Facebook Needs To Clean Up Before It Starts Monetising Videos

Image via iStock, edit by Gizmodo

Opinion: A recent report has indicated that Facebook intends to begin monetising videos via 'mid-roll' -- short video ads that will cut in after 20 seconds of a video. The revenue from these ads will be split with the creator through a system similar to YouTube's -- which is hugely problematic when so many popular videos on Facebook don't actually belong to the people who uploaded them.

The new development was first reported by Recode, citing "industry sources", though the core of the news is not new. Facebook has been talking about monetising videos for some time, and it's only become more likely since last year, when it renewed its focus on video quite aggressively.

This wasn't without its problems, of course. Facebook came under fire for over-representing video view time to advertisers, and potentially still counting many 'false positives' thanks to videos autoplaying as users scrolled through their feeds. Later, a study revealed that video ads on Facebook are seen for a far shorter time than video ads on YouTube and other competitors. But there's one issue with Facebook video that not many have yet touched on.

Late last year, I was scrolling through my Facebook feed when a video popped up. The thumbnail showed a freeze-frame from Shrek, the description merely said "hey now". Expecting some kind of Shrek-related joke, I clicked, only to see the Dreamworks logo pre-roll, the beginning of the movie and, unbelievably, the entire movie. Right there on Facebook.

In fact in late 2015, 725 of the 1000 most viewed videos on Facebook were, in fact, stolen.

It's not just Hollywood movies that fall victim to these thefts -- the problem of so-called 'freebooting' goes much deeper, and while Dreamworks will probably recover, it's especially harmful to smaller independent creators who rely on YouTube revenue to get by. Often videos that get a few thousand views on YouTube will go on to receive tens of millions when ripped and reuploaded by Facebook viral 'celebrities' and aggregate meme pages -- usually without credit of course.

One such page called "BIG CAT" uploaded this Disney Smashmouth montage late last year with the description "whoever made this thank you":

It quickly racked up almost 600,000 shares and a staggering 30 million views. Meanwhile, the person who actually "made this", James Covenant, was left with only 870,000 views on his original video -- nothing to sniff at, of course, but completely dwarfed by the stolen Facebook video. The YouTube comments all reflect frustration at the Facebook freebooters: "I'm gonna have to resort to watermarks in my future videos", says the top comment from James himself, while others are similarly angry: "Facebook videos are a joke; I wanted to link this and had a feeling the real creator was out there somewhere."

Of course, BIG CAT wasn't the only one to have ripped off James' video. If you search "Smashmouth Disney" or any similar term on Facebook, you'll come up with hundreds of copies of the same video, some with 30 views, some with 3 million. Some go as far as crediting James by name, while others instead use the view-hungry video vehicle to redirect people to their Instagram or Snapchat, or even to a store where they sell their own merchandise.

It's also deliberately difficult to report a post for copyright infringement -- you have to click through 10 different screens just to get to the copyright report form, many of which are repeated questions and deliberately obfuscated links. All this brings you to a form which then promises to share details such as your name and email address with the page that you are in the process of attempting to report. Even if you have the patience to go through this process, trying to track down all instances of infringement with Facebook's admittedly handy but ultimately unreliable Graph Search is next to impossible.

Disney Characters Sing "All Star" by Smash Mouth wasn't the first victim of this social culture, and it certainly won't be the last. Just search "who made this?" on Facebook and you can see just how many videos are stolen and re-uploaded with a 'cute' caption demanding to know who the genius behind said video is, while simultaneously siphoning off all of the original creators' views.

Needless to say, when people put time and effort into creating videos that are inevitably going to get stolen, they're not happy about it. "There's really nothing you can do to stop people re-uploading stuff," Elliot from Deerstalker Pictures told me. "When our stuff gets stolen our best option is to just kick up a stink in the comments section and hijack the post." Deerstalker Pictures has also posted about this phenomenon publicly, expressing the same frustration with the lack of options Facebook provides:

Of course, it's worth a mention that Facebook recently introduced its own copyright management system that's quite similar to YouTube's Content ID. It's called Rights Manager, and is available to creators on an application-only basis. How strict the approval process is is not clear, as Facebook does not clarify beyond "we are accepting partners into Rights Manager on the basis of their needs."

