Youtube is home to millions of videos with new content being uploaded every second of the day. Youtube is certainly one of the best options for getting your videos seen and appreciated, but there's the looming chance that your video may be taken down by Youtube for various reasons. If you'd like your video back up and don't believe you have done anything wrong, your best chance to get the removal overturned is with a dispute or appeal. After a video has been removed, the uploader has the chance to get the video back up by providing Youtube's staff with reasons why the video follows both terms of service guidelines and copyright restrictions. To properly start the dispute and appeal process for a deleted video, follow these steps.
Step One: Finding Out the Reason for Removal
This is a relatively simple step in the process as Youtube almost always provides the uploader with the reason why their video was removed. For instance, if the video has copyrighted content in it the video will have red text underneath the video description in your video manager stating that the video's content has been matched with third-party content or that the video has been taken down by the request of the owner of the copyrighted content.
If you have too many videos to sift through to search for removed items, go to the video manager and go under the section titled “Copyright Notices.”
Youtube also usually sends an email to the uploader notifying them of removed videos while usually providing the reason for removal in the email.
Step Two: Figuring Out if the Video Should be Disputed
The dispute process should only be used when you believe that your video was wrongly taken down and you can prove that your video followed community guidelines, term...
... middle of paper ...
... the video is covered under fair use by using the guide provided here.
Sign your full name as another show of professionalism and sincerity and submit the claim. It can take anywhere from a day or two to a month to get a judgment by Youtube's staff.
Step Five: Appeals
If the content was left down or was taken down again under request of the copyright holder, you can make an appeal. The appeal process is very similar to the original dispute, only it requires more detail in the explanation and verification of your account through a cell phone number. Your contact information may also be requested for the sake of the copyright holder.
Not all videos are available for appeal, but you will need to ensure that your video is truly within guidelines and fair use laws with a good and solid explanation backing it if you want to have a chance at succeeding in the appeal.
They hired three different lawyers to handle their case, (which if you ask me, that's a clear sign that they know we have the upper hand in this case) two of them were clearly there for research purposes only, the other's name was Mister Smith, he stood up to give his opening statement. “While it is true that the video was made for educational purposes, to edit or show even small portions of films requires a public performance license, the only way to obtain this license is to have direct permission from the copyright owner. The only way this could be fair use is if he showed it to a small group of people such as a classroom and never put it online, this of course did not happen. We are not trying to stomp out small creators that just want to make educational content, we just want things to be fair.” He sat down next to the rest of his colleagues with a seemingly smug look on his face, like he thought he had this case in the bag. All company lawyers were like this, since large companies usually win court cases unless its something huge that could legitimately damage the company's image. I give my last statement before we leave the courtroom and let the jury decide Mister Faden's fate. “Despite what Mister Smith may have said about “not stomping out the little guys” they do it all the time. If someone wanted to make a necklace with the mickey silhouette and sell it
Ulrich, G. (1999). Widening the circle: Adapting traditional Indian dispute resolution methods to implement alternative dispute resolution and restorative justice in modern communities. Hamline Journal of Public Law and Policy. 20, (2), 419-452.
Late May 2011, a YouTube channel by the name of ksawomen2drive posted an eight minute video. The first day it was up it became the most viewed clip in Saudi Arabia, and became so popular it started trending worldwide. Any non-Arabic viewer might have been slightly baffled by its popularity. To them it would merely be a clip of a woman in a hijab driving while talking to her passenger, and a poorly filmed clip at that. The hundreds of thousands of Arabic viewers however, saw something all together quite different. They were witnessing a crime take place, an act of dissent. The video gained over 600 000 the few days it was up, but was taken down following the arrest of the driver shown in the clip. Manal al-Sharif was that driver.
Plaintiff website operator, KinderStart.com filed a complaint against Defendant Google, alleging nine claims for relief: violation of the right to free speech under the United States and California Constitutions; attempted monopolization in violation of the Sherman Act; monopolization in violation of the Sherman Act; violations of the Communications Act, unfair competition under California Business and Professions Code §§ 17200; unfair practices under California Business and Professions Code; breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing; defamation and libel, and negligent interference with prospective economic advantage. The Court dismissed Plaintiff’s first complaint with leave to amend. Plaintiff then proceed to file an amended complaint asserting s...
The District Court granted 2 Live Crew a summary judgment, but then the Court of Appeals reversed the decisions saying that the defense was barred. Then the Supreme Court reversed and remanded the holding for 2 Live Crew. (Onelbriefs.com, 2009)
Thousands of cases are appealed every year. They include criminal convictions as well as ci...
YouTube apologized for the video which was #1 trending saying that it was misclassified due to the news source footage. They removed the video because it violated their policies and YouTube said they were working to improve their systems. Hogg appeared all over social media after this incident and twitter and facebook said they would protect these florida survivors who were being
on Monday, Sept. 14, and noon on Tuesday, Sept. 15, according to Campus Police. The DVD contained a video art project and was taken from an unsecured monitor on the third floor of the building. The owner is still in possession of the original copy, Campus Police
The defendant is innocent by the claim of fair use. Professor Faden claims his use of Disney Studio’s movie clips is fair use. The purpose of using the clips was to teach students about fair use. In 1984 the court case Universal City Studios v. Sony Corp. , Universal Studios sued Sony Corp. for their Betamax recorder, which allowed public to record whole episode of a TV show. While the technology allowed people to record whole episodes of a show it was ruled fair use because the purpose in which the device was being used was good. The device did not deprive the copyright owners of revenue. People weren't selling the recorded tapes they were just watching them later. So take this court case ruling and apply it to this one. Professor Faden’s purpose is to teach and his using of Disney’s works isn't taking away their profit.
If still not satisfied the last route for appeal is to contact the External Moderator appointed by the Awarding body who will have the final say. The learner may be asked to meet with the External
Today I am going to be explaining exactly why Professor Faden’s video ‘Fair(y) Use Tale Trial’ has caused a great deal of problems, due to the appearance of it being copyright. At a first look the video just screams copyright, anyone could agree with that. But with a little dedication and a fair amount of research, It's clear the purpose of the video was education and parody. Point,
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) involves dispute resolution processes and techniques that fall outside of the government judicial process. There has been moves against ADR in the past by entities of many political parties and their associates, despite this, ADR has gained inclusive acceptance among both the broad community and the legal profession in past years. In fact, many courts now entail some parties to remedy to ADR of some type, usually mediation, before allowing the parties' cases to be tried. The increasing attractiveness of ADR can be clarified by the increasing caseload of traditional courts, the perception that ADR imposes fewer costs than litigation, a preference for confidentiality, and the desire of some parties to obtain larger control over the selection of the individual or individuals who will decide their dispute.
The research topic chosen for this study is based on Digital Rights Management (DRM) and how it affects the stakeholders involved in digital purchases e.g. the content provider, the consumer etc. Current technologies and future trends in the areas of digital copyright security are also avenues of research that are pertinent to the topic.
Media sharing sites – sites that give users the freedom to post videos or photos (YouTube, Instagram, 220)
Copyright is a form of protection given to the authors or creators of “original works of authorship,” including literary, dramatic, musical, artistic and other intellectual works. According to Dictionary.com: "The exclusive right to make copies, license, and otherwise exploit a literary, musical, or artistic work, whether printed, audio, video, etc.: works granted such right by law on or after January 1,1978, are protected for the lifetime of the author or creator and for a period of 50 years after his or her death." Different countries have different lengths for copyright. The copyright time ranges between 30-70 years. Click on one of the links below to learn more about copyright.