> UPDATE: Vydia has since withdrawn every single one of their copyright claims thanks to the support I received from this video. I appreciate all of the support but I don’t condone threats of violence against anyone.
"Copyright for me but not for thee" reminds me of Anthropic crying foul about their code being leaked and potentially used [0]
YouTube has got a problem with claims though to be fair the sheer amount of volume being added every day it's beyond impossible to asses every claim. Their dispute system could do with some improvements though from what I hear.
I am super curious how this could pass the smell test though in a court if all her claims are accurate, surely it's a simple process to prove she created the music first ?
Ironically, the post doesn’t even mention her name, just “musical artist”. This is part of the engagement bait, leaving details out so that people will click to tweet either to pause the vid to read the moving watermark or to find out her from the comments, increasing the signal for the algorithm.
At this point I would say either drop the copyright system or enforce it properly, that is either unlimited derivative works to increase creativity or no one gets to use other people work, not even downloading videos from instagram to “help” a struggling artist spread her message.
(BTF = Blue Tick Fucker, an initialism I'm trying to get to take off, primarily in my WhatsApp groups where there's loads of self-proclaimed geopolitics experts claiming to know exactly what's going on and what will happen and why.)
That's one of the reasons I'm not a fan of extrajudicial processes like YouTube's Content ID: they don't give any court the opportunity to point things like that out.
Update 2 days ago from source: https://www.instagram.com/p/DWl8C6KDiRi/
> UPDATE: Vydia has since withdrawn every single one of their copyright claims thanks to the support I received from this video. I appreciate all of the support but I don’t condone threats of violence against anyone.
"Copyright for me but not for thee" reminds me of Anthropic crying foul about their code being leaked and potentially used [0]
YouTube has got a problem with claims though to be fair the sheer amount of volume being added every day it's beyond impossible to asses every claim. Their dispute system could do with some improvements though from what I hear.
I am super curious how this could pass the smell test though in a court if all her claims are accurate, surely it's a simple process to prove she created the music first ?
0 - https://www.businessinsider.com/anthropic-copyright-infringe...
Ironically, the post doesn’t even mention her name, just “musical artist”. This is part of the engagement bait, leaving details out so that people will click to tweet either to pause the vid to read the moving watermark or to find out her from the comments, increasing the signal for the algorithm.
At this point I would say either drop the copyright system or enforce it properly, that is either unlimited derivative works to increase creativity or no one gets to use other people work, not even downloading videos from instagram to “help” a struggling artist spread her message.
Murphy Campbell https://www.youtube.com/@murphydoesntmatter
Standard BTF nonsense.
(BTF = Blue Tick Fucker, an initialism I'm trying to get to take off, primarily in my WhatsApp groups where there's loads of self-proclaimed geopolitics experts claiming to know exactly what's going on and what will happen and why.)
https://xcancel.com/VladTheInflator/status/20395770015317689...
Alternative link to report:
https://www.techbuzz.ai/articles/folk-artist-battles-ai-voic...
YouTube already had a problem where small channels get copyright strikes for their own content. AI makes that a problem now for everything everywhere.
I’m pretty sure during Covid the guitarist of Dragonforce got his livestream taken down for… playing the song he wrote.
Maybe AI will be what finally makes people realise how absurd the concept of Imaginary Property is.
Doubtful. People seem to be moving in the opposite direction since they hate AI so much.
> AI files a copyright claim against the original artist
If I read this verbatim, AI, and not the AI company, filed a copyright claim.
I thought I read somewhere that AI/LLM works can't be copyrighted, or is this yet another "appeal after appeal after appeal" affair?
And I have no idea where this USSC would rule, or how many Winnebagos it would take to sway the decision.
That's one of the reasons I'm not a fan of extrajudicial processes like YouTube's Content ID: they don't give any court the opportunity to point things like that out.
I thought AI generated content couldn't be copyrighted or used in copyright claims. I guess the problem is proving that it was AI generated?
YouTube et al's automated copyright systems put way too much trust in the hands of those making the claims.