Shashir Mehrotra

To be super clear, it's not what the law requires.

To be clear, if you use Content ID and you use it for monetization, you're not issuing strikes.

You just said it.

What YouTube did is said, when it happens, we're going to help you find it, but you're not preventing someone from doing it.

It's a very different standard.

You're making sure after.

To be clear, the idea of copyright is very different than a name and likeness claim.

If I built a video that said, hey, I really like Marques Brownlee, and here's what I think he would say, let me tell some jokes about Millet, it's a very different standard.

The standard for YouTube was about copyright, and that's a set of...

regulations that are covered by a totally different part of the law and in that case you have a claim there's a dmca uh um uh statute that allows you to go and enforce your copyright that's not actually what we're talking about here but i the the principle of what is similar in that in both cases there's a law the law does not really meet the creator bar

I think the goal of the community, the goal of products like ours, working with people like you, is not to use the law as the test.

The goal is to get well beyond that to align our interests such that your success is our success, and that should be our goal.

Are we required to do it?

No.

I don't think that's the requirement.

We choose to do it because it's the best way to build the right products for our customers.

We'll see if the laws find a ground on that.

I do think it's a catch-22 as a creator.

I mean, the copyright law has been around for hundreds of years now and in its various forms.

The way music composition was licensed started with actually Mozart and Bach and has grown since then.