I Hate Everything (YouTuber)

YouTube copyright issues relate to how the Google-owned site implements its protection methods.

The systems are designed to protect the exclusivity of a given creator and owner and the rights to reproduce their work.

YouTube uses automated measures such as copyright strikes, Content ID and Copyright Verification Program.

These methods have been criticized for favoring corporations and their use of copyright claims to limit usage of uploaded content.

When a person or company creates an original work that is fixed in a physical medium, they automatically own copyright to the work.

The owner has the exclusive right to use the work in certain, specific ways.

In response to a lawsuit from Viacom, video sharing service YouTube developed a copyright enforcement tool referred to as Content ID which automatically scans uploaded content against a database of copyrighted material ingested by third-parties.

If an uploaded video is matched against an asset in the database, YouTube warns the user of the match and applies a predetermined 'match policy'.

YouTube has faced numerous challenges and criticisms in its attempts to deal with copyright, including the site's first viral video, Lazy Sunday, which had to be taken due to copyright concerns.

At the time of uploading a video, YouTube users are shown a message asking them not to violate copyright laws.

Despite this advice, many unauthorized clips of copyrighted material remain on YouTube.

YouTube does not view videos before they are posted online, and it is left to copyright holders to issue a DMCA takedown notice pursuant to the terms of the Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act.

Any successful complaint about copyright infringement results in a YouTube copyright strike.

Three successful complaints for copyright infringement against a user account will result in the account and all of its uploaded videos being deleted.

Organizations including Viacom, Mediaset, and the English Premier League have filed lawsuits against YouTube, claiming that it has done too little to prevent the uploading of copyrighted material.

Viacom, demanding $1 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 billion times".

YouTube responded by stating that it "goes far beyond its legal obligations in assisting content owners to protect their works".

During the same court battle, Viacom won a court ruling requiring YouTube to hand over 12 terabytes of data detailing the viewing habits of every user who has watched videos on the site.

The decision was criticized by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which called the court ruling "a setback to privacy rights".

In August 2008, a US court ruled in Lenz v. Universal Music Corp. that copyright holders cannot order the removal of an online file without first determining whether the posting reflected fair use of the material.

The case involved Stephanie Lenz from Gallitzin, Pennsylvania, who had made a home video of her 13-month-old son dancing to Prince's song "Let's Go Crazy", and posted the 29-second video on YouTube.

In the case of Smith v. Summit Entertainment LLC, professional singer Matt Smith sued Summit Entertainment for the wrongful use of copyright takedown notices on YouTube.

He asserted seven causes of action, and four were ruled in Smith's favor.

In June 2010, Viacom's lawsuit against Google was rejected in a summary judgment, with U.S. federal Judge Louis L. Stanton stating that Google was protected by provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

Viacom announced its intention to appeal the ruling.

On April 5, 2012, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reinstated the case, allowing Viacom's lawsuit against Google to be heard in court again.

In April 2012, a court in Hamburg ruled that YouTube could be held responsible for copyrighted material posted by its users.

The performance rights organization GEMA argued that YouTube had not done enough to prevent the uploading of German copyrighted music.

YouTube responded by stating:

"We remain committed to finding a solution to the music licensing issue in Germany that will benefit artists, composers, authors, publishers, and record labels, as well as the wider YouTube community."

In April 2013, it was reported that Universal Music Group and YouTube have a contractual agreement that prevents content blocked on YouTube by a request from UMG from being restored, even if the uploader of the video files a DMCA counter-notice.

When a dispute occurs, the uploader of the video has to contact UMG.

At the end of 2013, YouTube enabled automated Content ID claiming on videos uploaded by users who were signed with multi-channel networks (MCN).

Previously, videos uploaded to channels that were linked to MCNs could only be claimed manually or removed with a DMCA takedown.

This led to a large number of new claims which suddenly left uploaders unable to place advertisements on their videos until they disputed.

Users such as Angry Joe created videos complaining about the changes and how they would negatively affect the livelihoods of video creators.

According to a 2021 transparency report published by YouTube, more than 2.2 million videos were reinstated due to false copyright claims, which represent 1% of more than 729 million copyright claims spanning from January to June 2021.

On March 18, 2014, the lawsuit was settled after seven years with an undisclosed agreement.

YouTube's owner Google announced in November 2015 that they would help cover the legal cost in select cases where they believe fair use defenses apply.

On November 1, 2016, the dispute with GEMA was resolved, with Google content ID being used to allow advertisements to be added to videos with content protected by GEMA.