直 Japanese PDF Font
  • Our Professionals
  • Our Work
  • Our Insights
  • Offices
  • Firm
  • Careers
Finnegan
  • News
  • Finnegan Facts
  • History
    • Finnegan VISION
    • Finnegan FORWARD
  • Pro Bono
  • Management
    • Pricing & Alternative Fee Arrangements
    • AFA Models We Offer
    • Contingency Fees
    • AI + KM

Commentary

YouTube’s ‘Checks’ Copyright System: What Lawyers Think

April 9, 2021

World Intellectual Property Review

YouTube recently introduced a new method to help protect copyright owners and deter users from uploading infringing content. The ‘Checks’ system scans videos for possible infringement before being published to the platform and provides the person uploading the video with an additional warning about potential issues with their content. This shifts the onus of the copyright infringement on the uploader rather than the owner. World Intellectual Property Review interviewed Finnegan partner Margaret Esquenet for her insight on this new system.

Margaret said:

“The amount of content on the YouTube platform, and the constant addition of new materials, make it very difficult for copyright owners to police YouTube videos on their own. So, a pre-publication screen of content has been a feature rights-owners have demanded for a long time.

While infringing content will be missed and rights owners will need to continue to be on the lookout, assuming it works as anticipated, the Checks system should prevent publication of at least the most obviously infringing content.

Technological advancements in AI and machine learning probably had a lot do with the current rollout of the Checks service. This type of service (YouTube indicates that the check will only take minutes) requires substantial processing power and other technical capabilities to do accurately.

From a policy perspective, social media platforms are under some pressure to make their services more responsive to the concerns of the public, including copyright owners. Examples of this can be seen in the recent U.S. Copyright Office Report on the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, proposed revisions to section 230, Australian and EU regulations regarding the rights of news organizations and the HD Media lawsuit in the U.S.

In my view, they don’t deter infringers who are in the business of piracy. Those bad actors simply find a way around the technological speed bumps. And in this case, YouTube apparently does not actually prevent users from publishing a video before the Checks process is complete. But, the Checks service will likely deter the more casual infringer by saving them from themselves.”

Read “YouTube’s ‘Checks’ Copyright System: What Lawyers Think”

Tags

social media

Related Practices

Trademark and Brand Management

Copyright

Related Industries

Communications

Media

Hospitality, Gaming, and Leisure

Related Offices

Washington, DC

Related News

Award/Ranking

Forbes Names Finnegan Partner Erika Harmon Arner on its Inaugural 2026 America’s Top Women Lawyers List

June 5, 2026

Commentary

‘Efficiency Enhancers, Not Revenue Disruptors’: Lawyers Analyse USPTO’s AI Trademark Tools

April 17, 2026

Media Mention

Federal Circuit Grills Sanctioned Patent Lawyer Over Conduct

April 9, 2026

Media Mention

Patent for Vehicle Tracking and Control System Directed to Ineligible Subject Matter

March 30, 2026

Award/Ranking

Finnegan Associates Honored with Young Lawyer of the Year Award

December 7, 2025

Press Release

Federal Circuit Affirms Victory for Finnegan Client Castle Retail Against Hawk Technology Systems

November 17, 2025

Media Mention

Summary Judgment of Noninfringement Affirmed in Cruise Control System Patent Suits Against BMW

October 15, 2025

Commentary

Finnegan’s New AI Practice Is a Project in ‘Interdisciplinary’ Expertise

September 12, 2025

Award/Ranking

Finnegan Rises 13 Spots in the 2025 American Lawyer Midlevel Associates Survey Rankings

September 9, 2025

Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.

  • Privacy
  • Disclaimer
  • Legal Notices
  • Fraud Alert
  • EEO Statement
  • Cookies
  • Contact Us

© 2026 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP