds of Nazi- and SS-glorifying, Holocaust-denying, anti-Semitic and racist videos have been brought to the attention of both YouTube and its parent company Google Inc. by the German Zentralrat der Juden ("Central Council of Jews"), which did "not get any response". The first reports about the violation of YouTube's own rules surfaced in August 2007 after the German TV-magazine Report Mainz reported that even over a hundred complaints by the federal Jugendschutz.net watchdog to YouTube about videos forbidden by German law had not been answered and that the flagged content had not been removed by YouTube. [ [http://www.spiegel.de/netzwelt/web/0,1518,502093,00.html Neonazi-Propagandafilme: Zentralrat der Juden droht YouTube mit Anzeige - Netzwelt - SPIEGEL ONLINE - Nachrichten ] ] [http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/08/28/google_germany_neo_nazi/] [ [http://www.reuters.com/article/technologyNews/idUSL2751050320070827 YouTube criticized in Germany over Neo-Nazi clips | Technology | Reuters ] ] [ [http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/898004.html YouTube criticized in Germany over anti-Semitic Nazi videos - Haaretz - Israel News ] ] Some of the flagged videos have been online for over a year. CNN contacted Google specifically about a 6 part video series of Holocaust Denial videos, which Google promised to "block immediately", but over five weeks later (and as of January 17, 2008) were still available. [ [http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/world/2007/12/17/pleitgen.neo.nazis.on.you.tube.cnn Video - Breaking News Videos from CNN.com ] ] At some point between then and the 9th of February 2008, the video was taken down for a "terms of use violation". [ [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OKg7ACjcS84 YouTube - Broadcast Yourself ] ]

Denial videos of other genocides (such as the Nanking Massacre) can also be found on YouTube. Fact|date=May 2008

Abusive users

YouTube has been criticised for not enforcing strict rules on the content of videos and comments on videos that may be deemed offensive. [ [http://icliverpool.icnetwork.co.uk/0100news/0100regionalnews/tm_headline=fury-as-youtube-carries-sick-hillsboro-video-insult%26method=full%26objectid=18729523%26page=1%26siteid=50061-name_page.html icLiverpool - Fury as YouTube carries sick Hillsboro video insult ] ] This has allowed some users (known to the YouTube community as "Haters", "Trolls" and "Flamers") to post defamatory and abusive comments on videos and profiles of other users, and not be punished for it. The blocking system on YouTube has come under criticism because although a user may be blocked from posting comments on another user's profile, that user can still reply to comments another user has made on other system with the "reply to comments" system. The posting of potentially offensive videos and comments has been reported in the Daily Mirror, relating to comments on videos about the Munich Air Disaster, Hillsborough Disaster and the Soham Murders. Recently YouTube has taken a measure against abusive comments with a "comment voting" system, similar to Digg, although this has been criticised by othersFact|date=May 2008, because it allows trolls to rate seemingly friendly comments negatively and hateful comments positively. It can also be abused by people with multiple accounts. When a person is banned, there is nothing stopping them from creating another account, provided that they have another e-mail address.

Censorship by country

Since 2008, YouTube has started using geolocation to block certain countries from viewing certain videos. [ [http://pitchhk.blogspot.com/2008/03/this-video-is-not-available-in-your.html The Pitch HK: This video is not available in your country ] ] It is claimed that this was done due to licensing issues, as certain videos were not licensed for use outside a certain country. [ [http://yyhh.org/blog/2008/03/youtube-censors-bbcs-documentary-usa YouTube censors BBC's documentary in USA | yyhh.org ] ] The most common examples would be either a clip from the BBC Channel, only available to the UK [ [http://youtube.com/watch?v=R3meZOO2YPM YouTube - Broadcast Yourself ] ] or Ashley Tisdale's "He Said, She Said", probably not available to anyone outside the United States. [ [http://youtube.com/watch?v=4sTHw7HEfHo YouTube - Broadcast Yourself ] ] It was possible to watch blocked videos by changing the URL from http://youtube.com/?v= [video ID] to http://youtube.com/v/ [video ID] , but YouTube has since fixed this. [ [http://googlesystem.blogspot.com/2008/04/watch-restricted-youtube-videos.html Watch Restricted YouTube Videos ] ]

References