from <a href="https://x.com/ChainPatrol/status/1876300596182983151" rel="nofollow">https://x.com/ChainPatrol/status/1876300596182983151</a><p>"
Hello! This was a false positive in our systems at
@ChainPatrol
. We are retracting the takedown request, and will conduct a full post-mortem to ensure this does not happen again.<p>We have been combatting a huge volume of fake YouTube videos that are attempting to steal user funds. Unfortunately, in our mission to protect users from scams, false positives (very) occasionally slip through.<p>We are actively working to reduce how often this happens, because it's never our intent to flag legitimate videos. We're very sorry about this! Will keep you posted on the takedown retraction.
"
I think a good baseline might be that you need to deposit say $1M and then when oops, you accidentally made a bogus claim it's OK that $1M is split between the victim of your oopsy and Youtube for their trouble - you just pay $1M to get back into the game. Outfits like this could explain to their investors that while their technology does sometimes have little goofs that cost a few billion dollars per year, once they invent perfect AI they can scale infinitely and make that back easily, so if you invest $10Bn of your fiat currency today, in 18 months they can 100% guarantee nothing in particular, wow.<p>This works for actual creators, who are occasionally slightly inconvenienced but handsomely rewarded when that occurs, for Youtube, who get paid each time these "rare" mistakes happen, and for the companies "innovating" by making up nonsense and taking people's money. Just as well the "investment" goes to a Youtuber as to some random office park or an ad firm.
Just a friendly heads up. Anyone who wants to avoid Twitter, since it has become so toxic, can use the domain xcancel.com in place of twitter.com or x.com. like so:<p><a href="https://xcancel.com/3blue1brown/status/1876291319955398799" rel="nofollow">https://xcancel.com/3blue1brown/status/1876291319955398799</a><p>This links to independent Nitter to provide a full thread.
It's deeply haunting to think about how badly AI is going to mess up the world over the next few years. Today, it's YouTube videos. Later, it will be a rejection of the insurance claim for a kid's life-saving surgery.<p>If you're in a position of influence in an organization that's losing its marbles over AI, please, at the very least encourage others to pump the brakes and <i>think</i>.<p>If there was ever a time to speak up when you know implementing something will lead to a likely disaster, it's now.
One of the reasons that copyright processes are so biased towards traditional rightsholders and against individual creators is that the latter group is simultaneously captive to the platform and unorganized/decentralized; YouTube needs licenses and goodwill from, say, Universal, far more than it needs 3blue1brown individually.<p>And the incentives for rectifying this are skewed: video platforms simply need to address individual cases with influential creators just reactively enough so that collective action isn't incentivized; that's far cheaper, and far easier to not need to coordinate with traditional rightsholders, than addressing the problem systematically.<p>If we believe that the vision of being an independent content creator is important to humanity - and I think it's becoming vital as "a way to distinguish myself" that folks are able to dream about from an early age - then we need to seriously work to protect it. Not everybody will get their "big break" but we can at the very least start having conversations about protecting creators from an AI-driven DMCA bot arbitrarily destroying their career through automated channel-disabling rules.
I wish Youtube etc would blacklist requests by these companies, but am not optimistic. Curation seems like the path here, but it seems difficult. (See also the recent Kagi thread here, highlighting how being able to curate which sites appear on your search results is a big deal)
I noticed `ChainPatrol` has a Github: <a href="https://github.com/chainpatrol">https://github.com/chainpatrol</a><p>There's a `report abuse` button on the right of that page. I used it. (Category: Bullying and Harassment)
You have to think of YouTube and other platforms as a mechanism for distribution, not a source of truth.<p>If you're a creator it's essential to have your own place on the web were you can host and publish anything without fear that it will be taken down for any reason — even accidentally.<p>As it becomes cheap to automate both creating takedown requests and processing requests, the volume of spam requests is going to skyrocket and it seems likely there will be more false positives.
can we start permanently banning companies that submit false-positive takedown requests?
