Seeing as how there is no penalty whatsoever for misidentifying a video and taking it down(1), I'm wondering if its a feature and not a bug. Remember back in the bad old days of youtube, when everyone thought that Google was crazy for acquiring them because there just seemed to be no way to get around the billions demanded in lawsuits (I wish that were hyperbole)?
This is the way. Just let the system run amok and get everyone talking about how they just ban everything at the drop of a hat. No one can argue that they're "not doing enough" when the idea is always percolating in the public conscious that videos get banned all the time, even when they shouldn't be.
(1) And there really should be a small one, paid by the "owner" of the material. You should have to think carefully about how much it might cost you to turn on content protection for your material.
No, penalties for issuing a false takedown. If it actually cost something (even a little something) to claim you own something and try to have it removed, but then it turns out you were in the wrong, it would be taken more seriously.
This is the way. Just let the system run amok and get everyone talking about how they just ban everything at the drop of a hat. No one can argue that they're "not doing enough" when the idea is always percolating in the public conscious that videos get banned all the time, even when they shouldn't be.
(1) And there really should be a small one, paid by the "owner" of the material. You should have to think carefully about how much it might cost you to turn on content protection for your material.