If I try to log-in with my Google account it says "Your account has
been permanently disabled."
1. The video that the Youtube "ATTENTION" page that poped up saying I
copyright infringed upon can NOT be correct:
from Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation about Duck TV Charbax 1 -
Charbax
Video ID: Sb7iphIFyoY
I am pretty sure to remember that my "Duck TV Charbax 1" video was
recorded using Seth MacFarlane's promotional Youtube voice-over
application. Based on a short animation of http://youtube.com/sethcomedy - It was a promotional application where they let users record
different voice-overs and perhaps enter a competition or just to get
highlighted on the sethcomedy.com website or something. There were
tens of thousands of other users who had done the same as me. The
voice-over is not containing any music, just my original voice doing
some stupid Duck watching TV sounds. The Sethcomedy Flash and AJAX
based application then automatically published the resulting video to
my Youtube account since I was already logged in, which I expect it
did for thousands of other users who had a little fun with this
feature.
2. Is there any way to ask Youtube to check this thing and report back
to me about what I should do?
3. A "permanently disabled" Youtube account would be absolutely NOT
acceptable to me. I have uploaded nearly 400 videos on that Charbax
account since 2006 before Youtube was even acquired by Google. I am
getting upwards 2 million views on my Youtube and Google videos PER
YEAR, and Google has not paid me $1 on any of it cause I am not being
accepted as a Partner, my guess is that the main reason is that I am a
resident of Denmark which is not part of the 8 countries list of
countries where Partners can apply to become partners.
4. My http://techvideoblog.com website is very much tied to my Youtube
account. Which basically renders my 560 videos posted either partly or
fully UNUSABLE!! I don't think it would be acceptable to expect me to
re-upload all those videos, especially since I upload most videos as
1280x720 HD resolution files. The most painful thing would be to re-
enter all the descriptions.
5. No way I will re-start Google search rankings and Youtube rankings
for all my videos down to zero. My Youtube videos are OFTEN number 1
on Google searches for the companies and people that I interview.
Especially of course if the company, product name or person
interviewed aren't in hundreds of other Youtube videos already.
6. I contacted [email address] as soon as I realized this had
happened (about 12 hours ago), to still no reply.
7. Again, I am quite certain I never use copyrighted material on my
Youtube channel. If there may have been faint background music playing
in the background of one of the videos, then I would expect that
Youtube first sends a warning, giving the user the time to look at it
and decide to Replace audio track (try to edit out the copyrighted
background music) or to just delete the video voluntarilly. I received
no warning period, no warning email. I just woke up and discovered
that my Charbax Youtube account was suspended or even worse and much
more worrying "permanently disabled". Anyways, Youtube only sent me an
email about "Duck TV Charbax 1 - Charbax Video ID: Sb7iphIFyoY" which
I am very certain does not infringe on any copyrights on my fault.
Thanks for anyone who can help me or give me advice on what to do. Are
there other users having the same experiences?
I am okay if Youtube just had some type of Bug in their copyright
detection and account suspention system. A bug is okay, but a
permanent disablement or a long wait for it to come back up would not
be okay!! Especially if I loose my high relevancy ranking status on
all my videos for every hour that passes!
I just followed these instructions which I found here on another
thread searching for "Your account has been permanently disabled." :
Start here:
http://help.youtube.com/support/youtube/bin/request.py Select "Account issue" and click "Continue".
Click "Suspended account", then "Learn more about what's happened to
your account".
Answer the questions:
Can you currently log into your account? Answer: No.
When you attempt to log into your account, what error message do you
see? Answer: Your account has been permanently disabled.
Would you like more information about your account suspension?
Answer:
Yes.
Now click on "Contact us" and fill out the form. This should at least
give you an idea as to whether it was for community guidelines
violation or copyright infringement.
The VERY worrying message that I get on the other side when I clicked
the contact button is this:
"Note: In the event that your account is restored, your account
information such as videos and comments will NOT be restored."
I am VERY worried right now. I expect that a sofisticated company as
Google can restore all my videos. I deeply expect that from them.
My ~400 Youtube videos with 2 million yearly views are probably worth
more than $50 thousand dollars in revenues over a combination of the
last three years since I started to upload them and the next couple of
years while they are still relevant to hundreds of thousands of Google
and Youtube users, if only Youtube would display overlay advertising
on them. The largest amount of my viewers are from the USA or the UK,
or from other of those 8 Youtube Partner countries, so I believe
Google should just display advertising and pay Danish content
providers for those views by users in countries that can be monetized.
I can understand if Google has bugs with their copyright protection
mechanisms, scanning all the files for digital or analog
fingerprinting, preventing pirates from using the service for sharing
copyrighted works and all that, I understand there can be bugs in
that. Especially since Youtube is so huge and growing so fast.
Literally millions of users are uploading videos on Youtube and
hundreds of millions are watching the videos. So I can understand
Google has some bugs.
But I also expect Google to have prompt full account restore features
for when they do make mistakes. Google has the priviledge to have the
responsabillity to look after all the content providers in the world,
especially those that are small and independent and who may rely on
Youtube for their new media independent content makers business models.
If the problem is regarding a false copyright claim then you need to
send YouTube a DMCA Counter notice like as described here:
http://www.youtube.com/t/dmca_policy
You should mention your account got suspended due to that false
copyright claim. Without a counter-notice you won't be able to clear
up any issue regarding your account and the video.
