Creative Commons videos are having stupid glitches. How is it I can use a creative commons video and still get a penalty even though YouTube allows it. YouTube is ran by R2D2.
LOL.......These people are on drugs. Bubbaeffect has over 300 sock accounts, and threatened to have military personnel come to my home to kill me.
It doesn't require an "algorithm" or a "review" to know that bubbaeffect is TRASH & needs his YouTube account deleted, but yet *NOTHING* has been done!
.......And probably never will be, unless I get a court order.
also - see the youtube's own (c) guide to see just how popular their bullshit iron fist looks in sugar-coated extremely annoying cartoon form. watch?v=InzDjH1-9Ns
crazedigitalmovies, and other low scum level "companies" and their other channels are getting deleted because they are frauds, and make false copyright claims. The amount they will be sued is something they will never afford in their lifetime... Clink! Obviously flag any connected videos as "scam/fraud", but collect all the urls that are connected and report them to sites like mywot, siteadvisor, spamcop, abusenet etc. False copyright claims are responsible for hurting so many.
Hello everyone,I need help.Recently I got few of my videos suspended,because in each of these videos I included 1~2 celebrity pictures,the videos were complained by some websites/companies which probably have the first hand of these images,although I was downloaded from some other forums instead of these websites few years ago,and rest of the video contents were completely made by myself, the videos had been around safely for 2+ years,can I restore my videos?
I believe that it is not right that some video are flagged and penalized...and yet there are worse videos still up and running on youtube.
As far as copyright is concerned. Some video are blocked due to copyright, yet other videos with same songs have not been blocked. There is still much work ahead to make this world function better. Thankyou
Victoria is a big fat liar! If videos didn't come down unless a human watched it first is soooo wrong. If that were true, they would never put the videos back up...because it was already seen by a human and taken down, right?
Too bad, I've seen too many false flagging campaigns in the Atheist community, which results in the swift suspensions of the affected accounts. There are no human reviews.
LiberalViewer: could you please make it so we can see the rating of a video in the little thumbnail link before we click it? As in like could they show the % of ratings that were thumbs-up or -down? I would greatly appreciate it.
That's what made the old rating system viable (in my eyes) was that you could see what people thought of the video before you click it (as in, see how many stars it had been rated, on average).
@marinemom744 Uh no so I can know if when I'm looking up some video, if it's actually just a little kid yelling at his camera for 4 minutes instead of the actual video, and he just made the thumbnail a relevant picture.
hey you should tell them to make a new category under the browse section....i've noticed more and more "News" videos are about celebrities, and i'd hate to see youtube's news section turn into something similar like our mainstream media
Great Video Topic…What if someone came up with a way to determine the monetary value of user created content and provided a system to also convert your ideas to your marketable intellectual property? That would begin to answer the questions asked by this video wouldn’t it?... click @Bradlauber to discover the World’s First Free Market of Ideas... and discover the future of individual online content ownership
YT is a haven for Tween rubbish. That's where they have lost all credibility.
People at YT need to review and create standards that stop those with large subscriber bases from false advertising their content with misleading vid titles and thumbnails.
LiberalViewer, when you talk to the people at Inside Track Room, I wonder how can YouTube improve dealing with anonymous users who intimidate others online? Should YouTube require a one time rule for problem users who create [sock accounts] and/or multiple accounts in order to troll other users! And what can YouTube do to make people liable for slander and privacy violations?
Great Video Topic…What if someone came up with a way to determine the monetary value of user created content and provided a system to also convert your ideas to your marketable intellectual property? That would begin to answer the questions asked by this video wouldn’t it?... click @Bradlauber to discover the World’s First Free Market of Ideas... and discover the future of individual online content ownership
I believe you should bring up DMCA abuse. Stress how those policies will help make Youtube a better community, and how this will keep Youtube a great service.
perhaps you should suggest that YouTube should modify it's policy and mandate human review of all DMCA flags and place the burden of proof on the individual making the DMCA claim. Is that legally enforceable?
I hope you did cover false flaggesr liberalviewer. Because that is the single biggest problem youtube is facing right now. There are more and more false flaggers popping up every day and just in the last week three channels that I had enjoyed watching were taken down.
Sounds like a great argument, and a very important one. One thing to consider - will youtube have to spend more money in order to allow for more human supervision of their copyright violation claims? Just a thought. They may claim that such a practice will drive them to financial ruin.
Yes, the points you mentioned should be brought up during the panel discussion. I would also suggest, that the of flagging videos should be made more difficult - not via a simple button underneath each video.
I post news clips & stories in my own YouTube collection (getting RW nonsense "on the record"). I consider "news" a valid exception to the "30 second rule" for "Fair Use". Yet YouTube has flagged a number of my videos as containing "copyrighted material". My experience has been that videos are identified by their audio track and/or description, not video content, rendering their automated validation software a total joke (Comments are also parsed for flagged words.)
without getting in to an argument for which is more American, in a conversation between running YouTube as media outlet in which submitters have to prove their content first versus a submission process without limits after which legitimate complaints result in removals, the latter grows much faster, has more content, and way more viewers. That's what Youtube is supposed to be, but shrinking a little now, since they aren't new kids anymore, may be financially worthwhile.
and in the review process, I agree with your assessment that the burden should lie on the complainee (media companies), and until the decision is made, Youtube should err on the side of freedom. While they may feel that pandering to the media companies helps the value of their content, Youtube succeeds because of the independence of their product. They should pay careful attention to the balance or they might become one of the media company sites that Youtube currently obliterates in views.
your argument for fair use, made previously, is that you show clips with commentary as opposed to the complete video and have won previous copyright battles with it. The matching software is clever and could obviously be used to calculate the ratio of the matched content to original content. From this, ranges could be set for obvious infringement, fair use, and blatant attacks on free speech, in which the second range is subjected to human review.
Of course any DMCA claim should be reviewed by a human, people constantly use sections of video to make political, social, or humorous commentary on the subject matter within that portion of the video. It's not for the purpose of recreating the video, it's new original content that required the context of at least part of the original video. That is FAIR USE!
Google is a geek child that's discovered a way to run things. There was bound to be a learning curve. Too harsh? Just check out Larry Page's take on Steve Jobs. Here he alleges he's rewriting history: h ttp :// tech.fortune.cnn.com/2010/07/09/larry-page-jobs-is-rewriting-history/
Talk to them about NAMEWASTERS. I think if an account hasn't been logged in for over 2 years, YouTube should email the user (with their given email used to make the account), that in two weeks time or so that YouTube will remove their account and make it open to the public again, or even raffle it off, unless they log into that account. That way the user gets a fair warning that his/her account is being removed.
But I also have a theory that YouTube actually owns most of the "namewasters".
