Censorship by copyright

[3][18][9] A 2005 survey of documentary makers in Canada found that 85% of them said copyright is more harmful than beneficial for their field and that it threatens their ability to produce content.

Such solutions, however, are overprotective due to difficulties related to defining legal uses such as quotations or fair use, as well as the lack of authoritative information about who is a legitimate rights holder for which copyrighted work.

[11] They are also designed from the perspective of assumption of guilt, as any claim made by copyright holders is automatically accepted, results in the takedown of allegedly offending material, and requires the accused to prove their innocence.

[10] Consequentially, automated copyright detection systems built for and used by online video hosting services like Google's Content ID have been used by governments, companies and individuals to block critical reporting.

[6][23][24][25] In some cases, individuals have been known to play copyrighted music to disrupt streaming, recording or other activities with the intent of getting other users' videos taken down by automated systems.

[7] Earliest examples of the use of copyright law to enforce censorship relate to the British government invoking the monopoly of the Worshipful Company of Stationers and Newspaper Makers to suppress texts it deemed problematic, such as anti-Cromwellian and anti-Caroline satirical writings in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.

Hannibal Travis wrote that "copyright largely determines the accessibility and cost of information in a democratic society, and that it grants rights holders substantial powers of censorship through the threat of prosecution for infringement".

[12] Modern copyright laws and associated technologies developed to enforce it have been described as "wielded by powerful government and business officials as a weapon to censor independent news media and deter investigative reporting".