Quote:
Originally Posted by brandonstills
Allison, I already read the wikipedia link you mentioned and also found some more technical information from various sources on how specifically it is implemented. I think you misunderstand what I said.
I did not say it could not work at all. I said I saw flaws. Obviously if the content is voluntarily provided by the site it makes it much easier. This can be used to effectively reduce piracy. But to the degree that they (infringers) deliberately prevent you from getting at the videos is where I see the problem.
Can you go into more detail on why I am incorrect? Saying that it has already been done does not make my statements any less true as I am not saying it can not be done; just that there are situations where I see this would not be feasible, for the reasons I mentioned above.
|
Well, I'll give you a personal example. We've had our content finger printed & we used the APAP software to track all of our content on all 16 sites they had at the time. We also had an employee here individually go through all of the videos on about 5 different tubes and it took him about 2 weeks per tube site to do in detail.
Every single video he found was also found by the technology. Out of 1,000 videos found across 16 tube sites, only 5 were false positives where they were not our videos.
So that's just a statement to it's accuracy that we've seen.
Regarding workarounds. If a UGC company is agreeing to participate in the program in order to comply with UGC principles/DMCA, that's a non issue. If a UGC company refuses to participate & then does whatever it can to evade tracking I believe they would be positioning themselves for even more liability and there would be evidence gathered by the tracking software demonstrating that evasion.