I agree. before a machine takes a video down, a human should review to verify whether or not it qualifies as fair use is definitely a change that should be made. other than that, i don't have much to add. good luck in the panel/committee! :D
...not considered "family safe". Clarification is needed, as I can only think that this is because I have criticised Creationism. If this is a standard policy, maybe it should also be standard policy that promoting of religion and the derision of Atheism should also be considered not to be family-safe?
I think that's more than enough from my point of view.
...not all my own. Obviously when replying to videos, most people will quote from an original video source in order to provide context for their discussion, something that is covered under fair use. This is an area that needs to be addressed.
An additional issue that needs to be addressed was raised to me when my latest video was rejected for revenue sharing, and I quote: "Advertisers on YouTube are currently trying to advertise next to family-safe content". This needs clarification...
I also agree that these are important areas to cover. Also it might be a good idea to question the practices used against those who apply for partnership and revenue sharing. I have, on numerous occasions, applied for partnership and revenue-sharing on YouTube. The main reason for applying for partnership is so that I can upload longer videos, but being able to monetise my content is also useful as a secondary effect. I have been denied on the basis that the content of some of my videos is...
Keeping personal information in DMCA counternotices protected untill getting real evidence, is definately a valid point and should be high up in the list.
But more so should be the harvest of real evidence before starting to think about honoring a DMCA request.
All points made here defiantly need to be brought up at Vidcon if you have a serious opportunity to discuss the issues with people who can make changes.
Those are very important topics to talk about it. Also should have them fix the layout as well as the rating system. I know someone who made a parody of the Spider Man 2 movie, and was taken down numerous times for no logical reason. Also there were claims of false copyright claims. Glad you will be bringing this up. The freedom of speech should not be interfered with.
"You know what word I really hate? The N-word, and I don't mean 'nigger' I mean literary 'the n-word' because that's just white people getting away with saying nigger, that's all it is. When you say 'the n-word' I go 'oh she means nigger' then you're making me say it in my head, why don't you fuckin' say it instead and take responcibility!" -Louis CK
You're branching out from the usual "Fox News" Bias videos. I like it, I hope you continue to branch out but not forget about continuing to expose those douchebags. Keep up the good work.
Could YouTube avoid DCMA abuse by only taking down videos upon a court order after the merits of the complained video have been determined valid enough to proceed to court?
@kingofdeedeedee111 I don't think the star system was that good... people weren't giving videos the number of stars they thought it deserved anyway. They were giving stars based on what amount of stars they -thought- it should be showed to have.
So if I saw a video I thought deserved 3 stars but only had 1 star, I would give it 5 stars to get it closer to the 3 stars that was my goal. 1 and 5 stars (dislike / like) were by far the most used buttons.
There is a court desicion that states that you are permitted to copy portions of copyright material for commentary purposes. Sometimes Youtube bans any portion of a video....the olympics is a good example. Not even one second was allowed during the olympics. Even for commentary. Somebody at Youtube didn't understand the law and fucked up. Maybe they are just happy they got hired by Youtube and spent more time being a poser than doing the research i have already done.
BTW it's a total joke for youtube to talk about "hate speech" and human flagging- the only videos they EVER take down and the only people whose channels they suspend are because of copyright infringement- which is also arbitrarily applied.
Hi Allen, I am trying to make a timely video response but something that is related and could be clarified is the procedure for determining how videos get into or get excluded from "Popular" and "Top News." Specifically related to this is a concern that although videos that get flagged may not be removed from the site, are they being removed from the categories "Popular" and "Top News?" I think this needs to be asked. & disclosure if a video has been flagged to the owner. # of x & reason + who
I think YouTube should hire more human censors and not just rely on machines. It's like the lady said, "we cannot develop an algorithm to investigate video content and copright infringement." It takes a human to do that. Being that it is now owned by Google, YouTube should be able to hire an army of human monitors to judge whether or not flagged videos should be taken down.
Of course that's what should be discussed, history has shown it's the biggest problem on here. I mean who doesn't remember the whole VenomFangX debacle?
I think you have a great idea of what to discuss. if you have a chance though, and this isn't exactly a serious issue, could you bring up the false flagging of comments as spam? or at least a way for a viewer to be alerted if they are flagged as spam so they can alert youtube to it.
DMCA abuse is the single most pressing issue that users face with YouTube's current policies. If you have to focus on any single topic, IMVHO this should be it. Preferably of course, you can raise the review issue as well.
You should discuss DMCA Abuse, False Flagging, False Copyright take downs like Fan Made Music Videos and Parodies. Although I have seen less takedowns from WMG lately but their is a crap load from Toei Animation lately and are removing Abridged(Parody) works without Mercy constantly. Hell Toei removes the Abridged work even when theirs a fucking disclaimer saying Support the Official release but Toei does it anyway.
I really look forward to this panel and I really, really hope it will be streamed cause while seeing big tubers talk about their success is one thing, these "conference style" panels and discussions are what separates Vidcon from other gatherings.
She is lieing through her teeth. There is a threshold for flags that takes down a vid, implemented as a form of viral video damage control, I.E. to prevent the rape and murder and beating vids that get posted here. I've abused the system before myself, and anyone else who has could tell her just how much of a lieing scum bag shit she is. Someone needs to call that bitch out.
can you tell them to stop changing the way youtube looks each time they do it get worse, and thumb up and thumb down thing bring back the stars so i know what vid are good and which are bad.
seems to me many false flags would stop if....(in adition to your good three)the user name was posted as the flagger And the flagging users real name was given to the flaggie befor the the flaggie had to give real name and adress. also the vid could stay up until the youtube human has a look...innocent til proven guilty
The DMCA issue is by far the most important. Your three suggestions are great and I think your second suggestion is critical. There have been many stories of users receiving threats of violence by users who have had their personal information after they have had to give it out to fight a false DMCA claim. This hurts free speech most of all.
To think that we can get youtube to do ANYTHING that they don't want to do is a joke. We need them, more than they need us. There will ALWAYS be someone willing to put up with their bullshit in order to have their video be online.The only effective action against this crap, is to find another site that doesn't do it,
but if that existed, we'd be there instead of here, and we wouldn't be having this conversation.I wish you all the best of luck, but big money rules, and youtubers suffer for it.
1. There is a sizable community of people who recut films either into false trailers, mash-ups and new scenes. These people, one of my channels amongst them, do use copyrighted clips, but the context and mixing are a very creative effort usually taking hours of planning and execution and are not a direct copy/upload of the movie.
2. I've had videos taken down for music far in the background, yet more popular users are allowed despite not asking permission. Could popularity be a factor?
just try and remember that "CORPORATIONS ARE NOT PEOPLE", especially if you're going to be "representing" the rest of us, and despite what ever screwed up personal opinion you hold on the subject. .... thx....
