#WTFU: Where is the fair use movement

[ar81]

Talking about Hollywood studios stealing money from authors after copyright claims.
Hollywood studios or their outsurcing thieves, create an account, make a false copyright infringement claim. Money from views is given to the claimer, and Youtube author who makes a living on Youtube could have his channel or videos deleted and his money and source of income stolen. Youtube process is automated and there is no way to defend against a flood of claims, and there is no punishment for false claims.

Where's The Fair Use? - Doug Walker
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zVqFAMOtwaI

On Fair Use #WTFU - Chris Stuckman
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I55seO4d1Kw

YouTube Responds to #WTFU, Claims it Will “Strengthen Communication with Creators”
http://www.craveonline.com/design/95...ation-creators
YouTube has responded to the criticisms of its copyright policies, with the video sharing site insisting that it will improve its communication with creators following many high-profile false copyright claims. #WTFU, an online campaign set up by Channel Awesome founder Doug Walker, asked "Where's The Fair Use?" amid a wave of controversy regarding copyright takedowns of videos and channels that were legally covered by the Fair Use Act. YouTube's pandering to corporations dealing out these copyright claims and complete disregard for the rights of their creators saw them being faced with a massive negative backlash, with Walker's campaign quickly generating momentum as other well-established YouTubers jumped on board.

Do you think we will witness the end of fair use?

[Flixy]

Isn't there technically a law that says filling a false complaint is punishable? I'm not really up to date on copyright laws.

[LittleFuzzy]

and there is no punishment for false claims.

Sure there is. Any jury would be absolutely delighted to soak a studio with punitive damages if you wished to push things that far with a civil suit. But you won't because they have an army of lawyers and will make a comparatively attractive settlement offer if you've go the perseverance to get that far.

[Ominous Gamer]

The DMCA provides a very narrow window for which the takedown issuer can be taken to court and lose financially. Yet rebuttals to DMCA claims put a lot of weight on the person filling the rebuttal, and the punishments for losing a rebuttal can be financially ruining.

In 2007 Universal was taken to court because of their hamfisted attempt to get a 29 second dancing baby video removed from youtube. On February 25, 2010, Judge Fogel issued a ruling rejecting several of Universal's affirmative defenses, including the defense that Lenz suffered no damages, but that judge also said damages would be "nominal" (showing that challenging a DMCA takedown to be a financial nightmare even if won). Last year the courts ruled in the same case that fair use is not an "excuse" to infringe, but very simply authorized use. Same court ruled that parties must take that in consideration before sending a takedown notification. Sadly the same court also said that automated systems largely remove the DMCA takedown issuer from being malicious in their DMCA intent (WTF!).

Universal is still fighting that mom in court over her 29 second home video. The assholes.

Google has reached the point where it has to process 23 takedown notices EVERY SECOND. The DMCA is so broken its no longer funny