YouTube's Content Identification Failure Raises Eyebrows

MSNBC is carrying a story looking at YouTube's failure to follow through with a promised 'content identification system' by the end of the year. The article goes on to discuss the possible impact this failure will have on the site's (so far) good relations with television, music, and movie studios. From the article: "If the delay lasts for more than a week or two into the new year, suggesting more than just a slight technical hitch, 'this is certainly going to be a serious issue', [Mike McGuire, a digital media analyst at Gartner] added. Leading music companies have already made clear they see completion of YouTube's anti-piracy technology as an important step in any closer co-operation. Failure to build adequate systems to protect copyright owners could also add to the risk of legal action against the site."

Comments

Easiest code EVAR

[Anonymous Coward]

Here you go guys, this one's on the house:

if (content) {
    return "This Youtube content has been identified as: Bad";
}

Re:Easiest code EVAR

[SmlFreshwaterBuffalo]

You forgot the "mmm'kay?".

Re:Easiest code EVAR

[dimeglio]

The code is not the problem. Maybe the MPAA was requested to provide the MD5SUM of all the material they object to be published. I suppose they haven't completed this. So it's not necessarily YouTube's fault. ;-)

10 YouTube exec: So what clips exactly do you want us to remove?
20 MPAA: well all those which we don't want you to publish.
30 YouTube exec: Ok, which clips exactly do you object to.
40 MPAA: all those we don't want you to publish.
50 GOTO 10

Re:Easiest code EVAR

[recursiv]

I thought of a new algorithm that should be more accurate:

if (views > LEGIT_VIEWS_THRESHOLD) {
    return "This Youtube content has been identified as: Illegal";
} else {
    return "This Youtube content has been identified as: Legal";
}

Re:Easiest code EVAR

[Richy_T]

If I'm not mistaken, you just made that joke.

Rich

Relax

[Timesprout]

Its in Beta.

This should improve content dramatically

[nizo]

Once all that illegal content is gone, it will make it easier to find things like this.

Re:If I were google I would be worried

[trollingsloth]

There are no boobies until the third page of results and they aren't even good ones. Please doo some research before you send us on a wild goos chase.

Re:Why should we help the content providers?

[b0s0z0ku]

If anything, I'd patent to to keep it from being used.

Better yet, patent it and send all royalties to the EFF. The "industry" can only use it at "their own expense" - in more ways than one :)

-b.

Re:MSN Soapbox (Private Beta)

[KDR_11k]

Just wait until Web 3.11 for Workgroups.

Only Possible in Vista.

[twitter]

The easiest thing to do is simply make the fingerprints cover more stuff ("fuzzing" the fingerprint is a pretty good mental model), which definitely increases the false-positive rate on audio.

I would have thought the easiest thing to do would be to take the Vista approach: all video will be reduced to a 2x2 pixel screen size. Content will easy to identify that way, because it will all look the same.