> I can understand if Google has bugs with their copyright protection
> mechanisms, scanning all the files for digital or analog
> fingerprinting, preventing pirates from using the service for sharing
> copyrighted works and all that, I understand there can be bugs in
> that. Especially since Youtube is so huge and growing so fast.
> Literally millions of users are uploading videos on Youtube and
> hundreds of millions are watching the videos. So I can understand
> Google has some bugs.
> But I also expect Google to have prompt full account restore features
> for when they do make mistakes. Google has the priviledge to have the
> responsabillity to look after all the content providers in the world,
> especially those that are small and independent and who may rely on
> Youtube for their new media independent content makers business models.
PLEASE someone look at http://www.youtube.com/user/bk all the "Best of
the Best Dubs", "Worst Dubs" and all these. at least most of these,
show up as "Removed due to copyright claim".
I am not the only one with this problem I am seeing, well I see other
channels have NOT been suspended, while my Youtube account is
suspended!
I have filed a DMCA Counter notice to [email address]
Though how do I know if Youtube has received it, how do I know if they
have forwarded it to BayTSP or to 20th Century Fox. How do I know if
BayTSP or 20th Century Fox have the man power on the case to rectify
this promptly?
This has been a TOTAL BLATANT mistake by BayTSP's part and on
Youtube's part to suspend my Youtube account and to give me very bad
messages in automated email replies and in automated FAQ type online
help center responses like:
“Suspended accounts cannot be reinstated.”,
“Your account has now been terminated” and
“Note: In the event that your account is restored, your account
information such as videos and comments will NOT be restored.”
I say NO, NO and NO! Don't talk like that Youtube.
I know it's hard to manage millions of uploaders and billions of views
and all these demanding copyright owners and all that. But do not
terminate my Youtube account, delete my 400 HD resolution videos
uploaded since 2006, with millions of viewers, with high Google and
Youtube search ranking on thousands of search terms for the companies,
products and people which I interviewed and filmed since 2006. I will
simply not tolerate my existence on the web video world to simply be
deleted by a mistake on BayTSP or/and Youtube's part.
When you file a counter notice, YouTube must forward it to the
claimant. It's a legal procedure, and YouTube have no choice in the
matter: it's what the law says YouTube must do. (The same law also
says YouTube must remove the video if the copyright owner orders it
done, regardless of YouTube's private feelings on the matter -- like
most laws, this one cuts both ways.)
Yes, there are lots of nasty messages about copyright infringement,
but that's because YouTube have been in deep doo-doo about copyright
infringement since its earliest days (there's still a billion-dollar
lawsuit hanging over YouTube's heads as I write this, and the threat
of more to come). It really is in YouTube's interest, if they want to
keep operating as a company, to be seen to be taking a really tough
line on copyright infringement. That does mean, though, that they tend
to come down on the side of the copyright owners, although critics of
the DMCA say that this is exactly what the current law encourages
anyway.
Incidentally, you seem to be quite certain that BayTSP has a hand in
this. That wouldn't surprise me -- BayTSP is controversial to say the
least -- but how do you know?
This wouldn't be the first time that videos from sponsor mashup
contests have had copyright claims. I can remember the "W" film mashup
contest was triggering copyright claims when users would upload their
submissions...
Ordinarily, it takes several copyright takedowns for an account to be
suspended.
> I have filed a DMCA Counter notice to [email address]
> Though how do I know if Youtube has received it, how do I know if they
> have forwarded it to BayTSP or to 20th Century Fox. How do I know if
> BayTSP or 20th Century Fox have the man power on the case to rectify
> this promptly?
> This has been a TOTAL BLATANT mistake by BayTSP's part and on
> Youtube's part to suspend my Youtube account and to give me very bad
> messages in automated email replies and in automated FAQ type online
> help center responses like:
> “Suspended accounts cannot be reinstated.”,
> “Your account has now been terminated” and
> “Note: In the event that your account is restored, your account
> information such as videos and comments will NOT be restored.”
> I say NO, NO and NO! Don't talk like that Youtube.
> I know it's hard to manage millions of uploaders and billions of views
> and all these demanding copyright owners and all that. But do not
> terminate my Youtube account, delete my 400 HD resolution videos
> uploaded since 2006, with millions of viewers, with high Google and
> Youtube search ranking on thousands of search terms for the companies,
> products and people which I interviewed and filmed since 2006. I will
> simply not tolerate my existence on the web video world to simply be
> deleted by a mistake on BayTSP or/and Youtube's part.
I know this was wrongly triggered by BayTSP because of this I think
automated email that I got from [email address] :
-------
Dear Charbax,
We received notification from BayTSP as agent for Twentieth Century
Fox
Film Corporation. When we’re notified that a particular video uploaded
to
our site infringes another’s copyright, we remove the material as the
law
requires. If you feel a content owner has misidentified your content
as
infringing, you may file a counter-notification.
I am going to check right now what the other controversies are related
to BayTSP.
I totally understand that it is a HUGE problem that Youtube has since
day 1 in terms of copyright claims and lawsuits from everywhere.
Though I expect nothing other from Google than to come up with a HUGE
solution to this. And I expected Google to have come with the solution
at least 2 years ago.
It's not rocket science, yet it kind of is:
1. Youtube should identify all copyrighted material by digital and
analog fingerprinting in a huge database. With corresponding
copyrighted titles, descriptions, owners.
2. Youtube can scan the Youtube uploaders automatically and identify
content that is copyrighted.
3. Offer copyright owners to simply activate monetization for all of
their content, thus paying copyright owners upwards $10 per 1000 views
based on revenue from overlay advertising. Allow the copyright owner
to even decide to show pre-roll, mid-roll or post-roll advertising.
