Google Video Blasted Over Piracy Claims

Stony Stevenson writes "A US-based copyright watchdog has sunk its teeth into Google by sending a report alleging copyright violations on Google Video to members of Congress. The National Legal and Policy Center (NLPC) researched the extent of copyrighted material being hosted on Google Video earlier this summer and released a Top 50 list of apparently copyrighted movies. But, in the latest spot-check of Google Video conducted from 10 to 18 September, the NLPC claims to have discovered 300 additional instances of apparently copyrighted films, including over 60 movies released this year. This is despite Google's claim that it respects the rights of copyright holders, and provides tools to help identify and remove copyrighted intellectual property from the site."

And NPLC has no stake

If they did, they'd file DMCA complaints. They're just trying to get some publicity (And thus funding), so good work Slashdot.

Re:And NPLC has no stake

Blame the firehose...

Now now, the editors have been doing a poor job of verifying their facts long before the introduction of the firehouse.

*ducks*

Re:And NPLC has no stake

In the same breath, that's 300 out of how many videos. I'd say if they only found 300, 60 released this year, that google video is doing a really good job at keeping copyrighted stuff OFF of the site.

Well...

...it seems like the tools doing the identifying of copyrighted content are working.

The only tool needed

The only tool needed is a DMCA takedown notice. They're cheap and easy to use, and companies like Google have a policy of always responding in the affirmative to them. Thankfully there's another cheap and easy response to them which is a counter-DMCA notice and it forces companies like Google to put the work back up (or at least allow the person to put it back up). The original company and/or person can do nothing except take the infringer to court, and Google is allowed to continue on as business allows.

With the law so bent towards media companies, you would think they'd stop bitching when companies like Google comply with the draconian laws.

Re:The only tool needed

With the law so bent towards media companies, you would think they'd stop bitching when companies like Google comply with the draconian laws.

You may have noticed that the copyright cartel is not happy with their own law (the DMCA) and is now pushing for ISPs to actively censor the net on behalf of copyright holders. They are complaining the law is too biased towards ISPs.

Not the only tool they'll want

Eventually they will ask for protection on the desktop. Before everyone starts calling me a dunce or troll, I understand how impossible that will be. I'm just saying that they will eventually ask for some sort of legal remedy to suppress peoples ability to circumvent their copyrights. I'm pretty sure that the congress will give it to them.

If it can happen in Germany, sigh...

Why Congress?

Aren't there already laws protecting copyright? Is Congress really responsible for enforcement? This reminds me so much of a child running to mommy every time another kid takes their toy or calls them a name.

Re:Why Congress?

Congress is responsible for writing and funding laws though, and by going to congress the group in effect is saying that current laws are insufficient or not properly enforced. It's about policy, not about the specific cases of infringement. This group does not own the copyrights; they are just promoting a particular policy like any political group does.

DMCA requirements

I'm pretty sure the DMCA process for removal involves sending the information to the host (Google), not to Congress. Evidentally this watchdog group has gotten a bit confused about the process.

Re:DMCA requirements

I'm not sure, but someone said you have to be a stakeholder to invoke the DMCA process. The watchdog group doesn't own any of the copyrights in question, so they cannot invoke the DMCA process.

Double Talk

Google says:

We're not doing anything wrong with YouTube, however we're developing technology to remove copyright material *when* we have to do so legally.

not evil huh?

In related news...

...Google has announced its new copyright search tool, Google Copyright Search Beta (tm). The new tool is designed to allow copyright holders make a Google Video search for terms like "the 40-year-old virgin" in order to file a takedown request. Google will then review the infringing content and remove it if necessary.

[/sarcasm] come on, this "watchdog" could alert copyright holders of infringed content, so that the affected parties can request the takedown of copyrighted content. Think, people, it's not that hard.

Was this their first step?

Did the National Legal and Policy Center inform Google that they found these copyrighted files, or are they just choosing to complain to Congress about it instead of going through Google's pre-defined channels? It would seem like the real test here would be to see how quickly Google responds to a proper take down request, not a measurement of how many copyrighted files are on the site at any given time.

The most important link..

Please, where's the top50 list? Come on ;-)

Almost everything is copyright

... unless it has been explicitly released in public domain or was created before Mickey Mouse was created.
The difference is having permission to distribute copyrighted material.
Does Google Video contain copyrighted material? Of course it does, but is the copyright violated is the important question. That question can only be answered by the copyright holder.

This is the internet.

Where can I get the list of videos? (with links please)

I will review and confirm if they are indeed infringing.

Did this watchdog group...

...bother to tell Google? Automated tools may catch 99% of what they intent to catch, but some content will always slip through (cf: Spam.) Instead of crying to Congress over a very small percentage (300/gazillions) of offending videos. Did they even bother to simply contact Google and say, "Here's a video that violates copyright, please remove it." Instead, it seems that they're doing nothing more than crying foul and escalating this to a level that it really doesn't need to go. Simple intervention on Google's part could have "corrected" this problem in minutes. Now, we have Congress once again distracted by foolishness.

I may get blasted.....

I know I may get blasted but you know, as far as things like viewing video content for free or getting free music and the whole internet piracy thing... If it was not for free then I just wouldn't get it! I had a paper route when I was a kid and I was able to get like a CD a month, well needless to say that is not very much music so I opted not to buy CDs and just listen to the radio, or bought tapes and recorded songs I really liked and then just listened to the tape. So a new mentality forms, buy storage space and fill it with content. I am not one of those guys that will buy a 400 CD case holder and then spends thousands of dollars on CD's where the artist gets a small fraction of the profits, and if iPods (or other generic mp3 or storage devices) did not exist I would be content with the radio and tapes. The thing that irks me is that copyright and freak outs like this are about forcing us to consume, making us pay for something over and over and over again cause it can easily be replicated and the maker can get rich beyond their dreams. Well go for it, all the more power to them, all copyright and pirating headaches do for me is make me not consume the music, movies, or content, Then I might actually go outside again makes no difference to me.

