While foraging, I make a quick wild salad consisting of sea beets, corn marigold greens, yellow mustard leaves, mallow leaves and flowers, dandelion greens, prickly lettuce, smooth sow thistles, sourgrass, wild water-cured olives and lemon juice (from a street tree).
I wrote a brief article about a bad experience I had with Youtube's
automated copyright violation system, and a company called
Basically, their system identified this video as containing copyright
infringing music owned by Rumblefish. They put ads on it, with the
proceeds of the ads going partly to Rumblefish, partly to Google.
Since there's no music in my video, I disputed the claimed copyright
violation, and Rumblefish was sent a link to my video to check it and
see if Youtube's automated system had made a mistake.
They checked the video, and told Youtube that there was no mistake,
and that they do own the music in the video. So the dispute was
closed, and there was seemingly nothing else I could do.
But I wrote an article about it on Slashdot, and somehow it went viral
today, spreading all over the web, and Rumblefish backtracked,
released my video and sent me an apology.
This is the notice Youtube sent me after Rumblefish reviewed my dispute:
"All content owners have reviewed your video and confirmed their
claims to some or all of its content:
Entity: rumblefish Content Type: Musical Composition"
I did email Rumblefish to complain, and posted a thead on Google's
help forum, but they didn't do anything until my article on Slashdot
went viral and woke them from their slumber.
So they've now released my video and removed their ads, but for a while they were making money from my video. I think if this were made more public, Google would be forced to change their system and this would stop happening. Rumblefish and other similar intellectual property companies have been gaming the system like this for a while now, and this is just the first time the public outcry has been big enough to force them to correct their behaviour.