YouTube, Disney to trial copyright takedown software

YouTube says it's now really close to trialling the video fingerprinting technology it has reckons will put an end to its status as a copyright renegade, which won it a $1bn lawsuit from Viacom. The long-delayed system, built by Google engineers, was plugged again on Monday by YouTube marketing wonks, who told reporters it'll be tested on content owned by Disney and Time Warner in about a month. Other video producers will regain control of their work later this year, partner development director Chris Maxcy told Reuters.

At the D5 conference at the end of last month, Google CEO Eric Schmidt said Viacom "should have waited for the tools before laying its suit". The system had been slated to go live by the end of last year, and Schmidt said Youtube was "very close" to activating the software in the middle of April. Despite the repeated announcements, Maxcy said yesterday: "It's typically not something we talk about."

View: The full story
News source: The Reg

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

VMware Windows-on-a-Mac product close to launch

Next Story

Security flaw hits Safari (Windows) only hours after release


Commenting is disabled on this article.

Some of the clips on YT have made me think about buying the DVDs. I uploaded a clip of a classic TV show and included a link to where the DVD could be purchased.

Don't these idiots realize that if we can see or hear it we can re-record it and strip out their cra p.

I don't think you realise what the technology does. It doesn't alter the media stream (like DRM does), it simply creates what I would call a 'media fingerprint', an identifying (and therefore comparable) signature which they can then use to associate an item of media with an authorised publisher. Then if a user uploads content which is ripped off from the licensed material, the system can automatically flag it as infringed material. If you sit there and record what you are watching, the media fingerprint that could be generated from your copy is likely to be either the same, or similar, so it would still flag it as a possible illegal upload.

I think that is about right?