"It's so difficult for US fo figure out context ..." - exactly. She is right on that count. Flagging campaigns work NOT because an automated process is doing the job, but because reviewers often don't take the time to really understand the context. A reviewer is only a human being and if they don't like the person in the video they might be quickly inclined to agree that content is inappropriate, especially if they're tired, fed up, or simply hold opinions opposed to the video maker's. [more]
@rozeboosje I also am not convinced that reviewers understand the "privacy" concept very well. How can a video using a clip showing another user's face from THEIR video possibly be a privacy issue, when THEY clearly didn't have a privacy concern when THEY posted the video in the first place. Unless the video maker adds MORE personal information, a privacy flag should be rejected.
The other problem with flagging is that the appeals process seems not to work very well. [more]
@rozeboosje Again, this is understandable: someone looking into an appeal made against a reviewer will be inclined to side with their colleague.
It is therefore important that a reviewer records good notes of WHAT, EXACTLY made them decide that the video warranted removal, that the *real* reasons for removing a video are communicated to the user, and that there can be an open exchange with a human being, rather than stonewalling, when someone feels hard done by.
You lack one point about the false DMCA abuse, namely that the way DMCA works right now is counterintuitive and backwards in comparison to normal legal procedure, ie. the burden of proof has to be on the plaintiff. Youtubes DMCA procedure the plaintiff do not have to specifically prove they have copyright to the material they file a DMCA over and the burden of proof is not theirs. Thats up side down legally. Burden of proof must rest with plaintiff
Your agenda seems good, but I think the most important thing to improve the Youtube community is to add a REPUTATION rating to all registered Youtube users. This is IMHO the root cause to many ills.
Currently abusive users are immune from recourse because their actions are not remembered, and the community can't keep them in check. Likewise if one contributes to the community in positive ways - this too is lost.
Back on topic: if you participate in false flag campaigns - this is forgotten.
I hate it when i want to watch a video just to see "Hey guess what Sony/Viacom etc. doesn't want this up on youtube because they won't be getting money"
If what she says is true, then youtube has incompetent , badly trained employes, and botch the work they do, causing youtube to be responsible for the video take down.
YouTube was cool but now it's like big-brother. They flag and delete videos over the most BULL-SHIT stuff. They should not censor, period. I understand copyrights but unless the people are making money what's the big deal? 3:16 <------This is bullshit...Why take off any video of any news? YouTube went corporate.
To answer your last question, I have videos on my channel that have been attacked for "copyright issues". I am not happy with the whole "Audio Swap" option. Twice, I was forced to change the music in a video. One was a 30 second video that only had an intro of a song. The other had two songs, which were both "in violation". The funny thing is, I have seen both songs uploaded in whole among other channels and they didn't have to swap audio like I did. Thanks for the video :) Pretty informational
@LiberalViewer It's not clear to me what YouTube aims to prevent with their automated system: the use of unlicensed work or copyright infringement. If it is the former, their system seems to work fine, since fair use allows one to use unlicensed work without incurring in copyright infringement. if it is the latter, a human might not be enough for a definition of the legality of any given video.
Well no shit. Youtube is corporate and has no interest in privacy. Welcome to Web 2.0, where they tell you it's peer to peer and you have free speech, but it's really corporate media, and censorship is commonplace. How Orwellian.
The only real solution is for everyone to have their own domain.
I think that any AMV's or re-uploads of music or music videos by non-youtube partners should be counted as safe, as they are not making any money off of the product or song, just advertizing it.
YouTube should have more of a human overview to flagging, and the personal information should be withheld until there is a definitive case of copyright violation.
good to see she can lie with such a straight face. videos that DEFINATELY do not breach the TOS from loads of my subscriptions have been taken down. if she is in fact not lying the reviewers are retarded
I am happy with whatever topic you decide to talk about, all I ask is that after your opening statements, or question to her, you add "Oh, and we would like more porn." as you sit down and straighten your tie, and stare at her while waiting for the answer, i mean really stare at her.... THROUGH her. yeah.
About you ask if they can have way to have the real id of the person that files the dmca claim! I mean in real life you can't file shit without proper id,why not you tube? It really pisses me off that a user named "dick upyorass" can file a dmca claim against any video wtf? All they have to do is have the user snap a pic of his id next to his face and send it via email to you tube! Other website use this system when you lose your password to get in
Can human reviewers really accomplish the task of reviewing copyright issues? I think you're videos are a clear example of using copyrighted works in commentary and protected by free and political speech.
What about creative speech? synchronizations and mashups are very popular on YouTube and the first to be struck down from the site. Should YouTube defend it's users and viewers as new creators of creative works, despite being derivative works, against the 3 major conglomerated Goliaths?
I was subject to false DMCA claim because someone didn't agree with my video. They claimed: "hah, I am right, and you are wrong because youtube agrees with me." Now that I understand this person was well aware of the flaws in this system.
I also had a video blocked world wide instantly after upload, the video was obviously proceesed through a bot that couldn't recognize that my video was a parody under fair use. YouTube is not pulling their weight like they said they are. Good luck sir.
People have been false flagged for their own works and those that have a different opinion.
W. Kamau Bell had some of his stand-up taken down even though it was his own work.
TPrinces had her Twilight rant removed because someone did a false DMCA
VenomFangX used the DMCA to get people to go after a youtuber, posting his private info.
My question: If a person reviews such things before letting them go through, are they not doing their job properly or just sending everything through?
Yes definitely talk about DMCAs in full detail. Also, can you try talking about music on youtube? I'm not sure if we can really do anything about WMG muting videos, but see if you can bring that up somehow. Just copyright stuff related to using background music in videos and also music covers/parodies.
Recently a user named "The Archfiend" was DMCA'd 3 times (within one week) and had no copyrighted content in his videos, as he is a vlogger, and as someone who had just started watching him I was sort of offended.
If possible, can you ask how vloggers are check for copy right abuse? If they use a quote from a user (no video from user) can they be DMCA'd for that?
I think you should talk about well known Youtubers such as adiblasi, Bl00dblitz, thecreativeone, and leolaporte. Just a thought because they have great stuff on their channels. Leo Laporte actually was able to completely delete his Facebook profile live on TWiT. I know it has nothing to do with YouTube, but it has to do with privacy.
Privacy - something you should most certainly discuss at VidCon. Facebook doesn't seem to care anymore so now it is up to YouTube to bring back some sanity.
I believe that when a video is flagged, it should not count as an account strike, that or when a video claim is successfully disputed the strike goes away. The reason I believe this is that on my old channel, I had disputed several copyright claims as fair use, but the account marks stayed up there and when one of my videos got flagged, my account was immediately taken down without warning.
