DMCA Abuse on YouTube, Punk Bands Targeted
In recent months there has been a slew of DMCA takedowns on YouTube affecting numerous punk bands.
Apparently SST Records, owned by Greg Ginn, has been utilizing the Digital Millennium Copyright Act to claim copyright infringement on a vast number of videos that utilize brief clips of music from Black Flag, including skateboard videos made by fans. Well, gosh, that’s what copyright holders can do, though it does seem sort of mean.
SST has also claimed multiple copyright takedowns on bands that have nothing to do with SST, including X, Fear, Sin 34, Lower Class Brats, Puzzled Panthers, and the Adolescents. Also affected, videos made by fans under Fair Use, utilizing snippets of songs.
have since admitted that they never even viewed the allegedly offending videos before issuing the strikes! Rather, they used automated software in their campaign, in many cases resulting in false DMCA takedowns of videos that were legitimately using copyrighted material under the fair use doctrine. Several users permanently lost their channels (i.e., termination), and others permanently lost special privileges like being able to upload videos longer than 15 minutes.
YouTube provides copyright holders with a Content ID program. YouTube account holders who use the software must submit title lists and audio files, as well as proof of copyright. The program can be used to:
- Identify user-uploaded videos comprised entirely OR partially of their content, and
- Choose, in advance, what they want to happen when those videos are found. Make money from them. Get stats on them. Or block them from YouTube altogether.>
- Reduce Infringement. Educate your fans about your copyright preferences and prevent your content from being distributed on YouTube without your permission.
- Fully Automated. Once you’re set up, Content ID will identify, claim, and apply policies to YouTube videos for you.
The DMCA takedown of “Democracy” by the Adolescents on Frontier Records, which also handles their publishing via Bug Music, indicated that a company called Love Cat Music had also claimed DMCA rights, along with SST. I wrote to Love Cat, which has only one punk band, Reagan Youth, in its catalog. Owner Randy Frisch replied:
i do not know why LoveCat Music is mentioned here. Could be a mistake.
we have sent takedown notices with respect to other songs in our
catalog that we do in fact control.
But not this one
Is it possible that YouTube’s Content ID program is faulty and can’t tell punk songs apart? If so, major fail.
So I wrote to SST Record’s owner Greg Ginn and asked him about YouTube. At first he said
I don’t know much about YouTube.
Then I asked about fan videos being posted on YouTube. His response:
I then asked if he enforced copyright. He replied:
Greg did not write back, and blocked me on Facebook, making it impossible to contact him further. Ginn has been a brutal enforcer of SST’s copyrights, though oddly he showed disdain for U2’s when SST released Negativland’s single U2 (Full disclosure, I worked for a branch of SST Records in the mid-1980s. In 1991 I wrote an analysis of the U2/Negativland controversy for U2’s magazine Propaganda; when that piece was repurposed as a press release, I was paid. I know many former SST Records artists, as well as people affiliated with U2).
When a video is falsely DMCA’ed on YouTube, it is the responsibility of the real copyright owner to prove they are the rightful copyright holder. It can take up to 10 days for the DMCAed video to be restored. Alerted to the Adolescents’ video takedown, Frontier Records’ owner and founder Lisa Fancher worked with YouTube, sending in the correct forms to restore the video. Often bands do not know their videos have been taken down, or why, as in the case of Lower Class Brats:
How could they get our videos taken down off of YouTube and why would they do something like this? I am completely baffled…
I look forward to your reply, thanks….
Since it can take over a week to restore a video, DMCA-ing a video is an effective means of harassment or of silencing speech, as seen during Anonymous’ Project Chanology when videos shot at protests and/or using Fair Use clips of Scientology videos, or the organization’s logos, were DMCA-ed.
If YouTube’s content identifying software is at fault for false DMCAs, then those using it should definitely alert YouTube about the glitches since it looks pretty creepy and bad to take down videos for which you do not own the copyrights. However, if people are purposefully DMCAing videos out of spite, and have a long record of false claims, perhaps YouTube should treat them with the same vigorous enforcement they show to copyright abusers.
YouTube’s PR department did not respond to my questions about the accuracy of its Content ID software, however they did say:
Unfortunately, in some cases, individuals abuse our notification process by submitting fraudulent claims. When we become aware of this, we take action by reinstating the videos and/or accounts affected, and taking appropriate action against the individual responsible.
The PR person followed up to my questions about Content ID being possibly faulty with this:
You can read more about both of these things are our Copyright Center. Thanks!
Which is where I started in the first place.