Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thanks for sharing that. Did anything happen to the remainder of your Gsuite?
No, the rest was fine. My channel was all original music that I own the rights to. No clue why.
Thank you!
They're deleting my channel, but they don't know why? [video]
371–380 of 795 posts
Re: They're deleting my channel, but they don't know why? [video]
#372Earlier quoted context omitted.
Another option is to control the domain. That is what I recommend for any account that is used to make money in any way. In the event you have a dispute with your email host, you can simply change the domain MX records. You may lose a few hours or a couple days of email, but your name doesn't disappear out of thin air.
Just make sure you don’t forget to renew the domain.
And that your registrar is secure. GoDaddy had a lot of issues with social engineering a few years ago.
Re: They're deleting my channel, but they don't know why? [video]
#373This is like Rick Beato's channel he is constantly fighting false claims. Even some that are from actual record labels when Rick literally plays a few notes of a famous song, a cover not the actual band.
Re: They're deleting my channel, but they don't know why? [video]
#374Earlier quoted context omitted.
I see you've rediscovered the publisher vs. platform dichotomy! Those of us who believe in free speech understand that people will say things we don't like, and further understand that the sacrifice of ignoring content we dislike is worth it for the greater principle. I know this is difficult when people are saying things you believe to be untrue, but thus far nobody has come up with an alternative that doesn't resul…
I've never understood people's conflation of "I do not like your speech" with "censorship." A bookstore refusing to carry books by certain authors is in no way censorship, for instance (the books still exist, just not in that bookstore), yet when we bring things into the digital realm for some reason people seem to lose the distinction. Let me put it this way. Nothing is stopping hateful people from creating their ow…
> bookstore refusing to carry books by certain authors is in no way censorship
It’s fucking textbook definition of censorship.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/censorship
Are you conflating “government censorship” with censorship?
Re: They're deleting my channel, but they don't know why? [video]
#375Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Nothing is stopping hateful people from creating their own video hosting platform and hosting their drivel. Cloudflare and domain registrar bans, payment processor bans and deplatforming, etc. would beg to differ.
There is nothing unreasonable about choosing alternatives for any of those.
CloudFlare doesn't have many alternatives. There's VanwaNet, ddos-guard.net, and I think that's it.
Should you start your own DDoS protection service too?
Re: They're deleting my channel, but they don't know why? [video]
#376Imagine if you showed up to a self-storage facility one day and find a different lock on your unit. You go to the manager and ask what the hell is going on. > Oh, you ? Yeah, your unit was full of stolen goods, so we seized it and changed the lock. > There was nothing stolen in there! What about a bunch of banged up furniture and old cans of paint made you think it was stolen? (the manager stares blankly) > Well?! (c…
Sounds similar to how Paypal users routinely had their assets frozen. There was even a website about it, I think it was paypalsucks.com.
you say 'frozen" but I think you mean "stolen". When someone offers to forward money to me in exchange for a small fee, we sign a contract, then they keep all the money that's at best fraud but in reality theft.
Now all I need to do is hire a US legal firm to sue paypal and get my money. Even if it was $100,000 it still wouldn't be worth it. Paypal know this.
Re: They're deleting my channel, but they don't know why? [video]
#377Earlier quoted context omitted.
> all new manual claims It must not be a manual complaint. That's some nice PR-Legalese.
Video explicitly shows it's a manual complaint.
To quibble a bit, the video shows that YouTube's control panel tells users that a claim was "manual" and doesn't detail what "manual" means, or provide the DMCA notice (which is a written document, fwiw) that was filed, if one was.
I barely trust the information in the logging functions that I write, and those don't have legal consequences attached to providing extra detail.
Re: They're deleting my channel, but they don't know why? [video]
#378It sucks that Google doesn't offer better support, but are they really to blame here? Isn't the root of the issue IP and copyright laws and this very nebulous notion of "fair use" that seems extremely easy for IP owners to dispute and win?
I see people in this comment section posting alternatives to Youtube but I really wonder if, should they become equally as successful, they could end up behaving any different.
