Copyright madness: YouTube seems to doubt whether Shakespeare is in the public domain – Walled Culture
walledculture.org

This extraordinary saga of takedown notices for performances of Shakespeare show that 27 years after it was passed, the DMCA is still not fit for purpose. The companies like Google that are tasked with implementing it often do so in the most desultory way. There is an underlying assumption that claimed infringements are valid, an injustice compound by an arrogant indifference to the rights of ordinary citizens who find themselves caught up in a complex copyright system that is stacked against them.

  • bassomitron@lemmy.worldEnglish
    12·
    21 hours ago

    Content has to arrive first for users to consume. It really is a “both” type of response to some extent.

    In my opinion, the solution is for content creators to simultaneously release on alternative platforms while also maintaining a YouTube presence so they’re still making money from that. However, they should start heavily advertising the alternative platforms on every video and transitioning to a different payment model (e.g. Patreon, Ko-fi, Indiegogo, etc). Content creators could organize with other creators to coordinate the transition. If you got huge channels like Digital Foundry, Linus Tech Tips, GamersNexus, etc (for the PC gaming scene, as an example) to agree, then that’s already millions of users. It begins a snowball effect.

    That being said, as far as I’m aware, there aren’t any alternative platforms that can handle the bandwidth that supports millions of users simultaneously, along with thousands of content creators uploading and processing large videos regularly. There’s a reason YouTube has such a monopoly, and their vast wealth of pre-existing content is the main component, but not the only one.

    • MudMan@fedia.io
      6·
      21 hours ago

      All the examples you provide already have alternate hosting methods they publicise aggressively. LTT has Floatplane, which they own, DF offers Patrons higher bitrate alternative to their videos for download, GN pushes people to their website (although that’s different and not really monetized) and a whole bunch of other creators banded together and made Nebula as an alternative to Youtube.

      My understanding is that the vast majority of those alternatives from successful, established creators are residual, secondary monetization windows when compared to Youtube advertising and sponsorships driven pretty much entirely by Youtube views.

      I do agree that Youtube is a huge aberration. Every other dominant streaming site is built on owned or licensed content, not UGC, and they’re largely supported by subscription revenue first, advertising second. Definitely not by third party sponsorships baked right into the UGC. It is what it is, though, and if it got shut down tomorrow I genuinely don’t know that independently generated content would survive in any form at all. Maybe someone would ramp up capacity to try to replace them, but most likely you’d see social media posts becoming the real replacement.

      Much as my feelings for Youtube are mixed, I don’t know if I can think of a realistic alternative that isn’t worse.