3 strikes for them should result in not being able to submit any strikes anymore and all their content being removed<p>if the content creator can get their channel removed, same thing must apply to the opposite side as well
> The request seems to have been issued by a company chainpatrol, on behalf of Arbitrum, whose website says they "makes use of advanced LLM scanning" for "Brand Protection for Leading Web3 Companies"<p>Tech built on copyright abuse used for copyright trolling? Too early for peak irony of 2025!
Surely YouTube making a knowingly false allegation of tortfeasance against someone is libel. That should be actionable, possibly in a group action?<p>Continued libel that inhibits the democratic exercise of free speech seems like something the government should act on?
A policy I think would be interesting: copyright violation stops being about who is able to post what, and starts being about who is profiting from what. Content takedowns are impossible, but affected artists are directly and nontransferrably allowed to legally assert rights to the profits directly derived from their content and can legally reclaim lost funds. Preferably there would be a similar mechanism for false claims. No one loses money they aren’t entitled to, the rightsholder doesn’t need to play whack-a-mole to enforce an artificial monopoly, and no disruption for viewers in any case.<p>We need something that frees us from this prison. I still remember when it was normal for youtube videos to play mainstream music in the background. Now draconian enforcement has created this artificial power that people beyond music labels can abuse, and it affects our art adversely. Feels clear to me we need something new that operates in 2024, not from the era where individual movie pirates faced 6-7 figure fines and jail time.
This reminds me of that time CGP Grey's channel got in trouble for.... impersonating the famous youtube channel CGP Grey.<p><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DIssymQvrbU" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DIssymQvrbU</a>
The year is 2030. After the AI bot wars, FaceBook and Google have been crippled. They let AI automation control their content and it was deleted after OpenAI GPT10 discovered vulnerabilities in automated copyright strikes.<p>Taco Bell won the franchise war and is the only restaurant remaining.
It truly protected web3 from the "normies" that could have learned about crypto from this video. AI moderation is such a joke, every reupload (or a completely different video on the same subject) can take a video down because they look "similar" enough for the AI and no person would bother checking it. I expected a different treatment of their bigger creators, but that's what it is.
CinemaStix has also been fighting these lately. In their case, YouTube seems to have zero regard for Fair Use, and short-sighted film rights holders are striking every video containing any amount of their film, even though the publicity CinemaStix gives them likely increases sales.
I apologize in advance for not offering something constructive to say. I just wish anyone here who is younger could see the difference between what the promise of the web was in ‘95 and what it has become. Such a burning pile of trash, it’s heartbreaking.
I hope YouTube can make this a better experience extremely soon.<p>With YouTube video being used as a proxy for credible content on search results..<p>3 relatively anonymous complaints, in bad faithc can end so much learning and work… without evidence or reply kind of is deterring from having great content on YouTube.<p>The deterrent to creating good content on YouTube lets the bad content win, except it might not keep the eyeballs for advertising as well or broadly.<p>I’m not sure if the complainant must be required to contact the channel prior to accepting a dmca complaint? EBay has a built in messaging system, maybe YouTube can too.<p>Further if there’s ways creators can be protecting their creations before posting they should be built into the workflow, whether it’s registering custom music, etc.<p>Otherwise the price of success is targetable in an automated fashion to take down a channel if they don’t comply or pay out.<p>A channel inbox might force behaviour into first creator to creator before escalating straight to too easily triggering things.<p>Maybe new complainants found to have too many complaints in short order or some other pattern could possibly have to pass much higher kyc requirements to help each other communicate more effectively.
I wonder if it makes sense for someone to do a huge IP troll bot network to make copyright claims on all the big YouTubers in such an egregious and in-your-face wrong way that youtube would be forced to redesign or remove the system. It'd suck for a bit but I think this slow burn affecting people that can't defend themselves (3blue1brown can) is worse.
The crypto YouTube scams are incredibly sophisticated. Bitcoin is the best currency for scammers bar none, so millions from nation states like North Korea will pour into this to decimate lowly pensioners scared for their future.<p>3b1b is basically a causality in this war of greed.