Allow the coyright owner to upload higher quality versions of their
videos (if the initial upload is the exact same content both audio/
video) and allow copyright owner to edit and lock the edit of the
description, tags and all that. Also allow copyright owner to forward
all views and search rankings to the video on their official youtube
account.
4. Youtube must absolutely hold backup copies of Youtube accounts that
are supposedly being suspended. The suspention absolutely needs to be
only temporary and only until the cases of copyright claims have been
aknowledged and confirmed. I wouldn't mind if my Youtube account was
invisible for 48 hours or whatever, just until they clear it with
BayTSP, 20th century fox, Media Rights Capital and Burger King, that
this whole thing was just a mistake. I am absolutely counting on
Youtube having a FULL backup of my Youtube account and that I will
have my full Youtube account restored as soon as this mistake will be
checked.
You are totally right that I got more than 1 takedowns at the same
time. Though the other two I received exactly on the same date for
another Youtube account which is no longer under my control, but under
the control of the french company Archos and on which they are only
uploading legal videos about their products and answering other users
comments for support. So there is absolutely no way that the Youtube
account Archos had any videos that would infringe on following:
from World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc. about Edge's WWF Debut -
Archos
Video ID: Co1BuPIYrF4
from Viacom International, Inc. about Eight Man Tag: Steiner Brothers/
Basham/Damaja Vs VKM/Team 3D - Archos
Video ID: 98WnaZ3od7I
I have checked with Archos and they say it is impossible that they
would have uploaded anything illegal. The Youtube account was
previously owned by someone else, I bought it from that person for a
small fee. But as I remember it, I don't think that it contained any
copyrighted contents. But anyways, I deleted all the 5-6 videos that
it had the first day that I took it over. and it had only had a few
hundred hits on the channel and very few if any subscribers.
Anyways, I have no ways to check the Video ID Co1BuPIYrF4 and
98WnaZ3od7I since the Archos account was suspended at exactly the same
time as my Charbax account. I suspect that Youtube knew automatically
that I had accessed both accounts from the same computer and from the
same IP adress. So they deduced that all accounts that I had access to
should be suspended at the same time.
Anyways, this does not alter the fact that the only ever registered
copyright takedown on my Charbax account was for a video created using
the official voice-over dubbing flash tool at http://youtube.com/bk -
so it is obviously a big mistake on the part of BayTSP and Youtube to
not have noticed that those thousands of videos on people's Youtube
accounts were uploaded all by the dub flash creation tool at
http://youtube.com/bk as part of an official and totally legal
promotion and competition on http://youtube.com/bk
> that I had accessed both accounts from the same computer and from the
> same IP adress. So they deduced that all accounts that I had access to
> should be suspended at the same time.
It's probably far simpler than that. YouTube tends to identify people
by email address. In other words, if you have 3 accounts, A, B, and C,
all using the same email address, and account B runs into to trouble
and gets suspended, accounts A and C will also get suspended. In other
words they are suspending the person and not just the offending
account.
> I know this was wrongly triggered by BayTSP because of this I think
> automated email that I got from [email address] :
> -------
> Dear Charbax,
> We received notification from BayTSP as agent for Twentieth Century
> Fox
> Film Corporation. When we’re notified that a particular video uploaded
> to
> our site infringes another’s copyright, we remove the material as the
> law
> requires. If you feel a content owner has misidentified your content
> as
> infringing, you may file a counter-notification.
> I am going to check right now what the other controversies are related
> to BayTSP.
> I totally understand that it is a HUGE problem that Youtube has since
> day 1 in terms of copyright claims and lawsuits from everywhere.
> Though I expect nothing other from Google than to come up with a HUGE
> solution to this. And I expected Google to have come with the solution
> at least 2 years ago.
> It's not rocket science, yet it kind of is:
> 1. Youtube should identify all copyrighted material by digital and
> analog fingerprinting in a huge database. With corresponding
> copyrighted titles, descriptions, owners.
> 2. Youtube can scan the Youtube uploaders automatically and identify
> content that is copyrighted.
> 3. Offer copyright owners to simply activate monetization for all of
> their content, thus paying copyright owners upwards $10 per 1000 views
> based on revenue from overlay advertising. Allow the copyright owner
> to even decide to show pre-roll, mid-roll or post-roll advertising.
> Allow the coyright owner to upload higher quality versions of their
> videos (if the initial upload is the exact same content both audio/
> video) and allow copyright owner to edit and lock the edit of the
> description, tags and all that. Also allow copyright owner to forward
> all views and search rankings to the video on their official youtube
> account.
> 4. Youtube must absolutely hold backup copies of Youtube accounts that
> are supposedly being suspended. The suspention absolutely needs to be
> only temporary and only until the cases of copyright claims have been
> aknowledged and confirmed. I wouldn't mind if my Youtube account was
> invisible for 48 hours or whatever, just until they clear it with
> BayTSP, 20th century fox, Media Rights Capital and Burger King, that
> this whole thing was just a mistake. I am absolutely counting on
> Youtube having a FULL backup of my Youtube account and that I will
> have my full Youtube account restored as soon as this mistake will be
> checked.