@TehRealzTsunami He sounds exactly like the guy that did the Googlezon video. Have you ever seen it? I am sure it's on YouTube. This could be the same guy, I dunno, I haven't checked into it yet, but they sound identical.
@TehRealzTsunami Look for "2015 googlezon" in YouTube. There are a few diff versions, but this is the original that circulated the net before YouTube was even around. Check it out. Remember, the 2015 version is what you want, not the 2014 one. That I believe is done by a diff guy.
@N0SACREDC0WS Many websites with comments sections at the very least give their users a few options on how they want the comments displayed. Oldest first, newest first, highest rated, lowest rated, etc.
The youtuber Jory Caron (the channel that hosts "Is it a good idea to microwave this") has had several issues with his monatized videos being falsely flagged.
How about youtube actually DOING something about people that do these flagging campaigns? Or how about locking out someone's ability to give a video thousands of flags and/or votes.
Or how about youtube does something about the people that flag the video as inappropriate, which makes the video, forever more, require over 18 login.
I think there should be some sort of way youtube can go back and look at who has flagged who, and take legal action against them. Just freaking do SOMETHING.
1) Talk with dprjones (YT user and lawyer who works pro bono for people who are censored on YT) about filing false DMCA's.
2) You might want to bring up Thunderfoot's "YOUTUBE vs the USER" video where Youtube ACTUALLY censored that video by removing it because it was critical of them (and suggested one of the few ways you could get their attention).
Creative Commons videos are having stupid glitches. How is it I can use a creative commons video and still get a penalty even though YouTube allows it. YouTube is ran by R2D2.
MrMaDelirious 3 months ago
killing the children is Allowed in Atheism .. because atheism didn't contain any basics or ethics or laws
that's why all the atheist leaders were criminals and mass murderers
Fahd4Cool 4 months ago
LOL.......These people are on drugs. Bubbaeffect has over 300 sock accounts, and threatened to have military personnel come to my home to kill me.
It doesn't require an "algorithm" or a "review" to know that bubbaeffect is TRASH & needs his YouTube account deleted, but yet *NOTHING* has been done!
.......And probably never will be, unless I get a court order.
VonHelton 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
also - see the youtube's own (c) guide to see just how popular their bullshit iron fist looks in sugar-coated extremely annoying cartoon form. watch?v=InzDjH1-9Ns
macrograms 5 months ago
Comment removed
macrograms 5 months ago
re: "algorithm for context" - it is the most simple thing ever. the algorithm is"
mind your own business. offensive flag button. scalable ratio of view:flag = human review now. done.
macrograms 5 months ago
crazedigitalmovies, and other low scum level "companies" and their other channels are getting deleted because they are frauds, and make false copyright claims. The amount they will be sued is something they will never afford in their lifetime... Clink! Obviously flag any connected videos as "scam/fraud", but collect all the urls that are connected and report them to sites like mywot, siteadvisor, spamcop, abusenet etc. False copyright claims are responsible for hurting so many.
LickMyBabyBack 7 months ago
Hello everyone,I need help.Recently I got few of my videos suspended,because in each of these videos I included 1~2 celebrity pictures,the videos were complained by some websites/companies which probably have the first hand of these images,although I was downloaded from some other forums instead of these websites few years ago,and rest of the video contents were completely made by myself, the videos had been around safely for 2+ years,can I restore my videos?
Fortituder 9 months ago
How 'bout fixing or removing the DMCA law before more innocent users gets their accounts terminated?
AnimeJason2011 11 months ago
son del partido pirata de WIKILEAKS, SHANGAY LILLY EL JEFE.
miisabello69 1 year ago
wait...I wannna upload a full cartoon episodeto youtube...can youtube find out about it and sue me becauseof copyright or something???????
stingerhead666 1 year ago
Her comments are worrisome because it shows that EWTUBE are indeed very biased.
bannedbyMusloons 1 year ago
looks like 1181 people are retarded
bsisthebest1 1 year ago
I believe that it is not right that some video are flagged and penalized...and yet there are worse videos still up and running on youtube.
As far as copyright is concerned. Some video are blocked due to copyright, yet other videos with same songs have not been blocked. There is still much work ahead to make this world function better. Thankyou
unmarediemozioni 1 year ago
some guy made a page up calling himself me and its been up for months and is still
up,also i commented on a threes company video with my camera pointed at my tv with my paid cable hows that copyright?MOMSBLOG FLAGGED ME
rockondon 1 year ago
Victoria is a big fat liar! If videos didn't come down unless a human watched it first is soooo wrong. If that were true, they would never put the videos back up...because it was already seen by a human and taken down, right?
samala5793 1 year ago
6 people like DMCA notices
TubeCentary 1 year ago
Great idea, especially about the DMCA!
Montagraph 1 year ago
3:04
Its Alex Jones in the two inn videos the top right corner
GovernmentSham912 1 year ago
Yes this is absolutely essential to bring about for discussion. Good luck and congratulations!
catgivens 1 year ago
Too bad, I've seen too many false flagging campaigns in the Atheist community, which results in the swift suspensions of the affected accounts. There are no human reviews.
RtFusion 1 year ago
Whoa Whoa Whoa, The N word, why the fuck would eddie murphy use that word, he's a dirty negro, jeeze?
mit871chell 1 year ago
LiberalViewer: could you please make it so we can see the rating of a video in the little thumbnail link before we click it? As in like could they show the % of ratings that were thumbs-up or -down? I would greatly appreciate it.
That's what made the old rating system viable (in my eyes) was that you could see what people thought of the video before you click it (as in, see how many stars it had been rated, on average).
Good luck!
crablord 1 year ago
@crablord Why, so you can vote/go with the flow crab? Can't vote up or down on your own? Afraid you might not fit in like all the other sheep???
marinemom744 1 year ago
@marinemom744 Uh no so I can know if when I'm looking up some video, if it's actually just a little kid yelling at his camera for 4 minutes instead of the actual video, and he just made the thumbnail a relevant picture.
crablord 1 year ago
She has a load of SHIT in her mouth people CAN flag to make it above 18 like the microwave videos.
Dasconscripts 1 year ago
hey you should tell them to make a new category under the browse section....i've noticed more and more "News" videos are about celebrities, and i'd hate to see youtube's news section turn into something similar like our mainstream media
Natrix918273 1 year ago
LESS ADVERTISEMENT!
DSD1v57BG32 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Great Video Topic…What if someone came up with a way to determine the monetary value of user created content and provided a system to also convert your ideas to your marketable intellectual property? That would begin to answer the questions asked by this video wouldn’t it?... click @Bradlauber to discover the World’s First Free Market of Ideas... and discover the future of individual online content ownership
BradLauber 1 year ago
YT is a haven for Tween rubbish. That's where they have lost all credibility.