One creator who has been accepted as a partner, Nick Acott of Sneaky Zebra, says that the content protection is "pretty solid", but the process of submitting videos to the program can be tedious. Uploading new videos requires checking options in a separate "Rights Manager" tab, while getting old videos protected requires uploading and maintaining an unpublished reference library of your content.

Deerstalker Pictures, who haven't applied for Rights Manager, still question whether it would be worth the time. "You have to upload your own video for it to match against others, but most of the freebooted videos have those black bars at the top and bottom with "WHO DID THIS 😂 😂 😂" written on it." The system, by nature, also forces creators to be active on Facebook if they want to protect their views over on YouTube. Interestingly the system also has no ability to protect images, even though still images are as important to content on Facebook as videos are -- and implementation would be far easier than copyright protection on video content.

Early vulnerabilities also existed in the system, though those have since been fixed. Facebook also hasn't shown any inclination towards removing or banning particular pages that are known to be serial offenders, though it has allegedly cracked down on small musicians uploading cover versions on the site.

While freebooting remains a huge thorn in the side of Youtube's creators, causing them to miss out on hundreds of thousands, even millions of potential views, monetisation could make this an even bigger problem. Many of the offenders are Facebook power users -- with huge follower counts, verified badges and little regard for copyright law -- are there adequate restrictions in place to stop them from monetising other people's videos, or even using Rights Manager against the actual creators?

Direct monetisation has long been a concern of video creators and critics of freebooting. Back in 2015, Business Insider spoke to viral video creator Jay Lichtenberger, often a victim of freebooting. While Rights Manager had not yet been implemented at the time, Lichtenberger suggested that he would consider filing a class-action lawsuit if freebooters were allowed to directly monetise content they did not own.

This problem, like many others, show that Facebook caters more to business owners than to its own content creators. In fact, content creators on Facebook are constantly pushed to 'promote their businesses', with a one-size-fits-all approach that doesn't improve Facebook as a platform for original content.

Unlike YouTube and, to a lesser extent, Instagram, who welcomed, embraced and supported the content creators that gave their platforms life, Facebook continues to demand money from its creators just so that a fraction of their fans will be able to view the post -- and yet it still puts in only the bare minimum of effort to protect creators' copyrights. Not only this, but when it has tested monetisation of videos in the past, Facebook tends to partner with big media corporations, failing to seek the opinions or advice of independent creators whose videos nevertheless rack up millions of views on the site.

"I don’t want to bad-mouth Facebook, but it’s harder to be a successful content creator on Facebook." SketchShe's Shae-Lee Shackleford told Forbes late last year. "I’ve seen a big shift in views and engagement. Now, only a small percentage of our fans who like our page see our videos organically in our feed. Facebook demands payment to 'boost' videos, which is wrong and unfair."

Even though Rights Manager has been introduced, it's still not hard at all to stumble across stolen content on Facebook. Almost all the examples in this story occurred after the introduction of the surprisingly hard-to-track-down copyright manager, after all. Freebooting isn't going anywhere fast, and I doubt it will without some effort on Facebook's part. So here's a message to Facebook: please clean up your stolen content and known freebooters before you try to make even more money off your content creators.



    The evidence has been mounting for years and it’s time everybody faced facts. Facebook is a shady company with no moral compass and a total disregard for ethics. Of course it’s nigh impossible to report copyright infringement, even as they talk about monitising video content. They don’t care. If it brings more traffic to their site and more money to their pockets, then people be damned.

    The day society collectively gets bored with Facebook will be an amazing day indeed.

    TL;DR - Videos hosted through FB have notoriously bad buffer rates. Add advertising to the mix, it's going to be one steaming pile of crap!!

    Blah, Blah, Blah, broken record, Stop Using Facebook FFS!

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now