> You are totally right that I got more than 1 takedowns at the same
> time. Though the other two I received exactly on the same date for
> another Youtube account which is no longer under my control, but under
> the control of the french company Archos and on which they are only
> uploading legal videos about their products and answering other users
> comments for support. So there is absolutely no way that the Youtube
> account Archos had any videos that would infringe on following:
> from World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc. about Edge's WWF Debut -
> Archos
> Video ID: Co1BuPIYrF4
> from Viacom International, Inc. about Eight Man Tag: Steiner Brothers/
> Basham/Damaja Vs VKM/Team 3D - Archos
> Video ID: 98WnaZ3od7I
> I have checked with Archos and they say it is impossible that they
> would have uploaded anything illegal. The Youtube account was
> previously owned by someone else, I bought it from that person for a
> small fee. But as I remember it, I don't think that it contained any
> copyrighted contents. But anyways, I deleted all the 5-6 videos that
> it had the first day that I took it over. and it had only had a few
> hundred hits on the channel and very few if any subscribers.
> Anyways, I have no ways to check the Video ID Co1BuPIYrF4 and
> 98WnaZ3od7I since the Archos account was suspended at exactly the same
> time as my Charbax account. I suspect that Youtube knew automatically
> that I had accessed both accounts from the same computer and from the
> same IP adress. So they deduced that all accounts that I had access to
> should be suspended at the same time.
> Anyways, this does not alter the fact that the only ever registered
> copyright takedown on my Charbax account was for a video created using
> the official voice-over dubbing flash tool athttp://youtube.com/bk- > so it is obviously a big mistake on the part of BayTSP and Youtube to
> not have noticed that those thousands of videos on people's Youtube
> accounts were uploaded all by the dub flash creation tool athttp://youtube.com/bkas part of an official and totally legal
> promotion and competition onhttp://youtube.com/bk
Come to think of it, perhaps that the copyright takedowns on the
Youtube account Archos actually were valid. I guess that it may be
that the previous owner of the Archos account had uploaded such
contents and that it had been taken down already before I had taken it
over from him for an agreement to pay $50 on paypal on Oct 15, 2008.
But if that would be the case, then Youtube should know better than to
assign me the first 2 strikes of a 3 strikes policy for Youtube
account suspension. When I would have had no responsabillity in what
would have happened on that Youtube account before I took it over.
It's like if I buy a domain name from someone, should I be responsible
for what he might have done on that domain without me knowing it
before I took it over? I am now asking that old owner on his paypal
email if he knows anything about those first two copyright claim
takedowns being done at anytime during the time that he had that
Youtube account.
These are the claims that totally surprised me about 48 hours ago:
> from World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc. about Edge's WWF Debut -
> Archos
> Video ID: Co1BuPIYrF4
> from Viacom International, Inc. about Eight Man Tag: Steiner Brothers/
> Basham/Damaja Vs VKM/Team 3D - Archos
> Video ID: 98WnaZ3od7I
But then again, those possibly would have been illegal uploads by the
previous owner of a Youtube account that I only handled for a few days
before handing it over to a french company which I support by me being
the admin on http://archosfans.com for example and my Archos related
videos on Youtube (all on my now suspended Charbax account) being some
of the most popular Archos related videos.
Anyways, obviously Youtube can see that the email for the Archos
account changed on Oct 15, 2008, they can see that the IP adress was
from then on in Denmark and in France and not in the USA anymore. So I
think that they should know better than to suspend both Youtube
accounts without warning 48 hours ago.
> Anyways, obviously Youtube can see that the email for the Archos
> account changed on Oct 15, 2008, they can see that the IP adress was
> from then on in Denmark and in France and not in the USA anymore. So I
> think that they should know better than to suspend both Youtube
> accounts without warning 48 hours ago.
I would doubt it...it's an automated system.
For instance, at sign in if you use the option for "forgot my account
name" and enter your email address, you will get an automated reply to
that email address listing any accounts using that email address. So
I'm sure that the system is doing something similar...
There have also been reports from people changing their associated
emails to email addresses that have been previsously associated with
suspended accounts...only to discover that as soon as they are logged
out and and try to sign back in, the account has also now been
suspended.
> Come to think of it, perhaps that the copyright takedowns on the
> Youtube account Archos actually were valid. I guess that it may be
> that the previous owner of the Archos account had uploaded such
> contents and that it had been taken down already before I had taken it
> over from him for an agreement to pay $50 on paypal on Oct 15, 2008.
> But if that would be the case, then Youtube should know better than to
> assign me the first 2 strikes of a 3 strikes policy for Youtube
> account suspension. When I would have had no responsabillity in what
> would have happened on that Youtube account before I took it over.
> It's like if I buy a domain name from someone, should I be responsible
> for what he might have done on that domain without me knowing it
> before I took it over? I am now asking that old owner on his paypal
> email if he knows anything about those first two copyright claim
> takedowns being done at anytime during the time that he had that
> Youtube account.
> These are the claims that totally surprised me about 48 hours ago:
> > from World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc. about Edge's WWF Debut -
> > Archos
> > Video ID: Co1BuPIYrF4
> > from Viacom International, Inc. about Eight Man Tag: Steiner Brothers/
> > Basham/Damaja Vs VKM/Team 3D - Archos
> > Video ID: 98WnaZ3od7I
> But then again, those possibly would have been illegal uploads by the
> previous owner of a Youtube account that I only handled for a few days
> before handing it over to a french company which I support by me being
> the admin onhttp://archosfans.comfor example and my Archos related
> videos on Youtube (all on my now suspended Charbax account) being some
> of the most popular Archos related videos.