People at YT need to review and create standards that stop those with large subscriber bases from false advertising their content with misleading vid titles and thumbnails.
Scribblar 1 year ago
LiberalViewer, when you talk to the people at Inside Track Room, I wonder how can YouTube improve dealing with anonymous users who intimidate others online? Should YouTube require a one time rule for problem users who create [sock accounts] and/or multiple accounts in order to troll other users! And what can YouTube do to make people liable for slander and privacy violations?
LILVOKA 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Great Video Topic…What if someone came up with a way to determine the monetary value of user created content and provided a system to also convert your ideas to your marketable intellectual property? That would begin to answer the questions asked by this video wouldn’t it?... click @Bradlauber to discover the World’s First Free Market of Ideas... and discover the future of individual online content ownership
BradLauber 1 year ago
Comment removed
BradLauber 1 year ago
I believe you should bring up DMCA abuse. Stress how those policies will help make Youtube a better community, and how this will keep Youtube a great service.
dirtydeedsdone 1 year ago
Comment removed
dirtydeedsdone 1 year ago
perhaps you should suggest that YouTube should modify it's policy and mandate human review of all DMCA flags and place the burden of proof on the individual making the DMCA claim. Is that legally enforceable?
negroobserver 1 year ago
Thanks for all you do liberalviewer. I hope you are listened to.
thekswervedirt 1 year ago
I hope you did cover false flaggesr liberalviewer. Because that is the single biggest problem youtube is facing right now. There are more and more false flaggers popping up every day and just in the last week three channels that I had enjoyed watching were taken down.
TheFPSCenter 1 year ago
I find that it's an important issue to cover.
I can't quite think of anything that's all too important to cover... Other than trolling. But that's up to you whether you use that or not. *shrug*
Iwillluvemoboyzfrvr 1 year ago
Sounds like a great argument, and a very important one. One thing to consider - will youtube have to spend more money in order to allow for more human supervision of their copyright violation claims? Just a thought. They may claim that such a practice will drive them to financial ruin.
sutinma 1 year ago
Yes, and you pretty much covered the bases.
chris20855 1 year ago
Yes DMCA Abuse is areal issue, I have personal expreinece with it, A LOT.
Please bring up your points.
DMCA abuse has been used a lot by e.g. the scientology cult or the creationist movement to take down videos. these practices have to stop
liekmudkip 1 year ago
@liekmudkip
I'm sorry to bug you, but what does "creationist" mean?
forrenz 1 year ago
Comment removed
DrCarstairs 1 year ago
I agree with all of your ideas, particularly with the DMCA abuse.
DrCarstairs 1 year ago
5star
jannikmt 1 year ago
@PicklePumpers wow that was a little creepy
leonwoodford 1 year ago
one word, tittes...
twobitviewer 1 year ago
YES YES YES. DMCA abuse is a huge issue, especially for the atheist community. I think you are focusing on the right issues here.
DerrickBlank 1 year ago 26
@DerrickBlank So DNCA mainly targets atheists? lol So how does DMCA know what everyone's religious beliefs or lack their of is?
residentzombie 1 year ago
I give this video 6 stars - if you want stars back, then post your ratings as a comment!
guaymar 1 year ago
Yes, the points you mentioned should be brought up during the panel discussion. I would also suggest, that the of flagging videos should be made more difficult - not via a simple button underneath each video.
55ella2007k 1 year ago
I post news clips & stories in my own YouTube collection (getting RW nonsense "on the record"). I consider "news" a valid exception to the "30 second rule" for "Fair Use". Yet YouTube has flagged a number of my videos as containing "copyrighted material". My experience has been that videos are identified by their audio track and/or description, not video content, rendering their automated validation software a total joke (Comments are also parsed for flagged words.)
BI30 1 year ago
without getting in to an argument for which is more American, in a conversation between running YouTube as media outlet in which submitters have to prove their content first versus a submission process without limits after which legitimate complaints result in removals, the latter grows much faster, has more content, and way more viewers. That's what Youtube is supposed to be, but shrinking a little now, since they aren't new kids anymore, may be financially worthwhile.
timpostor 1 year ago
and in the review process, I agree with your assessment that the burden should lie on the complainee (media companies), and until the decision is made, Youtube should err on the side of freedom. While they may feel that pandering to the media companies helps the value of their content, Youtube succeeds because of the independence of their product. They should pay careful attention to the balance or they might become one of the media company sites that Youtube currently obliterates in views.
timpostor 1 year ago
your argument for fair use, made previously, is that you show clips with commentary as opposed to the complete video and have won previous copyright battles with it. The matching software is clever and could obviously be used to calculate the ratio of the matched content to original content. From this, ranges could be set for obvious infringement, fair use, and blatant attacks on free speech, in which the second range is subjected to human review.
timpostor 1 year ago
Yes.
Yes, but keep it simple for now.
jebus6kryst 1 year ago
couldnt they just like stop people from being able to flagged LIberalveiwer
Or others who have proven not to break copyright laws?
or the program doesnt work for people who have proven not to break the law? or is that to hard
sgsfdgfsdfsdfsddf 1 year ago
Of course any DMCA claim should be reviewed by a human, people constantly use sections of video to make political, social, or humorous commentary on the subject matter within that portion of the video. It's not for the purpose of recreating the video, it's new original content that required the context of at least part of the original video. That is FAIR USE!
ARKAtheist 1 year ago
Ask her what YouTube is doing about the legal horror that is the DMCA.
darkhawk123 1 year ago
Several channels have been suspended due to false DMCA, bring that to the attention.
jmo1link 1 year ago
FALSE FLAGING DESTROY
antonyneal 1 year ago
Google is a geek child that's discovered a way to run things. There was bound to be a learning curve. Too harsh? Just check out Larry Page's take on Steve Jobs. Here he alleges he's rewriting history: h ttp :// tech.fortune.cnn.com/2010/07/09/larry-page-jobs-is-rewriting-history/
They need grownups to guide them.
G58 1 year ago
Talk to them about NAMEWASTERS. I think if an account hasn't been logged in for over 2 years, YouTube should email the user (with their given email used to make the account), that in two weeks time or so that YouTube will remove their account and make it open to the public again, or even raffle it off, unless they log into that account. That way the user gets a fair warning that his/her account is being removed.
But I also have a theory that YouTube actually owns most of the "namewasters".
Begeru 1 year ago
I agree. before a machine takes a video down, a human should review to verify whether or not it qualifies as fair use is definitely a change that should be made. other than that, i don't have much to add. good luck in the panel/committee! :D
nolanpoepoe 1 year ago
...not considered "family safe". Clarification is needed, as I can only think that this is because I have criticised Creationism. If this is a standard policy, maybe it should also be standard policy that promoting of religion and the derision of Atheism should also be considered not to be family-safe?
