US Indicts Two Men for Running a $20 Million YouTube Content ID Scam

Two men have been indicted by a grand jury for running a massive YouTube Content ID scam that netted the pair more than $20m. TorrentFreak: Webster Batista Fernandez and Jose Teran managed to convince a YouTube partner that the pair owned the rights to 50,000+ tracks and then illegally monetized user uploads over a period of four years.

Content ID was abused *surprised Pikachu Face*

[steveinaccounting]

When will Youtube cut the nonsense and actually fix Content ID and their DMCA system to prevent this, there are so many companies that exist to profit off of other creators with unjustified copyright claims, this has gone on for years and many many many youtubers have made videos on the issue. Somehow it seems youtube is just getting worse over time.

Re:Content ID was abused *surprised Pikachu Face*

[drinkypoo]

Content ID they could maybe fix, or at least require human confirmation. DMCA system cannot be fixed completely because it requires them to take down content or be liable, although they could make it easier to challenge a takedown request so they could improve it if not actually fix it.

Re:Content ID was abused *surprised Pikachu Face*

[Knightman]

It's quite easily fixed, if a challenge is made the DMCA requester MUST provide the copyright registration for the offending material or the video gets re-instated.

This places the burden on the DMCA requester to prove that they actually own the copyright or is an agent for the real owner.

This easy fix will of course be implemented as soon as the pigs starts landing after darkening the sky.

Re:Content ID was abused *surprised Pikachu Face*

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

Some years back, people bitching about this or that evil in Islamic countries were having DCMAs levied against their videos, where the DCMA liars flat out claimed copyright ownership of the videos.

Legally the channel owner had to give out their address info or be shut down. This was when attacks were happening.

Basically, a forced dox or shut up, dox then backed by risk of murder.

Re:

[Antique Geekmeister]

Copyrights no longer require registration, and haven't for decades. It's only when a lawsuit is pursued that a registration is needed. This helps protect the copyright of personal correspondence or workplace recordings.

Re: Content ID was abused *surprised Pikachu Face*

[NagrothAgain]

You don't even technically need it for a lawsuit but proving ownership becomes much more difficult without it. (At least in the US.) Copyright can get messy once you begin distributing copies (or giving out distribution/useage rights) if you don't have it officially registered so it's a good idea to protect yourself.

Re:

[steveinaccounting]

This works great for registered copyrights. To make this cover user generated content you just need another section saying, I am the original uploader of this content, with a URL to the video on the channel you are reporting from. If you stole this content and uploaded it then your channel just gets instantly banned. ContentID and DMCA are built around the assumption that whoever the claim is against is 100% stealing it and must be presumed malicious and guilty at all times. Otherwise why else would someon

Re:Content ID was abused *surprised Pikachu Face*

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

You Tube should be asked to pay the real artists all the money it paid to the imposters. Only that will create real incentive for YouTube to be diligent about copyright enforcement. All the payments made by YouTube to fake claimants are null and void.

YouTube can do what it can to recover what it paid to the fake claimants. But it does not absolve its negligence in usurping revenue that should have gone to the rightful content owners and creators and redirecting it to some random fake claimants.

Re:

[AmiMoJo]

Human confirmation won't help. YouTube won't get into the business of doing confirmation themselves, and because of the DMCA they legally can't anyway. Having the claimant check for themselves will just mean they employ someone to click the "approve" button all day.

The way to fix this is to set up a copyright small claims court. Challenging DMCA notices requires too much risk and expense. It should be a simple, online court system where each side can make their case with written submissions and a decision q

Re:

[NicBenjamin]

A lot of your revenue comes from the first couple days a video is out because the algorithm promotes new content. They could write an algorithm that promotes content that is just off a DMCA clam if they wanted.

Re:

[drinkypoo]

I really love this idea. They clearly have the power of promotion and know who to target. This would be a meaningful form of restorative justice.

Re:

[bill_mcgonigle]

Warner Brothers buys tons of ads on YouTube and you don't. Who is Alphabet going to side with, you or them?