> Anyways, obviously Youtube can see that the email for the Archos
> account changed on Oct 15, 2008, they can see that the IP adress was
> from then on in Denmark and in France and not in the USA anymore. So I
> think that they should know better than to suspend both Youtube
> accounts without warning 48 hours ago.
> It's probably far simpler than that. YouTube tends to identify people
> by email address. In other words, if you have 3 accounts, A, B, and C,
> all using the same email address, and account B runs into to trouble
> and gets suspended, accounts A and C will also get suspended. In other
> words they are suspending the person and not just the offending
> account.
So if I had only changed the email adress on the Archos account (I am
not sure if at the time of suspention 48 hours ago if it still was
under my email or if it was under an email of an employee at the
Archos company in France), then perhaps Google wouldn't have suspended
both accounts?
Shouldn't Google detect that possibly the first two detected offences
had perhaps happened before October 2008 once the Archos account was
on another email? Shouldn't they take into account the IP adress
change (total continent change on the IP Adress and cookies used from
once using the previous email to when the email and passwords were
changed).
Have you ever noticed suspended Youtube accounts being restored? I
enormously hope that Google is advanced enough with their systems that
they easilly will be able to restore my full Youtube account as soon
as they see that this is a mistake. It's been 48 hours so far, but
it's going to be fine as long as all my videos are back, with all view
counts, all history of statistics, all user comments on my videos, all
my comments, all my originally uploaded source files and everything
that goes with that. And especially that Google can instantly restore
any search ranking problems that might have occured since all my 400
videos have been unavailable for now 48 hours. I certainly hope that
if my Youtube videos start disappearing from top Google search ranking
after 48 hours, that once Google finds out this was a mistake and
restores my account, that all my search rankings will also eventually
be restored to the levels I built them towards being over my video-
blogging activities of the past 5 years as uploaded DivX files and of
the past 3 years on Youtube.
> Shouldn't Google detect that possibly the first two detected offences
> had perhaps happened before October 2008 once the Archos account was
> on another email? Shouldn't they take into account the IP adress
> change (total continent change on the IP Address and cookies used from
> once using the previous email to when the email and passwords were
> changed).
You are assuming a lot. I would really doubt they do anything remotely
as sophisticated. With hundreds or thousands of accounts being
suspended for legitimate reasons, they are unlikely to spend any bit
of time trying to figure out if some set of circumstances caused an
innocent account to be suspended.
Everyone assumes that google/youtube can easily block IP addresses or
track anything anywhere... But the fact is that IP addresses for most
residential users change frequently, just by rebooting your router/
modem or re-dialing... since IP addresses are dynamically assigned by
the users ISP. In most cases you have to pay extra for a static IP
address.
There have been cases where accidentally suspended accounts have been
restored, but there is no guarantees that yours will be or that things
will be just the way they were before, etc...
> > It's probably far simpler than that. YouTube tends to identify people
> > by email address. In other words, if you have 3 accounts, A, B, and C,
> > all using the same email address, and account B runs into to trouble
> > and gets suspended, accounts A and C will also get suspended. In other
> > words they are suspending the person and not just the offending
> > account.
> So if I had only changed the email adress on the Archos account (I am
> not sure if at the time of suspention 48 hours ago if it still was
> under my email or if it was under an email of an employee at the
> Archos company in France), then perhaps Google wouldn't have suspended
> both accounts?
> Shouldn't Google detect that possibly the first two detected offences
> had perhaps happened before October 2008 once the Archos account was
> on another email? Shouldn't they take into account the IP adress
> change (total continent change on the IP Adress and cookies used from
> once using the previous email to when the email and passwords were
> changed).
> Have you ever noticed suspended Youtube accounts being restored? I
> enormously hope that Google is advanced enough with their systems that
> they easilly will be able to restore my full Youtube account as soon
> as they see that this is a mistake. It's been 48 hours so far, but
> it's going to be fine as long as all my videos are back, with all view
> counts, all history of statistics, all user comments on my videos, all
> my comments, all my originally uploaded source files and everything
> that goes with that. And especially that Google can instantly restore
> any search ranking problems that might have occured since all my 400
> videos have been unavailable for now 48 hours. I certainly hope that
> if my Youtube videos start disappearing from top Google search ranking
> after 48 hours, that once Google finds out this was a mistake and
> restores my account, that all my search rankings will also eventually
> be restored to the levels I built them towards being over my video-
> blogging activities of the past 5 years as uploaded DivX files and of
> the past 3 years on Youtube.
And I will keep telling people about my problem until someone real at
Google tells me that my problem can be solved!
I am relieved that you say that you have seen cases where accidentally
suspended accounts have been restored. Though I want to hear it from
someone real at Google before I can calm down.
I have no idea if Google perhaps has some certain limited amount of
time in which they can still restore an account or otherwise that it
would be too difficult in terms of restoring into the Google search
rankings and Youtube search rankings. A restored account with no
videos, no comments, no ratings, no same search rankings for the tens
of thousands of search combinations in Google and Youtube search which
put my videos at the top search results. It simply would be
unthinkable for me to imagine having to start all this over from the
beginning, and that just because of some mistake by BayTSP and some
perhaps second unfortunate event concerning another Youtube account
that I used briefly while it was transfered to someone elses control.
Though, I am pretty sure that Google does have all these very advanced
IP adress and they have cookies on all of our computers. I am pretty
sure that it is in the core of how Google search works, to know when
the same user does different things and clicks on different links.
Even if you are not logged in to your Google account at all times,
which I am most of the time and which many other people also are. I
know about dynamic IP adresses, though one can clearly see the
difference between my Danish IP adress and the US IP adress (I
presume) of the guy which was using that other Youtube account before
I was allowed to take it over and that it was totally cleaned of any
other contents when I took it over.
