New YouTube Terms and Conditions

So I’m reviewing the new T/C for YouTube, and I see this gem:

License to YouTube

By providing Content to the Service, you grant to YouTube a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free, sublicensable and transferable license to use that Content (including to reproduce, distribute, prepare derivative works, display and perform it) in connection with the Service and YouTube’s (and its successors’ and Affiliates’) business, including for the purpose of promoting and redistributing part or all of the Service.

License to Other Users

You also grant each other user of the Service a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free license to access your Content through the Service, and to use that Content, including to reproduce, distribute, prepare derivative works, display, and perform it, only as enabled by a feature of the Service (such as video playback or embeds). For clarity, this license does not grant any rights or permissions for a user to make use of your Content independent of the Service.

I don’t know how much of that is new, but I italicized the part that seems to deliver a knock0out blow to trolls who use the YouTube machinery to get other users’ content whacked.

Even so, there’s plenty of other weasel verbiage giving YouTube the option to whack your content, monetization or account for any reason or none whatsoever.  But it would seem to shift the burden onto YouTube, and off of the anonymous or protected other user.

5+

Users who have liked this post:

  • avatar
  • avatar
  • avatar
  • avatar
  • avatar

9 thoughts on “New YouTube Terms and Conditions”

  1. ctlaw:

    Haakon Dahl:
    “only as enabled by a feature of the Service (such as video playback or embeds).”

    Right, but since that clearly does not apply to derivative works, I read that as applying only to the last term in the list preceding; performance.

    2+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
    • avatar
  2. Haakon Dahl:

    ctlaw:

    Haakon Dahl:
    “only as enabled by a feature of the Service (such as video playback or embeds).”

    Right, but since that clearly does not apply to derivative works, I read that as applying only to the last term in the list preceding; performance.

    The comma contradicts that interpretation.

    2+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
    • avatar
  3. So maybe that is why it has become more difficult to capture video clips.

    They don’t want me to use them without embedding them…

    1+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
  4. ctlaw:

    Haakon Dahl:

    ctlaw:

    Haakon Dahl:
    “only as enabled by a feature of the Service (such as video playback or embeds).”

    Right, but since that clearly does not apply to derivative works, I read that as applying only to the last term in the list preceding; performance.

    The comma contradicts that interpretation.

    You’re probably right, but there’s still an argument that the last comma there is actually after the end of the parallel construction, and merely sets off  an adverb clause from the immediate preceding element.

    Example:

    You can pay now, pay later, or just steal the thing, if you don’t have money.

    Clearly this is a list of three alternatives, not four.  The last comma is not strictly necessary, so a defender would argue that this makes it a meaningful division into a separate element, but the semantics show that one or more of the parallel elements are not compatible with the final clause, which supports its use as a modifier only of the immediate preceding element.

    This construction is not exactly equivalent to the case in point, but it would serve to establish the flexibility of the comma in an argument.

    1+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
  5. This is why, as a lawyer, I am a big fan of aggressive use of formatting such as hard returns, hierarchical lists, etc.

    Consider:

    You also grant each other user of the Service a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free license to access your Content through the Service, and to use that Content, including to:

    a) reproduce;

    b) distribute;

    c) prepare derivative works;

    d) display; and

    e) perform it,

    only as enabled by a feature of the Service (such as video playback or embeds).

    For clarity, this license does not grant any rights or permissions for a user to make use of your Content independent of the Service.

    or don’t break up related limitations:

    You also grant each other user of the Service a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free license to, only as enabled by a feature of the Service (such as video playback or embeds):

    a) access your Content through the Service; and

    b) use that Content, including to:

    i. reproduce;

    ii. distribute;

    iii.  prepare derivative works;

    iv. display; and

    v. perform it.

    For clarity, this license does not grant any rights or permissions for a user to make use of your Content independent of the Service.

    This is a big problem with foreign attorneys who have no concept of such formatting and if asked to write an anatomical description of a man will identify that his elbows have fingers.

    1+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar

Leave a Reply