Use Odysee if you want to decentralize.

Re:Content ID was abused *surprised Pikachu Face*

[GameboyRMH]

Use Odysee if you want to decentralize.

Any less Nazi-friendly options?

https://www.theguardian.com/wo... [theguardian.com]

Maybe Dtube, although that unfortunately also uses hyper-inefficient blockchain technology.

POSSE: Post on Own Site and Syndicate Elsewhere

[tepples]

Any less Nazi-friendly options?

Film studios have been using this one weird trick for decades, and it's called POSSE [indieweb.org]. Start your own website ("with blackjack and hookers" as Bender put it), make a short trailer for each video, Post the whole video on your Own Site, and then Syndicate the trailer Elsewhere such as social media.

Re:

[jellomizer]

There are a number of rather Simple Fixes that YouTube can do, to make sure that copyright claims are justly dealt with. In short copyright holders will opt to be overly defensive on their IP (Just to prevent it sliding scale into Public Domain), then you have scammers who claim to be IP Holders where they don't own the IP as well.

Fair Use is rather broad, and YouTube self interest should be that they should welcome Fair Use of content, and not punish the Creators who make videos where they can put ad-reve

Re:

[NicBenjamin]

Copyright doesn't slide into the public domain. Trademark does.

Copyright holders are super-aggressive because they've subcontracted enforcement to a third party that gets paid when violations are found. The subcontractor is doing the enforcement. This also makes it hard to verify whether Bart's Legal LLC of Preoria IL is actually employed by Paramount films.

Re:

[Agripa]

Why would they fix it when it is working as intended to stifle fair use and competition? That was part of the deal they worked out with legacy content owners.

Youtube description joke

[suso]

They should just tell the judge that they didn't intend to violate copyright, so it's ok.

YouTube is culpable for ignoring the appeals...

[Myself]

There is ZERO percent chance that NONE of the affected creators appealed their strikes.

YouTube was flooded with evidence that these clowns were pulling a fast one, and failed to comprehend it, for FOUR YEARS. That kind of negligence should open them to some sort of action as well.

Re:YouTube is culpable for ignoring the appeals...

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

The content creators who lost revenue should take YouTube to court and ask for payment that should have come to them. And interest. And penalty. It is one time where a class action law suit is clearly warranted. By the content creators. Against YouTube.

Re:

[Spamalope]

Youtube comprehended it. They failed to see the profit for them in fixing the situation cementing the expectation that small fry don't get paid or listened to.

Re:YouTube is culpable for ignoring the appeals...

[TechyImmigrant]

No one goes to college with dreams of being a copyright strike reviewer.
I bet they have staff retention problems in that department with those dead-end jobs.

Re: YouTube is culpable for ignoring the appeals..

[X-Dopple]

Appealing a Content ID claim is incredibly risky. You aren't appealing to YouTube, you are appealing to the alleged copyright owner - who has the ability to take down your video and copystrike your account without any recourse.

https://support.google.com/you... [google.com]

It is a system optimized to screw over non-corporate media and YouTube knows it.

100% YouTube's Fault

[Sigmon]

These YouTube goons purposefully screwed over their user-base with this content ID garbage. They just side-stepped the legal liability and shoved the consequences of a clearly and obviously broken system onto the content creators. Makes me angry to think of all the thousands of people who's creative efforts were frustrated and were cheated out of who knows how much money.

Shouldn't this have been caught by some fancy AI

[xanthos]

I wouldn't be surprised in the least that these thieves had a set of criteria they used to identify their victims. Criteria that probably becomes obvious once you look for it in the data. But then you would have to be motivated to look for it and AlphaGoogleTube nor A.R.(the YouTube Partner mentioned) has any pressing business reason to look for fraud. Especially when they can point to these takedowns as evidence that they are enforcing copyright for the bigger artists that bring in the real money. Curious that these two guys get indicted but A.R who laundered the fraud gets off the hook while no doubt keeping their percentage. Curious that the original article states that these guys were indicted but doesn't indicate if they are actually in custody or not.