Content ID: Difference between revisions

| name = ContentIDContent ID

| size = no known measures

| license = closed sourceProprietary, only accessible via YouTube

Content ID<ref name="YouTube Content ID">{{cite web |title=YouTube Content ID |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9g2U12SsRns |publisher=YouTube |accessdateaccess-date=May 25, 2015 |date=September 28, 2010}}</ref> creates an ID File for copyrighted audio and video material, and stores it in a database. When a video is uploaded, it is checked against the database, and flagged as a copyright violation if a match is found.<ref name="youtube">[https://www.youtube.com/t/contentid_more More about Content ID] YouTube. Retrieved December 4, 2011.</ref> When this occurs, the content owner has the choice of blocking the video to make it unviewable, tracking the viewing statistics of the video, or adding advertisements to the "infringing" video with proceeds automatically going to the content owner.

| accessdateaccess-date=2018-09-09}}</ref> can use Content ID.<ref>{{cite web

| accessdateaccess-date=2018-09-09}}</ref> These criteria make the use of Content ID without the aid of a major backer difficult, limiting its usage to big corporations in practice.<ref name="plagiarismtoday">{{cite web

| accessdateaccess-date=2018-09-09}}</ref>

Between 2007 and 2009, companies including [[Viacom (2005–present2005–2019)|Viacom]], [[Mediaset]], and the English [[Premier League]] filed lawsuits against YouTube, claiming that it has done too little to prevent the uploading of copyrighted material.<ref>{{Cite news |title=Viacom will sue YouTube for $1bn |publisherwork=BBC News |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6446193.stm |accessdateaccess-date=May 26, 2008 |date=March 13, 2007}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |title=Mediaset Files EUR500 Million Suit Vs Google's YouTube |url=https://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/djf500/200807301025DOWJONESDJONLINE000654_FORTUNE5.htm |date=July 30, 2008 |publisher=[[CNNMoney.com]] |accessdateaccess-date=August 19, 2009}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Premier League to take action against YouTube |url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/2312532/Premier-League-to-take-action-against-YouTube.html |website=[[The Daily Telegraph]] |publisher=[[Telegraph Media Group]] |date=May 5, 2007 |accessdateaccess-date=March 26, 2017}}</ref> Viacom, demanding $1&nbsp;billion in damages, said that it had found more than 150,000 unauthorized clips of its material on YouTube that had been viewed "an astounding 1.5&nbsp;billion times".

During the same court battle, Viacom won a court ruling requiring YouTube to hand over 12 terabytes of data<ref>{{cnCite web |title=Google must divulge YouTube log |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7488009.stm |access-date=July30 2020June 2023 |website=BBC News}}</ref> detailing the viewing habits of every user who had watched videos on the site. On March 18, 2014, the lawsuit was settled after seven years with an undisclosed agreement.<ref>{{Cite news |title=Google and Viacom settle seven-year YouTube row |work=[[BBC News]] |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-25665596 |accessdateaccess-date=March 18, 2014 |date=March 18, 2014}}</ref>