I think that's more than enough from my point of view.
FSAthe1st 1 year ago
...not all my own. Obviously when replying to videos, most people will quote from an original video source in order to provide context for their discussion, something that is covered under fair use. This is an area that needs to be addressed.
An additional issue that needs to be addressed was raised to me when my latest video was rejected for revenue sharing, and I quote: "Advertisers on YouTube are currently trying to advertise next to family-safe content". This needs clarification...
FSAthe1st 1 year ago
I also agree that these are important areas to cover. Also it might be a good idea to question the practices used against those who apply for partnership and revenue sharing. I have, on numerous occasions, applied for partnership and revenue-sharing on YouTube. The main reason for applying for partnership is so that I can upload longer videos, but being able to monetise my content is also useful as a secondary effect. I have been denied on the basis that the content of some of my videos is...
FSAthe1st 1 year ago
You should mention the whole debacle with the Discovery Institute's DMCA Abuse against YouTube User "Donexodus2".
xXSceilusXx 1 year ago
I wholeheartedly agree with your topic choices. Good luck and thank you for representing us.
lanc4268 1 year ago
YES, YES, and YES!
PlasteredDragon 1 year ago
Keeping personal information in DMCA counternotices protected untill getting real evidence, is definately a valid point and should be high up in the list.
But more so should be the harvest of real evidence before starting to think about honoring a DMCA request.
Good vid!
joord 1 year ago
All points made here defiantly need to be brought up at Vidcon if you have a serious opportunity to discuss the issues with people who can make changes.
cmbmachine 1 year ago
Those are very important topics to talk about it. Also should have them fix the layout as well as the rating system. I know someone who made a parody of the Spider Man 2 movie, and was taken down numerous times for no logical reason. Also there were claims of false copyright claims. Glad you will be bringing this up. The freedom of speech should not be interfered with.
xchainlinkx 1 year ago
Hats off to @LiberalViewer. Good video
ddxhtml 1 year ago
Right on Liberalviewer! You hit the nail on the head with this.
majinspy 1 year ago
@kingofdeedeedee111 +1 to that. I liked being able to rate on a scale of 1-5 rather than whether I liked it or didn't
djrdan6 1 year ago
yes and i don't know
stevenbohorquez92 1 year ago
"You know what word I really hate? The N-word, and I don't mean 'nigger' I mean literary 'the n-word' because that's just white people getting away with saying nigger, that's all it is. When you say 'the n-word' I go 'oh she means nigger' then you're making me say it in my head, why don't you fuckin' say it instead and take responcibility!" -Louis CK
MarkArandjus 1 year ago
You're branching out from the usual "Fox News" Bias videos. I like it, I hope you continue to branch out but not forget about continuing to expose those douchebags. Keep up the good work.
InvisibleDiary 1 year ago
Could YouTube avoid DCMA abuse by only taking down videos upon a court order after the merits of the complained video have been determined valid enough to proceed to court?
sejembalm 1 year ago
Sometimes I wish I could share your Pollyanna attitude towards multinational entities and life.
While the term "pollyanna" has negative connotations, I assure you my envy of your outlook is genuine.
tkwsni 1 year ago
yes
Hashime777222 1 year ago
@kingofdeedeedee111 I don't think the star system was that good... people weren't giving videos the number of stars they thought it deserved anyway. They were giving stars based on what amount of stars they -thought- it should be showed to have.
So if I saw a video I thought deserved 3 stars but only had 1 star, I would give it 5 stars to get it closer to the 3 stars that was my goal. 1 and 5 stars (dislike / like) were by far the most used buttons.
xxDickBonesxx 1 year ago
id do dmca reform, thats a huge issue
onlythefacts999 1 year ago
false DMCA,that seems to be the biggest issue
Miata822 1 year ago
Intellectual Property is theft.
RockTheBellCurve 1 year ago
There is a court desicion that states that you are permitted to copy portions of copyright material for commentary purposes. Sometimes Youtube bans any portion of a video....the olympics is a good example. Not even one second was allowed during the olympics. Even for commentary. Somebody at Youtube didn't understand the law and fucked up. Maybe they are just happy they got hired by Youtube and spent more time being a poser than doing the research i have already done.
Rata4You 1 year ago
More humans less robots.
BTW it's a total joke for youtube to talk about "hate speech" and human flagging- the only videos they EVER take down and the only people whose channels they suspend are because of copyright infringement- which is also arbitrarily applied.
jessicafischerqueen 1 year ago
Could you ask them to address their customer service policy? Rather, could you ask them to address their LACK of customer service policy?
Ripley747 1 year ago
Hi Allen, I am trying to make a timely video response but something that is related and could be clarified is the procedure for determining how videos get into or get excluded from "Popular" and "Top News." Specifically related to this is a concern that although videos that get flagged may not be removed from the site, are they being removed from the categories "Popular" and "Top News?" I think this needs to be asked. & disclosure if a video has been flagged to the owner. # of x & reason + who
representativepress 1 year ago
I think YouTube should hire more human censors and not just rely on machines. It's like the lady said, "we cannot develop an algorithm to investigate video content and copright infringement." It takes a human to do that. Being that it is now owned by Google, YouTube should be able to hire an army of human monitors to judge whether or not flagged videos should be taken down.
2x2is22 1 year ago
Of course that's what should be discussed, history has shown it's the biggest problem on here. I mean who doesn't remember the whole VenomFangX debacle?
imnoromeo 1 year ago
My own video has been removed by false falgging. Is this bitch living in reality or what?
ricardas83 1 year ago
I think you have a great idea of what to discuss. if you have a chance though, and this isn't exactly a serious issue, could you bring up the false flagging of comments as spam? or at least a way for a viewer to be alerted if they are flagged as spam so they can alert youtube to it.
hawkeye40222 1 year ago
DMCA abuse is the single most pressing issue that users face with YouTube's current policies. If you have to focus on any single topic, IMVHO this should be it. Preferably of course, you can raise the review issue as well.
Polymeron 1 year ago
You should discuss DMCA Abuse, False Flagging, False Copyright take downs like Fan Made Music Videos and Parodies. Although I have seen less takedowns from WMG lately but their is a crap load from Toei Animation lately and are removing Abridged(Parody) works without Mercy constantly. Hell Toei removes the Abridged work even when theirs a fucking disclaimer saying Support the Official release but Toei does it anyway.
Kaibaman41 1 year ago
I really look forward to this panel and I really, really hope it will be streamed cause while seeing big tubers talk about their success is one thing, these "conference style" panels and discussions are what separates Vidcon from other gatherings.
