YouTube channels are being held hostage with false copyright claims, but the platform's hands are tied
- Creators say the copyright and community guideline claim system on YouTube has many flaws that can be exploited.
- YouTubers are having their channels held hostage by people who don't like their content, or who want to extort them out of money.
- There are two ways this happens: community guideline claims, which anyone can submit, and copyright claims, which can only be made within the YouTube site. Three strikes of either and a channel is terminated.
- Mike Fleischauer, for example, whose channel Gamefromscratch covers development tutorials and news, was given a community guideline strike by a stranger who asked for $50 worth of Bitcoin to remove it.
- The false claim problem is tricky for YouTube to resolve because they are not held responsible for copyrighted content uploaded by their users thanks to DMCA laws, which means anyone and everyone has the ability to easily file claims against who they please.
YouTubers have anguished over copyright strikes on their channels for years. It's one of the biggest and most common frustrations amongst creators because often, when they receive a claim on one of their videos, they are completely powerless to do anything about it.
There are two kinds of claims that can be made against YouTubers: Community guideline claims, which anyone can submit, and copyright claims, which can only be made by the copyright holder or someone on their behalf. There's a policy that states a channel is terminated after three strikes — a rule that some have started weaponizing.
YouTubers vs big corporations
YouTubers have long known that they have to be careful not to allow any music or clips owned by big corporations into their videos or they risk losing their AdSense revenue.
One popular YouTuber, who wanted to remain anonymous, told Insider big companies sometimes abuse their power by claiming royalties off smaller channels for using tiny snippets of music.
"I had a running joke on my channel with the song 'Careless Whisper' where I'd play less than ten seconds of it," they said. "It started to get flagged by Warner Chappell so instead of inserting it into videos, I would just very poorly hum it — clearly not a cover, clearly just a little joke — those started to get flagged."
They claim they lost all the advertising revenue on a 30-minute video for less than ten seconds of humming. They said they had no other option but to edit out the humming because no single creator can go up against a company of that size.
"I reached out to YouTube about it and they said they'd look into it and I never heard anything again," they said.
"They bend over backwards to keep big advertisers and companies happy. They probably don't want to even risk taking the fall for copyright lawsuits so they let the rights holders paint with a broad brush that leads to a ton of copyright abuse."
Warner Chappell did not respond to Insider's request for comment.
'The person wanted $50 in Bitcoin and for me to plug their Twitter account'
Mike Fleischauer was recently locked out of his YouTube account after getting two strikes on the same day from multiple claims. Fleischauer has been running the channel Gamefromscratch that covers development tutorials and news for about five years.
One of his videos, a review of a version of Adobe Animate, was taken down multiple times even though it violates no terms of service — it's not pornography, a guide to hacking, or information about pirating software. It was unclear what had happened until a stranger got in contact with Fleischauer to admit it was their doing. Fleischauer knows who it was but has "no desire to give this scum more attention."
"The person wanted $50 in Bitcoin and for me to plug their Twitter account," Fleischauer told Insider. "That may have been the full extent of it."
As for why he was targeted, Fleischauer has no idea and would love to know.
"Mine is not a controversial channel," he said. "So far as I know my most controversial video still has well over a 90% like to dislike ratio, so it's not like I have legions of alienated viewers."
As pointed out in an article on Boing Boing, this is not a "complex or daring" scam.
"You can do it by following a sheet of simple, foolproof instructions," it reads. "It's barely more complex than demanding money from a YouTuber, filing complaints if they don't pay up, and cackling as YouTube automatically takes down the YouTuber's videos or even suspends their account access."
Little trust in the automated process
Fleischauer's videos are now all restored, but that hasn't granted him much faith in YouTube's system. For starters, his video was flagged multiple times and then reinstated after manual review.
However, the most recent time it was flagged, an email from team YouTube stated the video was removed correctly and would stay that way. This led him to believe it can't have been manually reviewed at all. Rather, he was a victim of an automatic process that he didn't trust.
Fortunately, he had recently made a contact at YouTube who was a bit higher up.
"He escalated the support issue and it was resolved within minutes," he said. "It's insane to think my video is only online because I know someone inside YouTube, but that bluntly is the reality of the situation."
Fleischauer also believes his resolution is thanks to the video he posted about his situation, which gained traction on YouTube and Reddit.
"If I was smaller, my video would still be gone and potentially a warning strike would remain on my channel," he said.