"This is despite..."

So, despite Google fufilling their obligations to respond to DMCA takedown notices, they're supposed to be doing more? What, do you want them to read your fscking mind or something?

Misleading Wording

[...] researched the extent of copyrighted material being hosted on Google Video [...]

[...] have discovered 300 additional instances of apparently copyrighted films [...]

[...] provides tools to help identify and remove copyrighted [...]

I bet I could find 10,000 copyrighted movies! I would go as far as to say that almost every single video on Google video is copyrighted (> 99%). The catch is that most of the copyright holders of the hosted videos have given permission for Google to host the video.

For example, this post is copyrighted by me, but by submitting it here I am giving Slashdot permission to host it. Big business isn't the only copyright holder out there. Copyright is automatic.

Either the writer of the article is confused or the watchdog group is confused. Or, if you are wearing your tinfoil hat, maybe they are intentionally being misleading to hide the facts?

Mountain out of a molehill

I don't see how these findings in any way cast doubt on Google's claim that "it respects the rights of copyright holders, and provides tools to help identify and remove copyrighted intellectual property". There's a difference between complying with notices to remove copyrighted content and helping copyright holders identify it, and removing 100% of infringing content from the site at all times, by magic.

No matter how good their tools are, with probably thousands (if not tens of thousands) of video submissions per day, it's going to be close to impossible to check them all for potentially copyright infringing material.

Besides, we all know the NLPC must be evil, since their acronym clearly stands for No Laptops Per Child.

A Copyright Watchdog?

From the NLPC's website [nlpc.org],

NLPC was founded in late 1991 following the release of the Senate Ethics Committee report whitewashing the Keating Five. The report made reference to the Code of Ethics for Government, but not by name, presumably for fear of giving it greater standing. NLPC was founded to promote ethics, and to give the Code the visibility it deserves.

This seems to be an organization that focuses on politics more than anything else: its list of accomplishments seems to be targeted at Democrats more than Republicans, although there are a few Republican politicians named.

A quick Google turned up this page [fairness.com] about the chairman of the NLPC's affiliations.

So why would a Republican-leaning group be aiming at Google?

It's all copyrighted

It's really strange that a copyright watchdog group wouldn't understand that under US law every video on Google Video (or ever created for that matter) is copyrighted. The question is whether the copyright holders want the videos on Google Video. It's a copyright watchdog that doesn't even understand the most basic concept of copyright law.

Basic problem of scale

How many video's get uploaded to Google Video (or YouTube) every day? Well, there are a whole lot of people that are potentially uploading. Lots and lots. Let's put the number at 1,000 a day even though I think that is far, far too low.

Now we have a company that owns the copyright on a popular movie. They might be able to justify 4 people to look at video sharing sites for infringement so they can then request the hosting site to remove it. Let's assume there are no more than 10 such video sharing sites, each with an average of no more than 1,000 posters each day. I suspect these numbers are way, way too low but even so this means there are 10,000 new video uploads that must be reviewed each day, seven days a week, or you fall behind.

This is the situation that the DMCA has created. It was originally envisioned that there would be a small number of "web site maintainers" and there would be only a limited amount of new material. We now have user contribution web sites and the full force of the tsunami of such contributions. This wasn't what the originators of DMCA envisioned at all.

Face it, there is no way to keep up. The video sharing sites aren't going to police the content because it would make contributions more difficult. The copyright owners can't check everything every day without a lot more people being involved and getting paid for it. And nobody has any respect for copyright or copyright owners so it could never be a "community policing" effort. Almost everyone wants to see copyright infringment continue on and on, unabated.

User contributions which can be infringing encourage this sort of thing. There would not seem to be any solution to the problem other than just giving up. I fully expect to see people starting to get the message soon, and that will mean no more digitial distribution. If you don't have the DVD to rip, you can't redistribute it. If you have a movie that is a big hit why would you throw it all away by making a DVD so it can be pirated? The other alternative is just saying "bag it" and not bothering to make the movie in the first place because you know you aren't going to get a fraction of the revenue you would have pre-piracy days.

I also think you will start seeing wider commercial distribution of less professional movies. They are cheaper and could be put on TV for next to nothing. If you can't get 100 million dollars for a movie, maybe you will want to show one on late-night TV that only cost $5000 to make.

Give 'em a break

In stead of just blasting Google, why doesn't the watchdog work with it to help remove the illegal content?

Re:google will prevail

I thought Google Video hosted the files?

google will RTFA

I hear the articles are even better than the summaries!

"During the past two weeks, the NLPC again conducted random spot-checks of Google Video in an attempt to identify clearly copyrighted works that continue to be hosted on the site.

Also notable is the reference to Google's tools:

The NLPC added that Google has been promising video filtering technology to screen for copyrighted content since at least the Autumn of 2006. However, it appears that Google still had not implemented the promised technology either for its YouTube or Google Video sites.

Re:google will prevail

It's google VIDEO, not google SEARCH ENGINE. They are actively serving the files, not just indexing them.

Come to think of it, why aren't they making a furore over youtube piracy? (From my experience) you can watch tonnes of copyrighted videos on youtube (albeit in sections only), and iirc google bought youtube. Can someone explain the difference between youtube piracy and google video piracy?

Re:google will prevail

It could arguably be contributory infringement or inducement. But the safe harbor provisions of the DMCA do protect search engine providers as well as several other sorts of ISPs.