Have a good time there
princeword 1 year ago
I have no idea what you should talk about, but what you mentioned in the video should be an important focus.
StupidWindmill 1 year ago
Please raise the problems with the DMCA.
easuter 1 year ago
She is lieing through her teeth. There is a threshold for flags that takes down a vid, implemented as a form of viral video damage control, I.E. to prevent the rape and murder and beating vids that get posted here. I've abused the system before myself, and anyone else who has could tell her just how much of a lieing scum bag shit she is. Someone needs to call that bitch out.
shoopoop21 1 year ago
can you tell them to stop changing the way youtube looks each time they do it get worse, and thumb up and thumb down thing bring back the stars so i know what vid are good and which are bad.
Chriseycarlyeah324 1 year ago
They also need people to review taking down of audio things.
Voltegasproductions 1 year ago
False-flagging got my friends channel banned.
Voltegasproductions 1 year ago
seems to me many false flags would stop if....(in adition to your good three)the user name was posted as the flagger And the flagging users real name was given to the flaggie befor the the flaggie had to give real name and adress. also the vid could stay up until the youtube human has a look...innocent til proven guilty
penvsword 1 year ago
The DMCA issue is by far the most important. Your three suggestions are great and I think your second suggestion is critical. There have been many stories of users receiving threats of violence by users who have had their personal information after they have had to give it out to fight a false DMCA claim. This hurts free speech most of all.
fortyone0 1 year ago
face it, they don't want to spend the money, and no one is going to boycott them so they will continue not to spend the money.
RevolutionaryJam 1 year ago
LiberalViewer is Allen Ashe, Hmmm !
Throw him in a hole and you got an Ashe Hole !
hobo59 1 year ago
@hobo59
NO dummy, its what do you get when you cross a wrench with Allen Ashe, You get an Allen Wrench.
StupidWindmill 1 year ago
To think that we can get youtube to do ANYTHING that they don't want to do is a joke. We need them, more than they need us. There will ALWAYS be someone willing to put up with their bullshit in order to have their video be online.The only effective action against this crap, is to find another site that doesn't do it,
but if that existed, we'd be there instead of here, and we wouldn't be having this conversation.I wish you all the best of luck, but big money rules, and youtubers suffer for it.
socialgarbage2 1 year ago
1. There is a sizable community of people who recut films either into false trailers, mash-ups and new scenes. These people, one of my channels amongst them, do use copyrighted clips, but the context and mixing are a very creative effort usually taking hours of planning and execution and are not a direct copy/upload of the movie.
2. I've had videos taken down for music far in the background, yet more popular users are allowed despite not asking permission. Could popularity be a factor?
WhatTheMaynard 1 year ago
just try and remember that "CORPORATIONS ARE NOT PEOPLE", especially if you're going to be "representing" the rest of us, and despite what ever screwed up personal opinion you hold on the subject. .... thx....
MpowerdAPE 1 year ago
"It's so difficult for US fo figure out context ..." - exactly. She is right on that count. Flagging campaigns work NOT because an automated process is doing the job, but because reviewers often don't take the time to really understand the context. A reviewer is only a human being and if they don't like the person in the video they might be quickly inclined to agree that content is inappropriate, especially if they're tired, fed up, or simply hold opinions opposed to the video maker's. [more]
rozeboosje 1 year ago
@rozeboosje I also am not convinced that reviewers understand the "privacy" concept very well. How can a video using a clip showing another user's face from THEIR video possibly be a privacy issue, when THEY clearly didn't have a privacy concern when THEY posted the video in the first place. Unless the video maker adds MORE personal information, a privacy flag should be rejected.
The other problem with flagging is that the appeals process seems not to work very well. [more]
rozeboosje 1 year ago
@rozeboosje Again, this is understandable: someone looking into an appeal made against a reviewer will be inclined to side with their colleague.
It is therefore important that a reviewer records good notes of WHAT, EXACTLY made them decide that the video warranted removal, that the *real* reasons for removing a video are communicated to the user, and that there can be an open exchange with a human being, rather than stonewalling, when someone feels hard done by.
rozeboosje 1 year ago
@LiberalViewer/Allen Asch regarding false DMCA
You lack one point about the false DMCA abuse, namely that the way DMCA works right now is counterintuitive and backwards in comparison to normal legal procedure, ie. the burden of proof has to be on the plaintiff. Youtubes DMCA procedure the plaintiff do not have to specifically prove they have copyright to the material they file a DMCA over and the burden of proof is not theirs. Thats up side down legally. Burden of proof must rest with plaintiff
mYOzZyKaT 1 year ago
Your agenda seems good, but I think the most important thing to improve the Youtube community is to add a REPUTATION rating to all registered Youtube users. This is IMHO the root cause to many ills.
Currently abusive users are immune from recourse because their actions are not remembered, and the community can't keep them in check. Likewise if one contributes to the community in positive ways - this too is lost.
Back on topic: if you participate in false flag campaigns - this is forgotten.
TimTrimT 1 year ago
Lol, I'm wondering when they can lift the regulation for porngraphy so I can teach people how to make love, hehe...
newalanlin1084 1 year ago
I hate it when i want to watch a video just to see "Hey guess what Sony/Viacom etc. doesn't want this up on youtube because they won't be getting money"
MetalEagle95 1 year ago
Context like your so gay! lol
redmar79 1 year ago
If what she says is true, then youtube has incompetent , badly trained employes, and botch the work they do, causing youtube to be responsible for the video take down.
thelordakira 1 year ago
@JuggyMcNoobTube I was talking about making his own original material.
AvengerXP 1 year ago
I got my most popular video taken down for abusive images....it was a war tribute.
bladeere14 1 year ago
YouTube was cool but now it's like big-brother. They flag and delete videos over the most BULL-SHIT stuff. They should not censor, period. I understand copyrights but unless the people are making money what's the big deal? 3:16 <------This is bullshit...Why take off any video of any news? YouTube went corporate.
lmcdowall 1 year ago
1. Absolutely. Copyright is the battleground of the future.
F33bs 1 year ago 9
@F33bs Copyright is new Oil.
dirtydeedsdone 1 year ago
To answer your last question, I have videos on my channel that have been attacked for "copyright issues". I am not happy with the whole "Audio Swap" option. Twice, I was forced to change the music in a video. One was a 30 second video that only had an intro of a song. The other had two songs, which were both "in violation". The funny thing is, I have seen both songs uploaded in whole among other channels and they didn't have to swap audio like I did. Thanks for the video :) Pretty informational
h2opolodan11 1 year ago
awesome topics... I'd love to see this. might it get posted on youtube?
Darkest209 1 year ago
What also annoys me is the content ban in certain countries. For example in Germany I can barely see any of BionicDance's videos or PatrickBoivin's.