In June 2007, YouTube began trials of a system for automatic detection of uploaded videos that infringe copyright.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |title=Sur YouTube, la détection automatique des contenus soumis à droit d’auteur ne satisfait personne |url=https://www.lemonde.fr/pixels/article/2018/07/05/droit-d-auteur-sur-youtube-personne-n-est-vraiment-satisfait-de-la-reconnaissance-automatique_5326621_4408996.html |access-date=30 June 2023 |website=Le Monde}}</ref> This system uses 'digital fingerprints' of songs or videos to automatically identify their matches. More precisely, it detects the unauthorized use of copyright-protected content.<ref name=":0" /><ref name=":1">{{Cite web |title=En 2021, YouTube a repéré 1,5 milliard d'infractions de propriété intellectuelle sur ses vidéos |url=https://www.clubic.com/television-tv/video-streaming/youtube/actualite-431187-en-2021-youtube-a-repere-1-5-milliard-d-infractions-de-propriete-intellectuelle-sur-ses-videos.html |access-date=30 June 2023 |website=Clubic}}</ref><ref name=":2">{{Cite web |title=Droits d'auteur : en 2021, YouTube a automatiquement traité près d'1,5 milliard de plaintes |url=https://www.lesnumeriques.com/vie-du-net/droits-d-auteur-en-2021-youtube-a-automatiquement-traite-pres-d-1-5-milliard-de-plaintes-n188409.html |access-date=30 June 2023 |website=Les Numériques}}</ref> Google CEO [[Eric Schmidt]] regarded this system as necessary for resolving lawsuits such as the one from [[Viacom (2005–present)|Viacom]], which alleged that YouTube profited from content that it did not have the right to distribute.<ref>{{Cite news |first=Kevin J. |last=Delaney |title=YouTube to Test Software To Ease Licensing Fights |url=http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118161295626932114.html |work=Wall Street Journal |date=June 12, 2007 |accessdateaccess-date=December 4, 2011}}</ref> The system was initially called "Video Identification"<ref>{{Citation|last=YouTube Advertisers|title=Video Identification|date=February 4, 2008|url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xWizsV5Le7s|access-date=August 29, 2018}}</ref><ref name="King 2018">{{Cite news|url=https://youtube.googleblog.com/2010/12/content-id-turns-three.html|title=Content ID turns three|last=King|first=David|date=December 2, 2010|work=Official YouTube Blog|access-date=August 29, 2018|language=en-US}}</ref> and later became known as Content ID.<ref name="YouTube Content ID"/> By 2010, YouTube had "already invested tens of millions of dollars in this technology".<ref name="King 2018" /> In 2011, YouTube described Content ID as "very accurate in finding uploads that look similar to reference files that are of sufficient length and quality to generate an effective ID File".<ref name="youtube" />

In 2006, YouTube and content protection company [[Audible Magic]] signed an agreement to mainly create 'audio identification technology', and precisely, to license the use of Audible Magic's own "Content ID" fingerprinting technology.<ref>{{Cite web |title=YouTube: a history |url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/mediatechnologyandtelecoms/digital-media/7596636/YouTube-a-history.html |access-date=17 July 2023 |website=The Telegraph}}</ref> When Google bought YouTube, in November of the same year, the license was transferred to Google.<ref>{{cite web

| accessdateaccess-date=2018-09-09}}</ref> The agreement was terminated in 2009, but in 2014 Google obtained a trademark for theirits own "Content ID" implementation.<ref>{{cite web

| accessdateaccess-date=2018-09-09}}</ref> Audible Magic sued Google the same year on the basis that they owned the "Content ID" trademark and therefore that Google trademarking their implementation was a fraud.

== CriticismsCriticism ==

{{see also|Criticism of Google#YouTube|Censorship by copyright}}

An independent test in 2009 uploaded multiple versions of the same song to YouTube, and concluded that while the system was "surprisingly resilient" in finding copyright violations in the audio tracks of videos, it was not infallible.<ref>{{cite web |title=Testing YouTube's Audio Content ID System |url=https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/04/testing-youtubes-aud |date=April 23, 2009 |author=Von Lohmann, Fred |accessdateaccess-date=December 4, 2011}}</ref> The use of Content ID to remove material automatically has led to [[YouTube copyright issues|controversy]] in some cases, as the videos have not been checked by a human for fair use.<ref>{{cite web |title=YouTube's January Fair Use Massacre |url=https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/01/youtubes-january-fair-use-massacre |date=February 3, 2009 |author=Von Lohmann, Fred |accessdateaccess-date=December 4, 2011}}</ref>

If a YouTube user disagrees with a decision by Content ID, it is possible to fill in a form disputing the decision.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/t/contentid_dispute Content ID disputes] YouTube. Retrieved December 4, 2011.</ref> However, this claim is sent directly to the party that owns the supposed copyright, who has the final decision in the matter unless legal action is pursued. If the reporting party denies their claim, the channel receives a strike. If a channel receives 3three strikes, it is removed from the platform. Prior to 2016, videos weren't monetized until the dispute was resolved.

