Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Germany fines YouTube for removing video of anti-lockdown protest

mediaite.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 471 posts

Re: Germany fines YouTube for removing video of anti-lockdown protest

#141

Post by onli »

Navarr wrote: post #136
onli wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Should be about something else than ToS, the quote is talking about a contract. The news is not sufficient to understand what supposedly happened there. That the Youtuber had a contract with Youtube, is that common? Maybe the court judged the partner program agreements as one? That "future changes may apply without notice" is invalid in Germany, that's evident. Companies writing bullshit like that in AGBs (ToS) or co…

Yeah, it's pretty clear the fine is about not obeying the court. But I was asking why the court was forcing them to re-instate a video in the first place.

Right, that part makes no sense at all to me. Even if the ToS did not include a fitting clause for the misinformation removal I see no binding right for the user to have his video hosted. That's why I added the tangent about the political environment in Dresden.

Re: Germany fines YouTube for removing video of anti-lockdown protest

#144

Post by throwawayswede »

namlem wrote: post #114
throwawayswede wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not what I said. To reiterate, what I'm saying is: Shady ideas fester in the dark. Banning won't help society. Exposure and discussion does. But the new and very different point that you're making, which is "removing bad actors improves the quality of information on social networks", is also very disputable and shaky. - First link is "Reddit says that the rules Reddit made helped Reddit." is not exactly impart…

The "marketplace of ideas" is a fiction that has long since been debunked. The best ideas arent the ones that win out, it's the loudest ones and the ones that appeal to our most base emotions that win. Only a small percentage of people actually possess intellectual curiosity. Most just mindlessly follow social trends.

> The "marketplace of ideas" is a fiction that has long since been debunked

I don't think it's been "debunked" as you say. Provide evidence. A few examples is not evidence to make such a blanket statement.

> The best ideas arent the ones that win out, it's the loudest ones and the ones that appeal to our most base emotions that win.

Again, very much disagree with this. If you look short term that may be true, but long term historically speaking at least that has not been the truth.

Re: Germany fines YouTube for removing video of anti-lockdown protest

#145

Post by eli »

danenania wrote: post #121
nemothekid wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Their only winning move was to stay neutral and do nothing but comply with legal requests. No? This narrative is a bit ahistorical - and it's fueled by this idea that hyperliberal boogeyman started censoring everything. If you look at what happened in 2017, Google started "censoring" things because advertisers threatened to boycott . The platforms couldn't stay neutral because advertisers became more and more conce…

The advertisers are bluffing when they threaten these boycotts. They're not going to stop advertising on google, facebook, twitter, etc., which these days probably represents a majority of their advertising budget and even more of their ROI. They'll make threats because it costs them nothing, but all the platforms need to do is say "no" and that would be the end of it. Even better: immediately ban the accounts of com…

Yeah I don't think Facebook is going to ban Coca Cola

Re: Germany fines YouTube for removing video of anti-lockdown protest

#146

Post by pindab0ter »

eli wrote: post #140
handrous wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They (Twitter, Facebook, Youtube, even Reddit) act so very much like publishers that it seems to me the mistake was granting "platform" protections to sites that: claim broad rights over posted content; use complex logic to decide what to promote (that they promote anything is alarming, for a "platform"!) and what a visitor sees while also hosting and distributing that content they're highlighting or promoting (which…

This "platform vs publisher" thing is a myth based on a misunderstand of how Section 230 works. The law doesn't actually distinguish between the two.

It’s an international issue that not only U.S. law applies to. And even if it did, it’s still worth discussing.

Re: Germany fines YouTube for removing video of anti-lockdown protest

#147

Post by eli »

akira2501 wrote: post #131
eli wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are of course free to create a platform that only removes illegal content, just as Twitter or YouTube is free to to remove content they don't like. But I think you'd find two problems: determining what could be illegal is really hard (what's a "true threat" and what's a tasteless joke?), and also you'd end up with a community that looks a lot like 4chan or parler. Not a place I would choose to hang out.

> Not a place I would choose to hang out. While that may be true.. do you not believe that the exceptional openness of either of those two platforms has an impact on places outside of them? Do you think there's no intangible benefits to you by these places merely existing?

What places? Like a hypothetical anti-censorship platform, or are you thinking of something that already exists like 4chan (if that even counts)?

Re: Germany fines YouTube for removing video of anti-lockdown protest

#148

Post by devoutsalsa »

realityking wrote: post #118
devoutsalsa wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't it kind of implied that if you own a platform, you retain the discretion to remove stuff at any time, unless otherwise prohibited? The YouTube terms of service can be updated at any time, and will never include language promising to never take down content.

That argument would imply that the terms of service are worthless as the platform owner can do whatever they want. That’s not how contracts work, at least not in Germany.

Imagine being responsible for writing the individual ToS for ever nation on Earth. That sounds hard.

Re: Germany fines YouTube for removing video of anti-lockdown protest

#149

Post by the_optimist »

Does anyone have a link to the argument from Youtube/Google on why they chose to remove videos of this documentary information?

Was there some philosophy that they claimed to be representing? What was the basis?

Can this be interpreted in any way other than a vulgar attempt to misrepresent historic reality?

Re: Germany fines YouTube for removing video of anti-lockdown protest

#150

Post by silicon2401 »

hvac wrote: post #125
throwawayswede wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not what this is about. In both cases, the state is forcing an company to do something they don't want. The only difference is that you agree with the one but not the other.

Yes, because the difference is that they are essentially immutable personal traits. The parent was presenting this scenario as an equivalent one and I don't think they are.

How is religion any more or less immutable from political beliefs? In my view both are fully equivalent.
Post reply on HN