When you get thousands of videos uploaded at any given moment and probably a huge amount of DMCA takedown requests what choice do you reasonably have? If there's one thing Google doesn't want is to be sued by the copyright owners, so they always take the defensive stance of taking the content down until proven innocent, which seems cynically reasonable to me.
That guy makes song covers. He claims it's non-profit, he claims it's fair use. The IP owner disagrees, issues a takedown. At this point Google either takes the content down, or starts a lengthy and risky legal battle on behalf of third party content that they do not control. I can't really blame them for not bothering.
BTW, IANAL and all that but I'm not entirely convinced that his "non-profit fair-use" defense would even hold up in court. Surely he monetizes his videos on top of asking for donations and putting ads on his website. Given his number of subscribers he probably makes a significant amount of money from these videos.
To be clear, I think ethically what he does is perfectly fine, but as we all know IP laws have very little to do with ethics. Focusing on big bad google is a bit simplistic here IMO.
Re: They're deleting my channel, but they don't know why? [video]
#379Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Nothing is stopping hateful people from creating their own video hosting platform and hosting their drivel. Cloudflare and domain registrar bans, payment processor bans and deplatforming, etc. would beg to differ.
You can still do it, you don't need to use cloudflare, you don't need to use that registrar. You don't even need to use the Internet, paint it on a sign and walk around the street with it on a pole. You're not having your free speech impeded by any of this, because refusing to carry someone elses speech isn't censorship, it's just that when you say things that are repulsive to people they won't want to help promote i…
You do need to use CloudFlare, or your site will get DDoSed into oblivion.
Re: They're deleting my channel, but they don't know why? [video]
#380Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can still do it, you don't need to use cloudflare, you don't need to use that registrar. You don't even need to use the Internet, paint it on a sign and walk around the street with it on a pole. You're not having your free speech impeded by any of this, because refusing to carry someone elses speech isn't censorship, it's just that when you say things that are repulsive to people they won't want to help promote i…
> If you want free speech go to your door, walk outside, start taking. You got your free speech. Everything else is a bonus. This argument is reductio ad absurdum, except executed against an argument you support. De-platforming online is in opposition to free speech, and the fact you can walk out your front door with a sign does not mitigate the loss of equal power behind your speech that others enjoy by using Intern…
> the fact you can walk out your front door with a sign does not mitigate the loss of equal power behind your speech that others enjoy by using Internet services. You standing on the street with a sign is in no way equivalent in character or reach to writing what your sign says on Twitter
Maybe the answer is obvious to you, but it is not to me: why should these things be equivalent? Why should you be entitled to twitter's channel for your views that twitter does not want to host?
If Twitter is making the decision on its own -- that is, it's not coerced by the state, and if you are still capable of getting your information online by some other means, then Twitter is making its own free speech decision to curate its own website like you would your own site or your own store. Free and accessible doesn't and shouldn't mean that you get to hold the platform for ransom with your content. That is, Twitter shouldn't be chained to indefinitely dedicating hosting specifically for any one kind of unpopular content.
Your definition for the "open web" sounds to me like, honestly, very severe state control of private enterprise. You, a member of the open web, not being permitted to choose what content belongs on your own website just defeats the purpose of any kind of experiment of free expression online. A government telling you that you must always carry this or that particular view is totally antithetical to the First Amendment that establishes the Freedom of Speech.
Getting kicked out of the bowling club for sharing highly offensive statements has not prevented you from sharing those statements. Losing your job over them has not prevented you from sharing those statements. Being banned from twitter has not prevented you from sharing those statements. I really do mean to be absolute about this -- your freedom of speech would not have been impeded _at all_, no matter how many hosts or bans or jobs you go through.
If you're reduced to screaming your opinions from a street corner in order to have anyone hear them, and you're still being ignored by people, well you've still got 100% of your freedom of speech -- it's just that the speech isn't resonating and the government isn't some despotic, Orwellian regime that would force audiences to listen to those views.