> <i>Sebastian Tomczak, an electronic musician from Australia, uploaded a ten-hour white-noise video to YouTube, and was promptly walloped with five infringement claims. YouTube’s automated Content ID system scans all uploaded videos against a database of copyrighted material; any overlapping content is flagged. When a supposed infringement is detected, the copyright owner can either have the video removed, or allow it to remain, and automatically garnish any advertising revenue that it might generate.</i><p>This kind of IP shenanigans is going to continue for as long as the burden of proof is on the party doing the "infringing." YouTube and platforms like it are built with this inherent bias toward copyright holders, despite the absurd frequency of false positives. On one hand, I can see how this <i>might</i> protect, say, indie film studios who don't have the resources to chase after everyone who posts their movies on YouTube illegally. At the same time, when a system's incentives result in bullshit like Fair Use protections being completely ignored[0], it's time for a new system.<p>Mammoth, centralized systems like YouTube are, unfortunately, still Really Hard to maintain without the backing of a proportionately mammoth company with lots of resources. You can be sure that that company's interest will often align with those of others with deep pockets. So in my mind, as with many of the big problems on today's internet, the technical aspect of this challenge really stems from centralization itself.<p>[0] <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nryFmUjtwEY" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nryFmUjtwEY</a>