YouTube policy does not allow content to be uploaded by anyone not permitted by United States copyright law to do so, and the company frequently removes uploaded infringing content. Nonetheless, a large amount of it continues to be uploaded. Generally, unless the copyright holder reports them, YouTube only discovers these videos via indications within the YouTube community through self-policing. The primary way in which YouTube identifies the content of a video is through the search terms that uploaders associate with clips. Some users have taken to creating alternative words as search terms to be entered when uploading specific type of files (similar to the deliberate misspelling of band names on MP3 filesharing networks). For a short time, members could also report one another. The service offers a flagging feature, intended as a means for reporting questionable content, including that which might constitute copyright infringement. However, the feature can be susceptible to abuse; for a time, some users were flagging other users' original content for copyright violations, purely out of spite. YouTube proceeded to remove copyright infringement from the list of offenses flaggable by members.
On October 5, 2006 the Japanese Society for Rights of Authors, Composers and Publishers (JASRAC) had their copyright complaints regarding Japanese media on YouTube finalized. Thousands of media from popular Japanese artists (such as Tokyo Jihen and various other music including Jpop) were removed.
When CBS and Universal Music Group signed agreements to provide content to YouTube on October 9, they also announced that they would use new technology that will help them find copyrighted material and remove it.
TV journalist Robert Tur filed the first lawsuit against the company in summer 2006, alleging copyright infringement for hosting a number of famous news clips without permission. The case has yet to be resolved.
On November 9th, 2006, Artie Lange said his lawyer was in talks with YouTube, after finding his entire DVD, It's the Whiskey Talking, available for free on their site. Artie said he will either demand money from them, or else he will sue.
Content owners are not just targeting YouTube for copyright infringements on the site, but they are also targeting third party websites that link to infringing content on YouTube and other video sharing sites. For example QuickSilverScreen vs. Fox Daily Episodes vs. Fox and Columbia vs. Slashfilm. The liability of linking remains a grey area with cases for and against. The law in the US currently leans towards website owners being liable for infringing links although they are often protected by the DMCA providing they take down infringing content when issued with a takedown notice. However, a recent court ruling in the US found Google not to be liable for linking to infringing content (Perfect 10 v. Google, Inc.).
