YouTube Copyright Crackdown Hits Multichannel Network Affiliates

Internet video service says has enabled copyright holders to scan material uploaded by MCN affiliates

YouTube has ramped up efforts to let copyright holders flag infringing material uploaded by affiliates of multichannel networks — which has resulted in a wave of new claims.

“We recently enabled Content ID scanning on channels identified as affiliates of MCNs,” a YouTube rep said in an emailed statement. “This has resulted in new copyright claims for some users, based on policies set by the relevant content owners.”

YouTube in the past week has sent out a spate of copyright-infringement notifications for videos on MCNs, chiefly targeting channels with videogame content, TubeFilter and Kotaku reported. Many of the requests appeared to originate from third parties unaffiliated with game publishes, the reports said.

The three biggest independent YouTube MCNs — Fullscreen, Maker Studios and Machinima — declined to comment.

Under the new YouTube policy, MCNs are on the hook for copyright violations on channels that they directly manage. For MCN partners that are designated as “affiliates,” however, those individual creators are now having their videos screened by the Content ID system and YouTube says it reserves the right to cut off ad payments to offenders, according to sources familiar with the policy.

Copyright issues at MCNs recently came to the fore in a lawsuit against Fullscreen filed by the National Music Publishers’ Assn., which alleged the MCN does not compensate songwriters and publishers for videos with cover versions of songs. The NMPA also announced a settlement with Maker over similar claims.

The YouTube rep noted that channel owners are able to dispute Content ID claims if they believe those claims are invalid.

According to YouTube, the Content ID system scans the equivalent of 400 years of video every day, which is matched against a database with 25 million reference files of copyrighted content. About 5,000 content partners use the service, including TV broadcasters, movie studios and record labels.

Filed Under:

Want to read more articles like this one? SUBSCRIBE TO VARIETY TODAY.
Post A Comment 5

Leave a Reply


Comments are moderated. They may be edited for clarity and reprinting in whole or in part in Variety publications.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

  1. This is very interesting, You’re a very skilled blogger.

    I’ve joined your rss feed and look forward to seeking more of your
    excellent post. Additionally, I’ve shared your website in my social

  2. Ben says:

    It would be a good thing if the claims are valid and actually target videos that use content illegally. But what about game reviews, critique and other such legal uses? Which are still being flagged under the Content ID system just the same. How would you like to individually appeal to, say 60 claims, citing every time that it is fair use.

  3. MCNs shouldn’t be immune to copyright claims. Most of these are the biggest offenders and problems for copyfraud ID claims we “normal” users had to face. It’s about time YouTube stopped playing favorites. The system is biased but letting MCN’s not get claims and even make false claims was a big problem.

  4. I’ve spent the last 12 months and will continue to do everything I can to build my business and social life OUTSIDE of the Google empire. You see, Google builds it and then takes advantage of you by attempting to manipulate your information and environment. I once copied a link made available on a SHARE BUTTON and posted it into my forum. It was a story about Christmas lights in Los Angeles. Later, the newspaper who hired the reporter decided not to pay the reporter for the story. In retaliation, the reporter made a copyright claim again the newspaper and ALL OF THE PEOPLE WHO LINKED TO THE STORY. Google shut down my real estate website for having the link to the Christmas lights story and wouldn’t allow me to access my website until I removed the “SHARE” link due to the claim. Does the general public realize that Google can SHUT DOWN YOUR WEBSITE. They have an agreement with Safari, Internet Explorer, Firefox and Google Chrome that if there is a copyright claim, they can SHUT DOWN YOUR WEBSITE until you PROVE TO GOOGLE that you’ve removed the material. There is no trial. There is no justice. There is just whatever Google decides to do with your own personal website. It’s getting bad people and we are all blindly buying into it.

More Digital News from Variety