I've posted this before, but I think it needs to look like this:
1. Claimant files a copyright claim with Google against a video owner. This immediately causes the video to be taken down / revenue to be redirected.
2. Video owner can contest the claim. This immediately causes the video to go back up / revenue to be refunded (or perhaps escrowed pending further procedures).
3. Claimant can now re-file the claim, but putting up enough money to have a real, trained human actually look at the case (I'm thinking on the order of $1000). Video is again immediately taken down, and revenue redirected.
4. The video owner can now re-contest the claim by putting up the same amount of money.
- If the video owner doesn't re-contest the claim, the money is refunded and the process is over.
- If the video owner contests the claim, they put up the same amount of money. A real, trained copyright lawyer looks at the case and decides. Whoever wins gets their money back.
1. Claimant files a copyright claim with Google against a video owner. This immediately causes the video to be taken down / revenue to be redirected.
2. Video owner can contest the claim. This immediately causes the video to go back up / revenue to be refunded (or perhaps escrowed pending further procedures).
3. Claimant can now re-file the claim, but putting up enough money to have a real, trained human actually look at the case (I'm thinking on the order of $1000). Video is again immediately taken down, and revenue redirected.
4. The video owner can now re-contest the claim by putting up the same amount of money.
- If the video owner doesn't re-contest the claim, the money is refunded and the process is over.
- If the video owner contests the claim, they put up the same amount of money. A real, trained copyright lawyer looks at the case and decides. Whoever wins gets their money back.