As Epontius said, you assume a lot. YouTube doesn't know, or care,
that you took over ownership of an account with a soiled history, nor
do they care that you passed it on to someone else. Users commonly
change email addresses. Users change passwords. Users even change IP
addresses, and for that matter I could carry a laptop from Florida to
Denmark and log into my account with a Danish IP address. YouTube
wouldn't notice. It's just me logging into my account. They have no
way of knowing, other than your word, that any of this exchange
happened at all.
> And I will keep telling people about my problem until someone real at
> Google tells me that my problem can be solved!
> I am relieved that you say that you have seen cases where accidentally
> suspended accounts have been restored. Though I want to hear it from
> someone real at Google before I can calm down.
> I have no idea if Google perhaps has some certain limited amount of
> time in which they can still restore an account or otherwise that it
> would be too difficult in terms of restoring into the Google search
> rankings and Youtube search rankings. A restored account with no
> videos, no comments, no ratings, no same search rankings for the tens
> of thousands of search combinations in Google and Youtube search which
> put my videos at the top search results. It simply would be
> unthinkable for me to imagine having to start all this over from the
> beginning, and that just because of some mistake by BayTSP and some
> perhaps second unfortunate event concerning another Youtube account
> that I used briefly while it was transfered to someone elses control.
> Though, I am pretty sure that Google does have all these very advanced
> IP adress and they have cookies on all of our computers. I am pretty
> sure that it is in the core of how Google search works, to know when
> the same user does different things and clicks on different links.
> Even if you are not logged in to your Google account at all times,
> which I am most of the time and which many other people also are. I
> know about dynamic IP adresses, though one can clearly see the
> difference between my Danish IP adress and the US IP adress (I
> presume) of the guy which was using that other Youtube account before
> I was allowed to take it over and that it was totally cleaned of any
> other contents when I took it over.
> 1. Youtube should identify all copyrighted material by digital and
> analog fingerprinting in a huge database. With corresponding
> copyrighted titles, descriptions, owners.
Such a database does exist. But this involves copyright owners
uploading specimen files to the databse, and when you think of the
sheer volume of copyrighted material that is produced daily -- TV
shows, movies, music, etc etc etc etc -- it simply wouldn't be
possible for the database to hold everything. Only some copyright
owners use the system at all, and only for material that is most
likely to be copied. And because it's an automated system, it's not
perfect: it occasionally comes up with false positives, while many
videos fall through the net.
> 2. Youtube can scan the Youtube uploaders automatically and identify
> content that is copyrighted.
This is what they do, but see the answer above.
> 3. Offer copyright owners to simply activate monetization for all of
> their content, thus paying copyright owners upwards $10 per 1000 views
> based on revenue from overlay advertising.
YouTube does exactly that. But of course, the copyright owner has to
agree to use the system, and many simply don't want their content on
YouTube, period. Anything that is ultimately owned by Viacom, for
example, is in danger of being removed, and WMG walked out of this
agreement at the end of last year, so anything claimed by them is also
likely to disappear. YouTube cannot force copyright owners to sign up
to this scheme, because the law says the rights remain with the
copyright owner.
> The suspention absolutely needs to be
> only temporary and only until the cases of copyright claims have been
> aknowledged and confirmed.
As you have discovered, a mechanism does exist for unsuspending
accounts.
> I am absolutely counting on
> Youtube having a FULL backup of my Youtube account
You should never actually do that with any online account ever.
Always, always back up material yourself: use an external disk drive,
or burn files onto DVDs, but never ever rely on any website to keep
your material safe.
Regarding BayTSP:
This is a service which companies can sign up to, and which scours the
net for videos which appear to infringe on copyrights, and then issues
DMCA complaints against them on behalf of their clients. It's
controversial for many reasons, not least of which is the fact that
their CEO believes the DMCA is inadequate while not shying away from
filing DMCA complaint after DMCA complaint; but also because they have
a habit of indiscriminately filing complaints against videos that have
every right to be online... as you have discovered. Unfortunately, the
way the law works, it actually makes sound business sense for YouTube
to disable these videos and wait for the uploader to mount a legal
defence, which is what you did. That sucks, and it is one of the
biggest criticisms of the DMCA. Luckily, the copyright owner in this
case apparently retracted their claim, but a lot wouldn't, and the
uploader (you) would then have no choice but to go to court over it,
which many unscrupulous companies realise most people like us would
not be prepared to do.
Also, the way the law works, if a copyright owner decides to order
your video be taken down but leave all the others, that is their
right, and they are legally entitled to do that.
anmoose and rewboss, I totally understand what you are saying, and you
are probably very right in what you are saying.
First on anmoose's point:
1. I am very sure that Google does take IP adresses, cookies and
perhaps even browsing behaviours into account to identify web browsing
users as unique identities. And that Google does for example probably
not only rely on the submitted Youtube email to determine the identity
of a user of the site. For example, I am sure that most visitors to
Youtube are not signed in, yet still Google knows for probably more
than 95% of them, if they are repeat users and thus probably the same
user who visited the sites previously.
2. If Google only identifies the email of youtube account holder as
the link between two youtube accounts, then it's probably just a
choice or lazyness on Google's part. They should easilly also be able
to notice IP adresses, cookies, use of open proxy IP adresses, usage
of hidden IP adresses and stuff like that. Just in the case of
preventing that one dedicated pirate cannot just setup a thousand
Youtube account and keep uploading pirated illegal contents again and
again on new youtube accounts.