In December 2013, Google changed the way the system worked (seemingly to cover YouTube in case of lawsuits), leading to numerous content creation copyright notices being sent to gameplay videos YouTube content creatorsaccounts. Those notices led to ad revenues being automatically diverted to third parties, which sometimes had no connection to the games.<ref>{{cite web

| accessdateaccess-date=2018-09-09}}</ref><ref>{{cite web

| accessdateaccess-date=2018-09-09}}</ref>

Since April 2016, videos continue to be monetized while the dispute is in progress, and the money goes to whoever won the dispute.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Hernandez |first1=Patricia |title=YouTube's Content ID System Gets One Much-Needed Fix |url=https://kotaku.com/youtubes-content-id-system-gets-one-much-needed-fix-1773643254 |website=Kotaku |accessdatedate=28 April 2016 |access-date=September 16, 2017}}</ref> Should the uploader want to monetize the video again, they may remove the disputed audio in the "Video Manager".<ref>{{cite web |title=Remove Content ID claimed songs from my videos – YouTube Help |url=https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2902117?hl=en |website=support.google.com |accessdateaccess-date=September 17, 2017 |language=en}}</ref> YouTube has cited the effectiveness of Content ID as one of the reasons why the site's rules were modified in December 2010 to allow some users to upload videos of unlimited length.<ref>{{cite web |first1=Joshua |last1=Siegel |first2=Doug |last2=Mayle |title=Up, Up and Away – Long videos for more users |url=https://youtube.googleblog.com/2010/12/up-up-and-away-long-videos-for-more.html |website=Official YouTube Blog |date=December 9, 2010 |accessdateaccess-date=March 25, 2017}}</ref>

The music industry has criticized Content ID as inefficient, with [[Universal Music Publishing Group]] (UMPG) estimating in a 2015 filing to the US Copyright Office "that Content ID fails to identify upwards of 40 percent of the use of UMPG’sUMPG's compositions on YouTube".<ref name="Popper 2018" /><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.scribd.com/document/308605292/DMCA-Universal-Music-Group-First-Round-Comments-pdf|title=Comments of Universal Music Group|date=2015|website=Scribd|language=en|access-date=2018-09-20}}</ref> Google has countered these assertions by stating that (as of 2016) Content ID detected over 98% of known copyright infringement on YouTube and humans filing removal notices only 2%.<ref name="Popper 2018" />

In January 2018, a YouTube uploader who created a [[white noise]] generator received copyright notices about a video he uploaded which was created using this tool and therefore contained only white noise.<ref>{{citeCite webnews |last=Baraniuk |first=Chris |date=2018-01-05 |title=White noise video on YouTube hit by five copyright claims |language=en-GB |work=BBC News |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-42580523 |access-date=2023-09-08}}</ref>

| accessdateaccess-date=2018-09-09}}</ref><ref>{{cite web

| accessdateaccess-date=2018-09-09}}</ref><ref>{{cite web

In April 2019, [[WatchMojo]] - one of the largest YouTube channels with over 20 million subscribers and 15 billion views with an extensive library of videos that rely on fair use - released a video that relied on its 10-year experiences managing claims and strikes via Content ID to highlight instances of alleged abuse.<ref>{{Citation|last=WatchMojo.com|title=Exposing Worst ContentID Abusers! #WTFU|date=2019-05-02|url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gbs9UVelEfg|access-date=2019-07-02}}</ref> In a follow-up video, the channel estimated that rights holders had unlawfully claimed over $2 billion from 2014-19 to 2019.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://torrentfreak.com/youtube-content-id-abusers-could-face-millions-of-dollars-in-damages-190509/|title=YouTube Content-ID Abusers Could Face Millions of Dollars in Damages|date=2019-05-10|website=TorrentFreak|language=en|access-date=2019-07-02}}</ref><ref>{{Citation|last=WatchMojo.com|title=Are Rights Holders Unlawfully Claiming Billions in AdSense Revenue?|date=2019-05-09|url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-w1f3olwqcg|access-date=2019-07-02}}</ref>