It looks like Facebook has entered a gray area when it comes to users’ personal videos. According to Techdirt Facebook is issuing DMCA takedown notices to users that have copyrighted music playing in the background of their videos. That Facebook has technology to automatically check for copyrighted material in videos is impressive in its own right but telling users that they can’t place music in their personal videos is ridiculous.
If a user makes a video public and begins actively promoting that video, they may end up crossing the line. There is definitely a line that ends up being crossed and something tells me that it may have to do with the number of users that have access to a given video. If these videos are private then the takedowns are absolutely absurd. It’s not like this automated filtering will prevent users from creating personal home videos.
Isn’t that what Facebook video is for … personal videos? I understand the concept of going to YouTube and posting a music video or a television show and that being illegal. If you were recording a Bar/Bat Mitzvah or any other party with music and wanted to keep and share the video for sentimental reasons, it would be insane to have someone come and tell you to take it down.
I would have to consult a lawyer at this point when it comes to the legality behind this but I could see this turning into a pretty serious debate. I’ll reach out to the digital media lawyers that I know to see what they have to say. What do you think about users receiving a DMCA notice? Is this crossing the line? Where is the line on this issue?
Update
One of the commenters has posted a copy of one of Facebook’s DMCA takedown notices. Here’s what it says:
Hello,
We have removed your video entitled “*******†uploaded at 11:37pm February 2nd, 2008. We did this because we learned that your video might include copyrighted material owned by a third party, such as a video clip or background audio.
If you are the copyright owner, or have permission from the rights holder to upload and distribute this material on Facebook, you may file a counter notice of alleged infringement by following the link below.
Please note that if you re-upload this video without filing a counter notice, or if you upload another video that infringes on the rights of a third party, our system will again remove the content. This could cause your access to the Facebook Video application to be disabled, or your Facebook account to be disabled.
To file a counter notice:
File a Counter NotificationFor Facebook’s video removal policy:
View the PolicyThe Facebook Team
copyright@facebook.com
![[Inside Social Apps 2012]](http://www.allfacebook.com/wordpress/wp-content/themes/allfacebook2/images/ISA2012_336x100_F_RegisterNow.gif)
![[AllFacebook Stats: Facebook Analytics for Your Business]](http://www.allfacebook.com/wordpress/wp-content/themes/allfacebook2/images/stpro_allfacebookstats.gif)
![[How can Facebook change your business?]](http://www.allfacebook.com/wordpress/wp-content/themes/allfacebook2/images/FMB_A_MAY2011_336x100_F.gif)
I just recieved one of these… for a photo? I own a page and they took town my photo.
Comment by Steve — October 30, 2008 @ 5:32 pm
They did this to me way back in May. This is the email I got:
Hello,
We have removed your video entitled "*******" uploaded at 11:37pm February 2nd, 2008. We did this because we learned that your video might include copyrighted material owned by a third party, such as a video clip or background audio.
If you are the copyright owner, or have permission from the rights holder to upload and distribute this material on Facebook, you may file a counter notice of alleged infringement by following the link below.
Please note that if you re-upload this video without filing a counter notice, or if you upload another video that infringes on the rights of a third party, our system will again remove the content. This could cause your access to the Facebook Video application to be disabled, or your Facebook account to be disabled.
To file a counter notice:
File a Counter Notification
For Facebook's video removal policy:
View the Policy
The Facebook Team
copyright@facebook.com
Comment by Clark — October 30, 2008 @ 8:18 pm
Absolutely absurd. This isn't an issue with YouTube, it should not be an issue with Facebook.
Comment by Eric — October 30, 2008 @ 8:30 pm
I just received today such an e-mail from Facebook. It was regarding a personal video with background music, but the music was in no way essential to the video and no theme played for more than 5 to 10 seconds, while I was slideshowing images from my holidays.
I filed a "Counter Notification" claiming to have the rights. Of course I don´t, but I just hope that by doing so a human being will double-check this and let me keep my video online.
—this is what I got—
Hallo,
Wir haben dein Video "7.10.2006: Viaje de Egresados a Bariloche (Parte 2)" das du um 5:08am July 23rd, 2008 hochgeladen hast gelöscht. Wir haben dies getan weil wir erfahren haben dass dein Video Material enthalten könnte, das einer dritten Partei gehört und durch ein Copyright geschützt wird, wie z.B. als Videoclip oder Hintergrundmusik.
Falls du der Urheber bist, oder Erlaubnis vom Urheber erhalten hast, diese Inhalte auf Facebook hochzuladen, kannst du eine Gegenmeldung uber die behauptete Urheberrechtsverletzung abgeben, indem du dem Link unten folgst.
Bitte beachte, wenn du das Video erneut hochlädst, ohne eine Gegenmeldung zu tätigen, oder ein weiteres Video hochlädst, das die Rechte eines Dritten verletzt, dass dann unser System die Inhalte erneut entfernen wird. Dies kann darin resultieren, dass dir der Zugriff auf die Facebook Video Anwendung verwehrt, oder dein Facebook Konto deaktiviert wird.
Um eine Gegendarstellung zu archivieren:
Gegendarstellung archivieren
Für alle weiteren Fragen, besuche unsere Help page.
Das Facebook-Team
Comment by -Pablo- — October 31, 2008 @ 9:25 pm
It's absurd, and it's illogical. Music is a commodity along with other commodities we're surrounded by daily. Every time I upload a video on Facebook or YouTube it contains products, logos and designs that are copyrighted. I still don't see Ikea, Alessi, Steinway or my local Home Depot demanding takedowns or suing me.
Then again, other manufacturers usually pay professional movie makers to spotlight their products, whereas the music industry charge large fees to allow anyone to advertise their product.
Comment by Terje — November 3, 2008 @ 5:58 am
Strikes me as a bit like the AP's over-the-top "outreach" to bloggers earlier this year, trying to strike fear into the fair use community. It may be absurd, but Facebook is in a tough spot on this, especially if it has – as it does seem to have – the technology to easily discover copyright uses in members' pages. I suspect Facebook is being a lot more aggressive in enforcing this than it ultimately will be when this sort of thing is sorted out over the next few months. One of your other commenters pointed out that YouTube has no problem with this sort of thing, which may be true but only because YouTube has been working out peace deals with the music publishers for the last year or two.
Comment by Andrew Mirsky — November 3, 2008 @ 12:18 pm
hi!!!sum thing is wrong with the facebook chat box,i wanted 2 chat with a friend but now the facebook chat box is under maintenance……pls let me knw when the facebook chat box no longer under maintenance.from reehana abrahams
Comment by reehana abrahams — May 5, 2010 @ 6:44 am
"We learned…" is the amusing part. This system rejects videos faster than a human could actually watch them and make a determination. They're just relying, like so many others, on an automated system that scans content and rejects things based on some set of criteria. This is the same kind of system that caused Yahoo Mail to be accused of censorship when it falsely flagged a bunch of email that included the phrase occupywallst.org as spam. It's a form of insidious, creeping fascism. The RIAA thinks it can extract a payment every time somebody plays a song somebody else might be able to hear, and so far, Facebook, et al., don't seem to have the nerve to defend their customers' right to fair use.
Comment by @trevzb — September 23, 2011 @ 1:49 pm