Content ID Under Fire

For years many Youtube Partners have had trouble with companies using Content ID to claim their content but the issue is finally starting to receive some media attention. This Ars Technica Article by Timothy B. Lee shines a spotlight on one instance where Content ID was used to claim a video of President Obama.

Personally speaking, I have a channel I created to upload public domain videos called the Classic Movies Network.  I've uploaded videos with expired copyrights or those commissioned by the federal government (videos that exist in the public domain and who no one can claim copyright ownership of) and received copyright strikes from companies who have claimed ownership of these videos using Content ID.  I end up keeping the videos private while I appeal the decisions, which can take weeks or a full month.

To date I have always been able to appeal the decision and get the strikes overturned (they would need to file a lawsuit over it which they know they cannot win) , but Youtube then prevents me from monetizing the videos unless I show proof of copyright ownership. This is terribly unfair because no one can provide proof of ownership for these videos, yet they allow companies to claim them using Content ID.



Worst of all, Content ID is not given freely to all Partners; only a select few companies are allowed to have it. I have been rejected many times even though I have millions of views to my videos and several Partner channels. So Content ID is basically monopolized by the few who have it, and they use it to claim content they do not exclusively own in order to run ads on public domain videos that other users have uploaded.

I'll admit, the strategy is smart from a business point of view. They probably make hundreds of thousands of dollars a month by using Content ID like this. However it is not morally correct and Google should do something about it rather than waive their hands in the air as they collect ad revenue.