This morning I noticed that YouTube had took the time out to remove my harmless video of Gilberto ‘s penalty against Tottenham due to copyright infringement and display a friendly message blaming the FAPL (which I assume is the FA Premier League) for their actions. The message is a generic YouTube copyright infringment message except this is the first time that I’ve seen the Premier League as the copyright owner:
This video has been removed at the request of copyright owner The FAPL because its content was used without permission
If the FA is cracking on YouTube it’s a sad day for all football fans who live in countries where games simply aren’t broadcast and rely on the Internet to follow their teams.
I was even notified via email:
This is to notify you that we have removed or disabled access to the following material as a result of a third-party notification by The FAPL claiming that this material is infringing:
Arsenal vs. Tottenham – Gilberto penalty 2-0 Dec. 2, 2006: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X4X7MCN5Rkc
Please Note: Repeat incidents of copyright infringement will result in the deletion of your account and all videos uploaded to that account. In order to avoid future strikes against your account, please delete any videos to which you do not own the rights, and refrain from uploading additional videos that infringe on the copyrights of others. For more information about YouTube’s copyright policy, please read the Copyright Tips guide.
If you elect to send us a counter notice, to be effective it must be a written communication provided to our designated agent that includes substantially the following (please consult your legal counsel or see 17 U.S.C. Section 512(g)(3) to confirm these requirements):
1. A physical or electronic signature of the subscriber.
2. Identification of the material that has been removed or to which access has been disabled and the location at which the material appeared before it was removed or access to it was disabled.
3. A statement under penalty of perjury that the subscriber has a good faith belief that the material was removed or disabled as a result of mistake or misidentification of the material to be removed or disabled.
4. The subscriber’s name, address, and telephone number, and a statement that the subscriber consents to the jurisdiction of Federal District Court for the judicial district in which the address is located, or if the subscriberis address is outside of the United States, for any judicial district in which the service provider may be found, and that the subscriber will accept service of process from the person who provided notification under subsection (c)(1)(C) or an agent of such person.
Such written notice should be sent to our designated agent as follows:
1000 Cherry Ave.
San Bruno, CA 94066
Please note that under Section 512(f) of the Copyright Act, any person who knowingly materially misrepresents that material or activity was removed or disabled by mistake or misidentification may be subject to liability.
Lot of lawyer talk as you can see but the main theme of the email seems to be “don’t do it again or we’ll ban you”. I’m sure YouTube would rather host the videos since they generate obscene amounts of views, but copyright is copyright and the law is the law. So I’m guessing the FA Premier League is finally cracking down on copyright infringement on YouTube. But one thing does surprise me: they took down the 2-0 Gilberto penalty and not the one that made it 3-0. More about that can be found here.
If this is the beginning of the end of football on YouTube, it is a sad day for everyone.