YouTube seems to have three main priorities with their copyright system:
1) Eliminate legal liability and risk of lawsuits. Technically all they need to do is comply with DMCA requests, but YouTube would rather not be sued by a major record company or film studio, even if they could win the case.
2) Become friendly with major content creators (record and film labels, television studios). YouTube wants a good working relationship with these companies, to ensure that these companies post their content on YouTube. YouTube really wants the views they get by hosting SNL clips and Beyonce music videos.
3) Actually help the independent content creators deal with copyright claims. This is a very, very distant third.
Because of these priorities, YouTube has decided their best course of action is to offload all of the work on copyright claims onto the independent content creators, in order to keep the big media giants happy. After all, NBC doesn't need YouTube, but a solo channel with 50k subscribers absolutely does.
I think point 2 is actually quite important. YouTube used to be a source of genuinely innovative content. It is now far more corporate and anodyne, and the most popular videos are largely big production companies, and part of that is copy-striking.
Ofc, the intention of copy-striking was not to decrease competition. But that ended up happening because of the way that the system is implemented (it isn't just copy-striking, I think reporting violations/automated violation systems have the same consequence).
Nonsense. Most of the videos on YouTube are still made by individual people. Just because there is now also corporate stuff on there doesn't mean you have to watch it. What do you want to do? Ban corporations from using YouTube?
I don't think I'm subscribed to a single corporate channel out of about 100 subscriptions.
* 3b1b
* Matthias Wandel
* Applied Science
* Colin Furze
* Scott Manley
* Practical Engineering
* Tom Scott
* Tantacrul
* CGP Grey
* Forgotten Weapons
* StuffMadeHere
* John Heisz
* Clickspring
* Internet Historian
...
YouTube is bursting at the seams with quality content made by individuals or tiny teams.
Individuals incorporating themselves, then adding in their friends who also appear in their videos and maybe some assistants is a bit different than billion dollars companies posting their videos.
Ha yeah the part where under-13s weren't allowed to opt in to the telemetry was really misunderstood. Lots of people leaping to crazy conclusions like that children couldn't use it at all, or they were sharing all the telemetry with the KGB or whatever.
I don't think I really said this wasn't the case. What I said is that corporations comprise the most popular/most watched videos (which is true, if you look at the video rankings).
That can happen simultaneous with good, independent videos being produced. But I think those non-corporate videos would do better if YouTube wasn't so hostile (again, content strikes, getting reported for violations...have you genuinely never heard any complaints about YouTube from people who create videos on the platform?).
It's quite simple. YouTube wants to be a dominant source for streaming music, to compete with Spotify. In order to do so they must keep the music labels happy. They don't really care about content creators anymore.
That sounds wrong. YouTube is by an order of magnitude the first video streaming platform on the way. I doubt that, were way to rake all Spotify's audience they would make even a significant portion of their video ad revenue.
One minor new annoyance is that they check the option to allow remixing a video in Shorts by default, and hide it behind a "show additional options" link on the video settings.
1) Eliminate legal liability and risk of lawsuits. Technically all they need to do is comply with DMCA requests, but YouTube would rather not be sued by a major record company or film studio, even if they could win the case.
2) Become friendly with major content creators (record and film labels, television studios). YouTube wants a good working relationship with these companies, to ensure that these companies post their content on YouTube. YouTube really wants the views they get by hosting SNL clips and Beyonce music videos.
3) Actually help the independent content creators deal with copyright claims. This is a very, very distant third.
Because of these priorities, YouTube has decided their best course of action is to offload all of the work on copyright claims onto the independent content creators, in order to keep the big media giants happy. After all, NBC doesn't need YouTube, but a solo channel with 50k subscribers absolutely does.