3. To determine relevancy of Youtube videos or of any website in
general, surely Google can use data from their logged-in registered
users, users with Google accounts and Youtube accounts (and combined),
but surely Google also takes in huge amounts of statistical data on
usage by unregistered users when they click on different links, load
different videos, skip in different videos from within the same
browsing session, or repeat browsing sessions on same IP adresses and
within the same browser cookies. Google might create their whole
pagerank only based on registered Google account users that are logged-
in, and on installed Google Tool Bar browser add-ons, though my guess
is that Google uses and registers also everything else.
To rewbosses points:
1. I understand building databases on digital and analog
fingerprinting of all copyrighted works is a big job to do and a very
big responsibillity. Though, if Google doesn't do it, then who else
should?
2. Recording everything from all released movies, CDs, TV shows,
constantly recording a copy of all TV stations in the world and having
an up-to-date repository to immediately digitize or store perfect
digital copies from all sources of such works worldwide. Sure, this
might sound like a big job, it might sound like a LOT of storage.
Surely it does represent thousands of Terrabytes. Though a terrabyte
hard drive is $90 on the open market, and this actual global
digitalization project at Google actually requires probably much less
storage capacity than all the User Generated Contents that are being
uploaded to Google EVERY day now.
3. Sure analog and digital fingerprinting technology may evolve and
improve. But the ones I have seen now that are available today are
already VERY good and very precise. In fact, at least in terms of
audio, the analog fingerprinting technology is so precise it can even
recognize when different bands perform the same song in different
tempos and with different elements of composition and improvisation on
top of it. And analog fingerprinting for video can recognize exactly
the amounts of frames used from which original contents in any video
mashup.
4. Sure Viacom and WMG are being very closed minded and selfish about
this, as big major studios will always be in these cases. They want to
have all the money in the world. And they are probably quite a bit
annoyed at Google who basically came out of nowhere in the last 10
years, to basically dominate everything on the Internet. Though,
Google absolutely needs to provide full and instant monetization
switch for any copyright owner and it should be absolutely transparent
and very obvious to any copyright owner that it is much more
meaningful to simply allow full usage of their contents on Youtube
than to want to limit any of it. The only choices should be as I said
to allow copyright owners to not only display overlay advertising
(could be $10 per 1000 views), but also if they want enable pre-roll,
mid-roll, post-roll, all depending on how many seconds of their
contents are being used in each Youtube video. And allow edit or
ammendment on Description text, allow overlay link (kind of like a
clickable watermark icon, for example "Music by Labelname"), and allow
automatic overtaking of the Youtube video onto the copyright owners
own Youtube account (for example if a user uploads a music video, then
it could automatically forward viewers onto showing that exact same
video on the Labels Youtube account), uploading of better quality
versions of those specific videos.
5. I am sure Google provides some of these solutions, partly, or
slowly. But as far as I have seen Google simply does not provide it.
Fact is I don't see the tools available for me, as an independent
video-blogger that I am: why can't I claim ownership when other
Youtube users copy my videos onto their Youtube accounts and take tens
or hundreds of thousands of views onto that? Why can't I claim to
forward those views, copy all comments onto my original video upload?
Why can't I identify all my musical compositions at Google and allow
all Youtube users to pick and choose my music in their videos and
allow me to earn money from monetization of that? Why is there at all
a Partner program to start displaying overlay advertising on videos
made, why do partners have to be limites in very few countries even
though what matters for overlay advertising is for where the viewers
are located in the world and not where the Youtube uploader is a
resident.
There are SO many aspects of video monetization that I think Youtube
is NOT doing a good enough job at implementing and taking advantage
of. It's basically like Google doesn't care about the billions of
dollars in extra revenues for Google that this would generate and the
real deep change in society that these changes will also generate.
This is not only about protecting the old media's move into new media
by allowing old media to make more money then they ever have on new
media, this is about making it possible for new media creators to
cannibalize old media and to basically move into a system where all
intermediaries are not needed anymore.
About all I can say in response to this is that you live in a very
tightly encapsulated dream world. You have no concept of how the
Internet works at all.
Oh... and as regards your heavy overworking of the term, "IP
address," as an ultimate tracking device, you might be surprised to
know that I can sit here at my desk, in the middle of a YouTube
session, reach over and switch off my DSL modem, reboot it, and in
less than a minute I'm back where I was on YouTube with a *completely
different* IP address. As for cookies? Opera lets me display all of my
cookies in plain text, with the option to delete any and/or all that I
care to, at any time. I can delete all traces of Google / YouTube
activity from my computer in a matter of seconds.
> anmoose and rewboss, I totally understand what you are saying, and you
> are probably very right in what you are saying.
> First on anmoose's point:
> 1. I am very sure that Google does take IP adresses, cookies and
> perhaps even browsing behaviours into account to identify web browsing
> users as unique identities. And that Google does for example probably
> not only rely on the submitted Youtube email to determine the identity
> of a user of the site. For example, I am sure that most visitors to
> Youtube are not signed in, yet still Google knows for probably more
> than 95% of them, if they are repeat users and thus probably the same
> user who visited the sites previously.
> 2. If Google only identifies the email of youtube account holder as
> the link between two youtube accounts, then it's probably just a
> choice or lazyness on Google's part. They should easilly also be able
> to notice IP adresses, cookies, use of open proxy IP adresses, usage
> of hidden IP adresses and stuff like that. Just in the case of
> preventing that one dedicated pirate cannot just setup a thousand
> Youtube account and keep uploading pirated illegal contents again and
> again on new youtube accounts.
