Germany fines YouTube for removing video of anti-lockdown protest • Hacker News Board

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

#431

Post by unishark » Thu, Jul 15, 2021, 7:03 AM UTC

AdrianB1 wrote: post #253

devoutsalsa wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Imagine doing business and getting revenue in every nation on the Earth. That sounds hard.

There are systems, such as international shipping and financial technology that simplify many of those difficulties for you, at least to the point of making revenue from a great many countries. Complying with the local laws (including paying taxes) is indeed where it gets hard.

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

#432

Post by lm28469 » Thu, Jul 15, 2021, 7:04 AM UTC

charrondev wrote: post #427

lm28469 wrote: post #419

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You're encouraging government coercion of action. And you're advocating for foreign private companies to have more rights than the democratically elected governments of the countries they operate in. Last time I checked laws still come from countries, not from Google. The world isn't America's private companies playground

> And you're advocating for foreign private companies to have more rights than the democratically elected governments of the countries they operate in. The biggest difference generally between a private enterprise (foreign or domestic) and a democratically elected government is that participation with the government and its rules are: - compulsory - enforced by physical violence If I disagree with googles rules I can…

Sadly Google isn't your mom and pop convenience store at the corner of the street. Arguing it is just a regular business is dishonest and you know it

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

#433

Post by CryptoPunk » Thu, Jul 15, 2021, 7:05 AM UTC

throwawayboise wrote: post #104

Phil_Latio wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Does YouTube's TOS really not contain statements giving them the ability to stop hosting any video, at any time, for any reason? The highest court in Germany (for civil and criminal proceedings) wrote this in one of their rulings: > Depending on the circumstances, especially if private companies - as in this case - move into a dominant position and take over the provision of the framework conditions of public commu…

This is as it should be IMO. When you position yourself to be a de-facto public square, you shouldn't get to selectively operate like a private club when it suits you.

If the people want a free-speech-respecting public square, they should petition their state to create one that is compelling enough to become the choice of the majority, not let private citizens do the hard work of creating an effective square, and then use force to commandeer it.

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

#434

Post by fsw » Thu, Jul 15, 2021, 7:13 AM UTC

charrondev wrote: post #427

lm28469 wrote: post #419

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You're encouraging government coercion of action. And you're advocating for foreign private companies to have more rights than the democratically elected governments of the countries they operate in. Last time I checked laws still come from countries, not from Google. The world isn't America's private companies playground

> And you're advocating for foreign private companies to have more rights than the democratically elected governments of the countries they operate in. The biggest difference generally between a private enterprise (foreign or domestic) and a democratically elected government is that participation with the government and its rules are: - compulsory - enforced by physical violence If I disagree with googles rules I can…

> If I disagree with googles rules I can avoid google.

That's exactly what Germany's highest court denied if they "move into a dominant position and take over the provision of the framework conditions of public communication themselves" because it is not easy to avoid Google/YouTube.

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

#435

Post by 4h53n » Thu, Jul 15, 2021, 7:22 AM UTC

CryptoPunk wrote: post #433

throwawayboise wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is as it should be IMO. When you position yourself to be a de-facto public square, you shouldn't get to selectively operate like a private club when it suits you.

If the people want a free-speech-respecting public square, they should petition their state to create one that is compelling enough to become the choice of the majority, not let private citizens do the hard work of creating an effective square, and then use force to commandeer it.

Why? We could let the free market come up with competing solutions and regulate where necessary.

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

#436

Post by heavyset_go » Thu, Jul 15, 2021, 7:41 AM UTC

heavyset_go wrote: post #418

thr0wawayaway wrote: post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anyone claiming that critical race theory is a "conspiracy" is either massively misinformed, or being actively deceptive in order to push that very ideology. The National Education Association, a union with about 2.3 million members, has not only affirmed the existence of it, but is actively pushing for its inclusion in schools[1][2]: "Share and publicize, through existing channels, information already available on c…

Well, this sure looks like a witch hunt[1] in which people were frothing with rage, becoming violent and getting arrested[2] at a school board metting because they didn't get their witch/CRT when they went looking for one to burn. According to that same mob, when they couldn't find the critical race theory at the school board meeting, everything they didn't like, along with diversity training, suddenly became critica…

It's too late to edit it now, but that last link should be a [4] and so should the reference number by the last quote.

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

#437

Post by RedComet » Thu, Jul 15, 2021, 8:24 AM UTC

boring_twenties wrote: post #5

I'm not sure I like the notion of a private entity being forced to host content they don't want to host. If it only applied to effective monopolies like YouTube, I would be more inclined to agree with it, but the article doesn't seem to know anything about that.

Yeah man, I bet the author has no idea that google has THE monopoly in this area.

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

#438

Post by CryptoPunk » Thu, Jul 15, 2021, 8:24 AM UTC

4h53n wrote: post #435

CryptoPunk wrote: post #433

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the people want a free-speech-respecting public square, they should petition their state to create one that is compelling enough to become the choice of the majority, not let private citizens do the hard work of creating an effective square, and then use force to commandeer it.

Why? We could let the free market come up with competing solutions and regulate where necessary.

1. Because it's a violation of other people's rights to control their own private property. It's predicated on using the threat of imprisonment against people acting peacefully, which infringes upon human rights.

2. Because it's lazy and lacking credibility: it's a claim to being privy to 'the correct path for society', without showing the ability to create something of value.

The state could still tap market forces to bring about public squares that abide with its guidelines, by providing subsidies to private parties developing such platforms, in exchange for the parties entering into an irrevocable covenant that requires them to follow the state's rules.

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

#439

Post by evilsetg » Thu, Jul 15, 2021, 8:28 AM UTC

travismark wrote: post #209

username90 wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If the German government wants to provide a free-speech "safe zone", they should provide it themselves. But that is what they are doing here, no? They just use Youtube as the way to provide it. Governments doesn't have to run businesses themselves, private actors are much better at running the day to day stuff usually. Similarly if you own a huge amount of land and build a city there and let lots of people move in,…

but the government isn't paying YouTube to host videos. eminent domain and related takings require compensation

YouTube is free to pack up shop and stop servicing Germany if they do not like it's Terms and Conditions.

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

#440

Post by n4r9 » Thu, Jul 15, 2021, 8:35 AM UTC

peakaboo wrote: post #420

lm28469 wrote: post #419

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You're encouraging government coercion of action. And you're advocating for foreign private companies to have more rights than the democratically elected governments of the countries they operate in. Last time I checked laws still come from countries, not from Google. The world isn't America's private companies playground

Swedish government asked Google to remove YouTube news channels that was critical of the Swedish state owned media, and Google did. I think we are way past the illusion of democracy and governments protecting their people at this point.

Do you have a source for this please?