With AI exponentially accelerating effects of Dead Internet, I think any social or content-sharing platforms will require some form of Digital ID that can't be easily created/mass-generated (e.g. maybe tie bank account to it?).<p>That would put real consequences on users misusing platforms. Even a small fee for misbehavior would likely curtail vast swathes of bad actors. It would also make companies be less trigger-happy with their bots if such are allowed to operate in that ID framework (i.e. an identifiable bot being punished would be a fee subtracted from the company that uses it).<p>I pretty much expect that kind of system in the future, otherwise we will just return back to private networks and private communities.
After looking at the websites for ChainPatrol and Arbitrum, I still have no idea what's going on here. How do these two things combine to result in a YouTube copyright claim? What sort of videos are they supposed to be issuing takedowns for?
From <a href="https://x.com/ChainPatrol/status/1876456092164653328" rel="nofollow">https://x.com/ChainPatrol/status/1876456092164653328</a>
"We found that this video was never reported in our system, and our system did not flag it. This false positive was due to human error, not bots or AI. One of our analysts, responsible for submitting takedowns, accidentally copied the wrong link while reporting a malicious video."
Are there any other copies of this video out there? Since it's a bogus claim, the video should be able to be posted elsewhere --- YouTube can't be the only source of record.
I'm not sure about x dmca check here: <a href="https://www.enforcity.com/blog/x-twitter-dmca" rel="nofollow">https://www.enforcity.com/blog/x-twitter-dmca</a>
Actually, this is exactly why we should embrace blockchain technology. With a decentralized video platform built on Web3, these kinds of copyright issues wouldn't happen because everything would be verified on-chain.I know people have been working on a similar project using smart contracts that could solve this. YouTube is just too centralized.
In the future we will <i>maybe</i> need a physical ID (or other sufficiently costly proof) to post a video or file a complaint or do stuff other than consume.<p>I don't know though, maybe that will prove to be too hard and the bot filled platforms will win. In which case maybe the only way to be safe from the bot armies is to <i>hire a bigger bot army yourself</i>. Fun!
Luckily there are copies on other video platforms. e.g.<p><a href="https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1yJ41117we/?spm_id_from=333.337.search-card.all.click&vd_source=204d16a89d6ce892cae191a976edefda" rel="nofollow">https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1yJ41117we/?spm_id_from=333...</a>
Are there any nations that have laws that require investigation before takedowns, or at least have financial punishment for issuing incorrect takedowns?<p>Why don't we build a video hosting service served from there, if such a place exists?
Isn't this very strong evidence in favor of a thesis that HN hates? That the most important networks (like YouTube) ought to be decentralized? Unfortunately, a strike in favor of the blockchain people — the best of which have been working to find ways to keep systems permanently decentralized (and not just temporarily decentralized, like Bluesky/Nostr/Mastodon/SMTP/etc.).
I'd like a couple of laws whereby if you charge or make money through something, you need to have some human monitoring.<p>Surely there's precedent is it not illegal to operate an unmonitored industrial factory
Why do we tolerate centralized censorship platforms when we know their catastrophic failure modes?<p>This is just a mistaken corporate interest. What about when the state wants very much to hide something?
I mean, it's good they are doing the right thing here, even if it were only damage control. But doesn't give a lot of confidence they won't harm creators who don't yet have 3b1b's reach.
"Be a property owner and not a renter on the Internet"<p><<a href="https://den.dev/blog/be-a-property-owner-not-a-renter-on-the-internet/" rel="nofollow">https://den.dev/blog/be-a-property-owner-not-a-renter-on-the...</a>><p>HN discussion: <<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AlcDHlK_RoY" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AlcDHlK_RoY</a>><p>If you keep working on Maggie's Farm, you'll keep encountering Maggie's rules.<p><<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maggie%27s_Farm" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maggie%27s_Farm</a>><p>Rely on YouTube for distribution, for now, but build a home base (or bases) elsewhere which you can fall back on.