> 3. To determine relevancy of Youtube videos or of any website in
> general, surely Google can use data from their logged-in registered
> users, users with Google accounts and Youtube accounts (and combined),
> but surely Google also takes in huge amounts of statistical data on
> usage by unregistered users when they click on different links, load
> different videos, skip in different videos from within the same
> browsing session, or repeat browsing sessions on same IP adresses and
> within the same browser cookies. Google might create their whole
> pagerank only based on registered Google account users that are logged-
> in, and on installed Google Tool Bar browser add-ons, though my guess
> is that Google uses and registers also everything else.
> To rewbosses points:
> 1. I understand building databases on digital and analog
> fingerprinting of all copyrighted works is a big job to do and a very
> big responsibillity. Though, if Google doesn't do it, then who else
> should?
> 2. Recording everything from all released movies, CDs, TV shows,
> constantly recording a copy of all TV stations in the world and having
> an up-to-date repository to immediately digitize or store perfect
> digital copies from all sources of such works worldwide. Sure, this
> might sound like a big job, it might sound like a LOT of storage.
> Surely it does represent thousands of Terrabytes. Though a terrabyte
> hard drive is $90 on the open market, and this actual global
> digitalization project at Google actually requires probably much less
> storage capacity than all the User Generated Contents that are being
> uploaded to Google EVERY day now.
> 3. Sure analog and digital fingerprinting technology may evolve and
> improve. But the ones I have seen now that are available today are
> already VERY good and very precise. In fact, at least in terms of
> audio, the analog fingerprinting technology is so precise it can even
> recognize when different bands perform the same song in different
> tempos and with different elements of composition and improvisation on
> top of it. And analog fingerprinting for video can recognize exactly
> the amounts of frames used from which original contents in any video
> mashup.
> 4. Sure Viacom and WMG are being very closed minded and selfish about
> this, as big major studios will always be in these cases. They want to
> have all the money in the world. And they are probably quite a bit
> annoyed at Google who basically came out of nowhere in the last 10
> years, to basically dominate everything on the Internet. Though,
> Google absolutely needs to provide full and instant monetization
> switch for any copyright owner and it should be absolutely transparent
> and very obvious to any copyright owner that it is much more
> meaningful to simply allow full usage of their contents on Youtube
> than to want to limit any of it. The only choices should be as I said
> to allow copyright owners to not only display overlay advertising
> (could be $10 per 1000 views), but also if they want enable pre-roll,
> mid-roll, post-roll, all depending on how many seconds of their
> contents are being used in each Youtube video. And allow edit or
> ammendment on Description text, allow overlay link (kind of like a
> clickable watermark icon, for example "Music by Labelname"), and allow
> automatic overtaking of the Youtube video onto the copyright owners
> own Youtube account (for example if a user uploads a music video, then
> it could automatically forward viewers onto showing that exact same
> video on the Labels Youtube account), uploading of better quality
> versions of those specific videos.
> 5. I am sure Google provides some of these solutions, partly, or
> slowly. But as far as I have seen Google simply does not provide it.
> Fact is I don't see the tools available for me, as an independent
> video-blogger that I am: why can't I claim ownership when other
> Youtube users copy my videos onto their Youtube accounts and take tens
> or hundreds of thousands of views onto that? Why can't I claim to
> forward those views, copy all comments onto my original video upload?
> Why can't I identify all my musical compositions at Google and allow
> all Youtube users to pick and choose my music in their videos and
> allow me to earn money from monetization of that? Why is there at all
> a Partner program to start displaying overlay advertising on videos
> made, why do partners have to be limites in very few countries even
> though what matters for overlay advertising is for where the viewers
> are located in the world and not where the Youtube uploader is a
> resident.
> There are SO many aspects of video monetization that I think Youtube
> is NOT doing a good enough job at implementing and taking advantage
> of. It's basically like Google doesn't care about the billions of
> dollars in extra revenues for Google that this would generate and the
> real deep change in society that these changes will also generate.
> This is not only about protecting the old media's move into new media
> by allowing old media to make more money then they ever have on new
> media, this is about making it possible for new media creators to
> cannibalize old media and to basically move into a system where all
> intermediaries are not needed anymore.
I know you can change or fake IP or delete cookies. Though nobody does
that, or very few people do.
99.999% of visitors on Google.com or Youtube.com will be easily
recognized by Google as returning users based on same IP adress and
browser cookies. Not only based on returning users that have to be
logged-in. Based on that, Google does their pagerank or whatever their
secret sauce is called to rank search results.
As for my case, two of the takedowns were done in April 2007 I was
told by the user who sold me his Youtube account. If Youtube puts so
much into the email to identify the owners of Youtube accounts, then
they should take into account that the owner email for that Youtube
account was changed in October 2008 and at the same time IP adresses
and cookies changed. So this should be more then good enough for
Google to at least wonder if there has been an owner change. Anyways
owner change of Youtube account names, I guess Youtube doesn't have a
real official procedures for that yet, other than just changing the
account email and password. For users who have many videos might want
to move those videos to their new Youtube account name, and as far as
I know, Youtube doesn't have that feature yet.
Anyways, I am not complaining about this anymore, Youtube restored my
accounts fully once 20th Century FOX acknowledged their mistake. So
right now I am happy, and no need to complain about those specific
things anymore.
