• De_Narm@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    81
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    11 days ago

    Sooo… is this image copyright infringement?

    There are just so many weird cases, based on the wording. Would Youtube need to scan for Danes within all uploads to check for copyright violations? Which is obviously impossible.

      • criticon@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        11 days ago

        But rushed and incomplete bills can come with bad implementations that make them useless

        -this post is known to the state of California to cause cancer

      • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        11 days ago

        I can imagine situations where this is a bad idea, such as making almost all journalism illegal because you don’t have to legal right to cover news about an individual.

        Hopefully they plan for that.

    • Stillwater@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      36
      ·
      11 days ago

      I’d figure the scenario would be that YouTube would need to respect takedown request from people whose likeness had been appropriated, which isn’t that absurd

      • De_Narm@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        11 days ago

        That’s likely, but that would only help with the most viral cases. Otherwise, what’s even the chance to come across AI generated content violating your copyright in an exponentially growing ocean of slop?

        On the flipside, individuals could probably maliciously claim ad revenue. That’s already a thing with music.

      • Stovetop@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 days ago

        Does have me wondering how YouTube would verify likeness, though. I could just find a video I don’t like and claim to be a person in it. If all they need is a photo, I feel like that’d be easy to mock up. If they require government ID, that’s getting into uncomfortable UK-esque ID verification territory.

        • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          11 days ago

          Requiring proof of identification when you are taking legal action is significantly different from requiring proof of ID at all times.

          Considering how lazy YouTube is about such things they’d probably just take your word for it and force the video creator to prove it isn’t you in order to get their ad revenue back.

    • Xaphanos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      11 days ago

      Also, how many times have you seen a photo of someone that looks just like someone else that is entirely unrelated? Old photos in particular.

    • dohpaz42@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 days ago

      Automated anything on such a grand scale is always a Bad Idea ™. It’s better to just let copyright holders flag videos manually. Less likely to get weaponized that way. Of course, that’s anecdotal and purely my opinion.

      • corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        11 days ago

        Automatic protection for people without them having to chase it in the courts is, somehow, a bad thing?