Volkswagen AG Broke Our YouTube

Mark Stevenson
by Mark Stevenson

The Verge has an article today about the arduous process of hoops YouTube makes publishers jump through if a copyright infringement claim is made against a video. It’s an interesting look behind the scenes of video publishing and the tools YouTube makes available to copyright holders wanting to protect intellectual property. It also highlights the lack of human-based recourse publishers have when it comes to hollow copyright claims.

“Fair use” allows limited use of copyrighted material. This is how parodies and satires get around certain legal restraints. Fair use is also why we can use snippets of articles from other outlets, so long as we don’t use those articles in their entirety.

Even further, automakers make materials available for editorial use on their own press portals. This material is offered free of charge by automakers so we can pimp their products. But sometimes they make a mistake and post the wrong thing.

Volkswagen posted the wrong thing. And now our YouTube channel is crippled.

On December 2015, we posted “ LEAKED: Volkswagen Might Show This Full TFT Display, Infotainment System at CES (Video)” with a video showcasing Volkswagen’s then-yet-to-be-shown e-Golf Touch infotainment system that the automaker was planning to show at the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas.

At the time, we said this:

“For instance, Volkswagen will give quite a clear glimpse of the latest developments in in-car infotainment that are on the verge of being launched onto the market. This will see innovations such as the Golf R Touch concept car finding their way into Volkswagen’s broad product portfolio,” the automaker said in a statement.

That’s probably possibly what we’re looking at here in a B-roll video made by the automaker obtained by TTAC through less-than-official channels.

However, we actually obtained the video through the most official channel you can get in this business: the automaker’s own website. Volkswagen made an oops and we caught them — just like we caught Volvo’s mistake when they accidentally posted shots of the new S90 too early.

In the case of Volkswagen’s video, the automaker had tools available to them to retaliate. And retaliate they did. We’ve been in YouTube Hell ever since.

Thankfully, we haven’t been as restricted as many of those mentioned in The Verge article, but it’s still now more difficult for us to conduct business. We aren’t a large team. We don’t do many videos. But now the ones we post on YouTube come with extra work because of this mess. We’ve made a counterclaim based on the fact the video was downloaded from Volkswagen’s own media site. Fingers crossed we will get our YouTube channel back in good standing.

Until then, thank you, Volkswagen. Thank you ever so much.

Mark Stevenson
Mark Stevenson

More by Mark Stevenson

Comments
Join the conversation
7 of 46 comments
  • Robert.Walter Robert.Walter on Feb 02, 2016

    So TTAC misrepresented the source of the video to make it's sources seem more mysterious to readers? Why?

    • See 3 previous
    • VCplayer VCplayer on Feb 02, 2016

      @seth1065 Pretty sure TTAC is engaged in journalism, which would mean the video falls under fair use. Unfortunately that holds up in court better than it does with YouTube's army of bots and nonexistent customer service.

  • Jimal Jimal on Feb 02, 2016

    I don't want to say that this is old hat for Volkswagen, but in the early 2000's I was a member of a small Volkswagen club, and handled their website. While most every other manufacturer appreciated the free advertising that their enthusiasts provided, Volkswagen seemed to relish filing copyright claims against anyone who used their logos, model names, pictures of their vehicles... just about anything that had a sniff of Volkswagen to it. At one point they even had a process you could go through to register your club (and website) with them so they could approve content. Our solution was to remove any VW brand sourced content from the website and go about our days. From what I can tell, it doesn't appear that Volkswagen bothers to do this anymore.

    • Brettc Brettc on Feb 02, 2016

      Look at what happened to tdiparts.com and the askavwsalesguy site. VW aggressively goes after what they see as copyright infringers, even if it's helping them as the askavwsalesguy site was doing. They should probably tone it down a bit since they're kinda screwed in the US at least.

  • Mebgardner I test drove a 2023 2.5 Rav4 last year. I passed on it because it was a very noisy interior, and handled poorly on uneven pavement (filled potholes), which Tucson has many. Very little acoustic padding mean you talk loudly above 55 mph. The forums were also talking about how the roof leaks from not properly sealed roof rack holes, and door windows leaking into the lower door interior. I did not stick around to find out if all that was true. No talk about engine troubles though, this is new info to me.
  • Dave Holzman '08 Civic (stick) that I bought used 1/31/12 with 35k on the clock. Now at 159k.It runs as nicely as it did when I bought it. I love the feel of the car. The most expensive replacement was the AC compressor, I think, but something to do with the AC that went at 80k and cost $1300 to replace. It's had more stuff replaced than I expected, but not enough to make me want to ditch a car that I truly enjoy driving.
  • ToolGuy Let's review: I am a poor unsuccessful loser. Any car company which introduced an EV which I could afford would earn my contempt. Of course I would buy it, but I wouldn't respect them. 😉
  • ToolGuy Correct answer is the one that isn't a Honda.
  • 1995 SC Man it isn't even the weekend yet
Next