[QUOTE]Major marketers' ads have likely been showing up on or near YouTube videos promoting terrorism, neo-Nazi groups and other web content for a long time. So why has the brand-safety problem suddenly burst into the open, prompting big advertisers such as General Motors, Walmart, Verizon, AT&T and Johnson & Johnson to stop spending on YouTube or other Google properties? Thank -- or blame -- Eric Feinberg, a longtime marketing-services executive who in recent months has made it his mission to find ad-supported content linked to terror and hate groups, then push links and screen shots proving it happened to journalists in the U.K. and U.S.
The resulting coverage has sparked a full-fledged advertiser revolt.
Mr. Feinberg owns Southfield, Mich.-based Gipec, short for Global Intellectual Property Enforcement Center, which employs "deep web interrogation" to find keywords and coding linked to terrorism and hate speech.
He's also co-owner of a patent issued in December for a "computerized system and method for detecting fraudulent or malicious enterprises." His system works in part by analyzing when videos and websites contain words that appear alongside such phrases as "kill Jews." He's logged thousands of sometimes innocuous or obscure sounding terms he says "co-trend" with such hate speech or exhortations to violence, which in turn helps him finding offensive videos.
His efforts with the media have been classic problem-solution marketing. Mr. Feinberg makes no bones about his interest in licensing his technology to Google and other digital platforms to monitor offensive content and keep ads away from it.
Certainly Google knows plenty about artificial intelligence and machine learning, as its executives have eagerly informed marketers in public and private presentations for years. And last week, as major advertisers one after the other pressed "pause" on YouTube advertising, Google said in a blog post that it's beefing up its tech efforts and hiring more people to prevent placement of ads with unsavory content. A spokesman declined to comment further.
But Mr. Feinberg said in an interview on Friday that he doubts Google can succeed. At least, he said, "not without violating my patent."[/QUOTE]
Source: [url]http://adage.com/article/digital/eric-feinberg-man-google-youtube-brand-safety-crisis/308435/[/url]
Is his patent intended on stopping Google from finding the extremist videos for his own self gain?
I haven't uploaded content to Youtube in a while, does certain terms and content used and uploaded not exempt you from Monetization anymore or is the system just lazy when it comes to finding that?
either way, what an awful man lol. I wonder if forcing stronger monetization rules would help this and also walk around this dude's garbage
[QUOTE=Dr. Odyssey;52049108]Source: [url]http://adage.com/article/digital/eric-feinberg-man-google-youtube-brand-safety-crisis/308435/[/url]
Is his patent intended on stopping Google from finding the extremist videos for his own self gain?[/QUOTE]
Yeah, basically. He's trying to insure he gets a cut from the biggest companies, especially Google, so people don't try to push their revenue streams away. Basically he's going, "Got a nice website there. Lot of good advertisers. Be a [I]real shame[/I] if [I]something[/I] happened to them all." He doesn't care about fixing a problem, he wants to exploit it.
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;52049206]Yeah, basically. He's trying to insure he gets a cut from the biggest companies, especially Google, so people don't try to push their revenue streams away. Basically he's going, "Got a nice website there. Lot of good advertisers. Be a [I]real shame[/I] if [I]something[/I] happened to them all." He doesn't care about fixing a problem, he wants to exploit it.[/QUOTE]
Yeah that is what I thought about the Article, a Mafia type Tactic.
Kind of how patents work in general, the only thing really significant here is that he's managed to mess with google's ad partner relationships.
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;52049206]Yeah, basically. He's trying to insure he gets a cut from the biggest companies, especially Google, so people don't try to push their revenue streams away. Basically he's going, "Got a nice website there. Lot of good advertisers. Be a [I]real shame[/I] if [I]something[/I] happened to them all." He doesn't care about fixing a problem, he wants to exploit it.[/QUOTE]
And by doing so he may be making a lot of money out of it.
I really have no fucking idea how you can patent a search algorithm for a copy written service you don't own the copy write for? There is no way something like this would stand up in court.
Why can't google just code their own?
Instances like this is why patent trolling needs to be illegal.
[QUOTE=Llamalord;52049305]I really have no fucking idea how you can patent a search algorithm for a copy written service you don't own the copy write for? There is no way something like this would stand up in court.
Why can't google just code their own?[/QUOTE]
That's the part that's been confusing me as well. It's Google's service, so surely someone can't patent a method for extracting data from it? It'd be like if I tried to file a patent for using asterisks in search queries. Second, what's stopping Google from writing their own code to find these videos? Even if it'd be a patent infringement, what would ever force them to reveal the code? Or even reveal they used it?
What a douche. As long as Google doesn't take any code from him, they may code whatever they want.
I must be the only person on the internet who doesn't give a shit about this. To me it's all drama. Anything YouTube related is insignificant drama.
[QUOTE=Code3Response;52051595]I must be the only person on the internet who doesn't give a shit about this. To me it's all drama. Anything YouTube related is insignificant drama.[/QUOTE]
I mean, this is actually affecting channels, causing them to lose revenue and even videos and possibly their entire channels. Like The Slingshot Channel is at risk because of this bullshit.
oy vey
[QUOTE=Code3Response;52051595]I must be the only person on the internet who doesn't give a shit about this. To me it's all drama. Anything YouTube related is insignificant drama.[/QUOTE]
"It's not my income, so why should I care?"
Well, your favorite YouTubers are going to quit the game if they can't make money. It's going to kill a lot of online entertainment by ruining people's careers.
[QUOTE=Llamalord;52049305]I really have no fucking idea how you can patent a search algorithm for a [B]copy written service you don't own the copy write for?[/B] There is no way something like this would stand up in court.[/QUOTE]
That's not how any of this works.
Here's the abstract of the patent:
[quote]A computer system and method for determining the legitimacy of a website determines the presence of a relationship between a received website and at least one known illegitimate website. When such a relationship is detected, the received website is determined to be illegitimate and corresponding action may be taken.[/quote]
It's a generalized thing.
[QUOTE=Llamalord;52049305]Why can't google just code their own?[/QUOTE]
Because they'd be violating the patent.
Their lawyers could probably sort it out, but Google would have to start giving a shit first. We'll just have to wait and see what happens.
[QUOTE=Code3Response;52051595]I must be the only person on the internet who doesn't give a shit about this. To me it's all drama. Anything YouTube related is insignificant drama.[/QUOTE]
No you aren't, but this type of mindset is just pure ignorance because unless your someone who just watches television shows all the time, it effects you since many people on YouTube's livelihoods are at stake.
So what you guys are saying is that no one ever put this idea into public domain before he registered the patent?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
