Poll of the Day > Does it bug anybody else when YouTube videos recycle background footage?

(+) Yeah! (+)

For example in a game review where the reviewer is talking about the game generally, like maybe the history, and they just have some filler footage of the game in the background, but you notice it repeats. The worst is when they go to show you a specific thing but it was something you already saw in the filler roll, really loses the impact imo.

I swear that every fucking video with some kind of secondary footage does this too. It applies to other things as well, like movie reviews. I know it can be hard to guess ahead of time how much footage you'll need, but come on, it's a ten minute review and obviously the movie or game was way longer than ten minutes. I'll even see shit repeat in two or three minute videos. Come on! How hard can it be to put a different clip in?

No, because I'm normal.
---

Most of them have to do that to avoid copyright strikes because YouTube doesn't understand the meaning of "fair use". Not the creator's fault, if they had their way they would be able to do exactly what you are describing.
---

i don't watch anything by youtube "creators" (lol), ok?

Chewster posted...

...really loses the impact imo.

that really just describe's any youtube personality in general, ok?
---

Dikitain posted...

Most of them have to do that to avoid copyright strikes because YouTube doesn't understand the meaning of "fair use".

Isn't that based on like more than thirty seconds at a time or something? I didn't think it measured cumulative footage. I also thought it was mostly based on audio (which is muted or low in volume with someone speaking over it) and generally didn't apply to game footage besides Nintendo.

I get a kick out of it in real crime shows when they show the same terrible reenactment over and over, especially if it's a woman screaming or something like that.
---

Chewster posted...

Dikitain posted...

Most of them have to do that to avoid copyright strikes because YouTube doesn't understand the meaning of "fair use".

Isn't that based on like more than thirty seconds at a time or something? I didn't think it measured cumulative footage. I also thought it was mostly based on audio (which is muted or low in volume with someone speaking over it) and generally didn't apply to game footage besides Nintendo.

No, no it's just if a program looks at the video and says it has "enough" content.
It's not YouTube who copyright strikes, it's the companies.

30 seconds means nothing, it's not real in anyway shape or form.
---

shadowsword87 posted...

It's not YouTube who copyright strikes, it's the companies.

Sort of? I mean the strikes will be identified as being associated with the copyright holder's company, but sometimes that company has nothing to do with it. Not saying that manual strikes don't also exist, but people get erroneous automated strikes all the time, and I think that's more of an issue with YouTube's programs.

Regardless, I'm not convinced that the footage recycling isn't mostly just a product of laziness.

It's a combination of the company & a flag bot that issues the claims. Youtube's system is guilty before innocent.
---