Fleischauer's main concern with the system is that YouTube assumes the party receiving the incoming strike is in the wrong. In a nutshell, he said, every single YouTuber is guilty until proven innocent. There's nothing standing in the way of the same thing happening to him again, or to anyone else.
The YouTube reporting system is also way too easy to access, he said, and there are plenty of ways for hackers can set up bots and tools to do it automatically.
"YouTube needs to stop treating their creators as guilty," he said. "A channel in good standing for 5+ years, with never a strike or infraction and over 1,000 videos uploaded, shouldn't be immediately assumed guilty when several complaints come in about multiple different videos in a [matter of minutes]. But that's exactly the scenario today."
'YouTube doesn't listen'
Copyright claims can only be made within the YouTube platform, but that doesn't mean they are any less misused. A system called Content ID scans videos and flags any to creators where it sees their work being copied, so the creator then decides whether to make a claim depending on whether the video falls under fair use or not.
Onision, possibly the most vilified creator in YouTube's history, is known to abuse this system. One of his biggest critics, Repzion, often has to appeal multiple false strikes on his videos.
YouTuber LtCobra also had trouble when he made a video that was critical of another creator called JustDestiny for using photos of underage girls in his thumbnails. JustDestiny had the video taken down — called a DMCA takedown — by falsely claiming he owned it, and by sending a fake cease and desist.
LtCobra told Insider it was only due to other larger YouTubers, including PewDiePie, taking notice of the case that JustDestiny rescinded the claims. If it wasn't for the public outrage, he'd probably have a strike on his account today.
"YouTube provides only one alternative, give all of your private information to whoever copyright striked you, or suck it up," he said. "And when it's a channel with much more subscribers than the person who was striked, YouTube don't listen and creators get away with it."
He said he's not sure how YouTube could fix the issue, "but there's a massive lack of transparency with their creators, that's for sure."
YouTube's hands are tied
YouTuber John Swan also received a copyright strike when he was critical of another creator in a video who subsequently made claims against it as a means to silence him.
He told Insider YouTube's hands are tied when it comes to false claims because it has to balance the creator's interests and US Law.
"One of the main aspects of copyright law that allows YouTube to exist is Safe Harbor, where platforms like YouTube are not held responsible for copyrighted content uploaded by their users," he said. "If this law didn't exist, then platforms that host user content would not be able to exist."
But because of this law, YouTube cannot step in and make decisions about these copyright claims because that would mean interpreting the law and ruling in favor of one party. That can only be done in a court of law.
"YouTube cannot usurp the role of the courts, so they have to maintain impartiality," Swan said. "US Law states that DMCA Takedowns are solely to be resolved between the claimant and the creator of the content being claimed."
YouTube can reverse strikes if the person submitting the claim has entered illegitimate information like a fake name or email address, or if they do not own the content. But at the moment there is no option to report either of these things when a creator appeals the claim.
"There needs to be an option when you appeal, or an email you can contact to allow creators to report copyright abuse, since it is one of the more increasing ways that creators are being silenced by trolls or by people trying to stop criticism," said Swan. "In addition, I would love to see YouTube take a stronger stance against this type of behavior."
'It's a constant guessing game'
YouTube sued a man called Christopher Brady in 2019 after it was brought to the company's attention that he had submitted multiple false copyright claims against Minecraft gaming YouTubers Kenzo and ObbyRaidz.
"That was great to see," said Swan. "We need more of this action to ensure a deterrent against these false strikes."
Fleischauer said there are two immediate fixes that he can see. One, to assume the innocence of channels who are over a certain threshold of average like to dislike ratios and are in good standing. And two, to require users prove they are actual humans before being able to submit channel strikes.
"That this can be done anonymously is insane," he said. "My contact at Google says this is where their hands are tied, as he put it: 'Someone could throw a report through our window taped to a brick and they would have to honour it.'"
This is ultimately due to bad law, he said, but Google and YouTube could definitely improve their vetting process.
The anonymous YouTuber said they just want everything to be more open because the rules and objectives are always changing without being communicated effectively. This is especially important for the creators who don't have a higher up contact at the company they can lean on.
"I'm very grateful to YouTube for being the platform that's given me my career," they said. "But being a creator, even after growing a sizeable audience, is a constant guessing game."
YouTube didn't respond to a request for comment.
Read more:
Why some YouTubers are destined to become supervillains