YouTube is a huge repository of videos, it's impossible to apply all the TOS rules all the time and instantly. They often flag videos for copyright infringement "years" after being submitted, and other stuff like judging if a video might violate other parts of the TOS might require human judgment which would take even longer.
Also why does YouTube even have to "stand" with anyone one here?! they are running a website, that doesn't mean everything they do must have a political agenda. Also why would they have to be collaborating with any government? as with the incident I linked to in my previous comment shows they don't' take orders from governments and won't remove legal materials. Have it even crossed your mind that someone who wanted these videos gone may have abused YouTube's flagging system? it won't be the first time.
If YouTube didn't have you agree to TOS before uploading a video, you may have a point here. In it's current state though, YouTube has carte-blanche permission to remove anything they want, not just disagreeable content. The concept of free speech does not give you the ability to renegotiate service agreements, unfortunately.
i'm not ready to jump to conclusions that this is government-related as implied in the article. i'd like to know more, but youtube's takedown policy is not a court of law and no rulings are ever published.
Assuming the facts reported here are true, it seems that YouTube is putting its safe harbor in jeopardy by not complying with the counter-takedown:
> Following receipt of a compliant counter-notice, the online service provider must restore access to the material after no less than ten and no more than fourteen business days, unless the original notice sender informs the service provider that it has filed a court action against the user.
YouTube didn't say he didn't need to. Show me in the terms of service where it says that as long as they follow specific guidelines that they don't reserve the right to flag or remove content.
Out of curiosity, has there ever been a case where a government has demanded that Youtube remove a video and it has not done so? I may be wrong, but I actually believe that they are fully responsible for the content that they are carrying. They do actually go to considerable lengths to remove content that they think is in violation of their terms of service as promptly as they can. I don't believe they are required by any law to review every submission for possible problems; only to remove content that they are aware is not compliant. I believe they do that. If they don't, I'm sure some enterprising lawyer could fashion a lucrative class action suit. It's not like they aren't sitting on a mountain of cash.
Just to be clear, they are not a common carrier and I have never seen any evidence that they claim to be one. I don't think they have to both ways. I understand (and have sympathy with the idea) that it would be nice if they were, but I really don't think they are.
First of all I'm sorry it takes so long. I actually used this for extracting the mp3 https://github.com/flagbug/YoutubeExtractor
As for the legal issue, I'll take it down if they ask me to. I've seen other YouTube video extracting things which makes me think YouTube doesn't mind so much
the problem is when the safe-harbour entity doesn't actually try to protect their content creators, but blindly accepts any takedown. Youtube is notoriously obedient - to the point where it can threaten content creator's livelihood (see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfgoDDh4kE0 for a famous one).
Youtube obeys the DMCA rules, but also has a vastly streamlined process that's being somewhat openly abused that lacks anyway to effectively fight back.
Are you suggesting YouTube turns a blind eye towards copyright infringement? My experience has been that they aggressively patrol the site for infringing content to the point where they remove many videos that are clearly not infringing.
Oh sure, YouTube forbids that. Once there's enough traffic to care, it'll get cut off. But YouTube is somewhat unlikely to try to sue one's socks off for breaking the ToS. Copyright owners though...
it's your claim -- that youtube won't take down videos within their TOS in order to blackmail rights owners -- so don't roll in here, make the claim, then demand people provide evidence to the contrary
oh, and given their well documented behavior with regards to handing large rights holders the ability to take down videos because of music without issuing DMCAs and with no review from youtube, not hard to believe [1] [2]. (See how I made a claim and I substantiated it?)
Also why does YouTube even have to "stand" with anyone one here?! they are running a website, that doesn't mean everything they do must have a political agenda. Also why would they have to be collaborating with any government? as with the incident I linked to in my previous comment shows they don't' take orders from governments and won't remove legal materials. Have it even crossed your mind that someone who wanted these videos gone may have abused YouTube's flagging system? it won't be the first time.
All that speaks to your shoddy reporting.
reply