In response to this, YouTube did not hasten the conflict resolution process, which still grants up to 30 days for copyright owners to react. Instead, it accelerated the appeals procedure, which occurs after a copyright owner declines a disputed claim and arguably is the moment when the YouTuber’s account is most susceptible to termination.
“The claimant now has 7 days rather than 30 to evaluate the appeal before deciding to request a video takedown, release the claim, or let it expire,” YouTube stated in the year 2022. “We anticipate that shortening the duration of the appeals process will facilitate quicker resolution of claims for you!”
This modification would only assist YouTubers keen on challenging claims, like Albino was, but not the majority of YouTubers, whom the EFF revealed were apparently so deterred by challenging Content ID claims that they frequently just endorsed “whatever penalty the system has imposed on them.” The EFF summed up the situation in which many YouTubers find themselves trapped even today:
For Albino, who mentioned fighting back against numerous Content ID claims, the triggering of demonetization by the Samsung washing machine melody appeared to be the final breaking point, exhausted by YouTube’s conflict resolution process.
“It’s completely spiraling out of control,” expressed Albino on X.
Katharine Trendacosta, a YouTube researcher and the EFF’s director of policy and advocacy, concurred with Albino, informing Ars that YouTube’s Content ID system has not improved over time: “It’s deteriorating, and purposely shrouded in mystery and designed to be exceedingly convoluted for creators.”
“I don’t know of any YouTube creator pleased with how Content ID operates,” Trendacosta informed Ars.
Although many individuals criticize YouTube’s system, Trendacosta additionally mentioned that she “can’t conceptualize a way to devise the matching technology” to enhance it since “machines are incapable of discerning context.” Perhaps if YouTube’s matching technology triggered a human review each time, “that might be feasible,” but “they would need to recruit significantly more personnel to accomplish it.”
What YouTube might consider is revising its guidelines to make the dispute process less daunting for content creators, as Trendacosta stated to Ars. Presently, the more significant issue for creators, according to Trendacosta’s research, isn’t how long YouTube takes to resolve disputes but rather “the way YouTube frames the dispute process to discourage you from contesting it.”
“The system is profoundly discouraging,” Trendacosta remarked to Ars, with YouTube warning YouTubers that initiating a dispute could lead to a copyright strike resulting in account termination. “Ultimately, it compels them to say, ‘I’ll bear it, whatever happens.'”
YouTube, which formerly dismissed complaints regarding the Content ID tool by indicating “no system is flawless,” neglected to reply to Ars’ request for comment on whether any modifications to the tool favorable to creators may be forthcoming. Instead, YouTube’s approach appears to involve sympathizing with users who presumably cannot afford to depart from the platform due to their apprehensions.
“We genuinely understand your frustration,” Team YouTube assured Albino on X.
This story was initially featured on Ars Technica.