Why can't I see those videos? Even anything He-Man related seems to be a no-go, when you access those video in Germany.
Rahhelthethird 1 year ago
@Rahhelthethird
What are you complaining for, they are doing you a favor.
jvforever72 1 year ago
@LiberalViewer It's not clear to me what YouTube aims to prevent with their automated system: the use of unlicensed work or copyright infringement. If it is the former, their system seems to work fine, since fair use allows one to use unlicensed work without incurring in copyright infringement. if it is the latter, a human might not be enough for a definition of the legality of any given video.
jhnntl 1 year ago
Well no shit. Youtube is corporate and has no interest in privacy. Welcome to Web 2.0, where they tell you it's peer to peer and you have free speech, but it's really corporate media, and censorship is commonplace. How Orwellian.
The only real solution is for everyone to have their own domain.
jsmith224455 1 year ago
2:07 the n word is neo-con
trapp313 1 year ago 2
bwahahahaha win!
mmmodafoca 1 year ago
Yes! It's one of the biggest problems if not the biggest problem on Youtube currently.
Failcard 1 year ago
fuck if we just gas all the religious ppl we wouldent have this fucking problem lol
murrymurrymurrymurry 1 year ago
I would hit the chick with the microphone so hard.
Kirbynessness 1 year ago
If you could train an algorithm to recognize blood in a video, how would it differentiate between a snuff film and a certain Monty Python clip?
lazyperfectionist1 1 year ago
I think you got it. Please post video of the answers given after the event, if possible. Thanks!
ScannerBrightly 1 year ago
I'm pretty sure false flagging campaigns do work or else the humans that review them are fucking retarded...
CocoandVelvet 1 year ago
Yes and yes
Dakayrus 1 year ago
I think that any AMV's or re-uploads of music or music videos by non-youtube partners should be counted as safe, as they are not making any money off of the product or song, just advertizing it.
SparkleOrchid 1 year ago
she is wrong that false flagging doesn't work.
richardmoz 1 year ago
YouTube should have more of a human overview to flagging, and the personal information should be withheld until there is a definitive case of copyright violation.
Somehomelessguy1 1 year ago
good to see she can lie with such a straight face. videos that DEFINATELY do not breach the TOS from loads of my subscriptions have been taken down. if she is in fact not lying the reviewers are retarded
tanekki 1 year ago
I am happy with whatever topic you decide to talk about, all I ask is that after your opening statements, or question to her, you add "Oh, and we would like more porn." as you sit down and straighten your tie, and stare at her while waiting for the answer, i mean really stare at her.... THROUGH her. yeah.
pornfartin 1 year ago
I love when people made famous by youtube start slamming it.
aarondavid826 1 year ago
Could you adress the issue of backgroud music used in its retail length set to a user made video and the monetisation of said videos? Thanks
fredotron 1 year ago
About you ask if they can have way to have the real id of the person that files the dmca claim! I mean in real life you can't file shit without proper id,why not you tube? It really pisses me off that a user named "dick upyorass" can file a dmca claim against any video wtf? All they have to do is have the user snap a pic of his id next to his face and send it via email to you tube! Other website use this system when you lose your password to get in
verodefacto 1 year ago
Can human reviewers really accomplish the task of reviewing copyright issues? I think you're videos are a clear example of using copyrighted works in commentary and protected by free and political speech.
What about creative speech? synchronizations and mashups are very popular on YouTube and the first to be struck down from the site. Should YouTube defend it's users and viewers as new creators of creative works, despite being derivative works, against the 3 major conglomerated Goliaths?
taxyttik17 1 year ago
I was subject to false DMCA claim because someone didn't agree with my video. They claimed: "hah, I am right, and you are wrong because youtube agrees with me." Now that I understand this person was well aware of the flaws in this system.
I also had a video blocked world wide instantly after upload, the video was obviously proceesed through a bot that couldn't recognize that my video was a parody under fair use. YouTube is not pulling their weight like they said they are. Good luck sir.
firebat42 1 year ago
People have been false flagged for their own works and those that have a different opinion.
W. Kamau Bell had some of his stand-up taken down even though it was his own work.
TPrinces had her Twilight rant removed because someone did a false DMCA
VenomFangX used the DMCA to get people to go after a youtuber, posting his private info.
My question: If a person reviews such things before letting them go through, are they not doing their job properly or just sending everything through?
JerkyChid 1 year ago
Yes definitely talk about DMCAs in full detail. Also, can you try talking about music on youtube? I'm not sure if we can really do anything about WMG muting videos, but see if you can bring that up somehow. Just copyright stuff related to using background music in videos and also music covers/parodies.
Begeru 1 year ago
I have already informed thunderf00t about this, everyone else who thinks he should know please also spread the word!
jackhartcup 1 year ago
Totally agree with your chosen topics! Will we be able to see the panel via YouTube?????
TsukiGeek 1 year ago
Recently a user named "The Archfiend" was DMCA'd 3 times (within one week) and had no copyrighted content in his videos, as he is a vlogger, and as someone who had just started watching him I was sort of offended.
If possible, can you ask how vloggers are check for copy right abuse? If they use a quote from a user (no video from user) can they be DMCA'd for that?
DJNSider 1 year ago
I think you should talk about well known Youtubers such as adiblasi, Bl00dblitz, thecreativeone, and leolaporte. Just a thought because they have great stuff on their channels. Leo Laporte actually was able to completely delete his Facebook profile live on TWiT. I know it has nothing to do with YouTube, but it has to do with privacy.
Privacy - something you should most certainly discuss at VidCon. Facebook doesn't seem to care anymore so now it is up to YouTube to bring back some sanity.
JoshKeatonFan 1 year ago
I believe that when a video is flagged, it should not count as an account strike, that or when a video claim is successfully disputed the strike goes away. The reason I believe this is that on my old channel, I had disputed several copyright claims as fair use, but the account marks stayed up there and when one of my videos got flagged, my account was immediately taken down without warning.
Omegashadowyoshi 1 year ago
You have the best voice for audio commentaries man. Do you do voice work?
HaligonianType1 1 year ago 44
@HaligonianType1 his voice is smooth like butter melting on a plate.
TehRealzTsunami 1 year ago
@TehRealzTsunami He sounds exactly like the guy that did the Googlezon video. Have you ever seen it? I am sure it's on YouTube. This could be the same guy, I dunno, I haven't checked into it yet, but they sound identical.
HaligonianType1 1 year ago
@TehRealzTsunami Look for "2015 googlezon" in YouTube. There are a few diff versions, but this is the original that circulated the net before YouTube was even around. Check it out. Remember, the 2015 version is what you want, not the 2014 one. That I believe is done by a diff guy.
HaligonianType1 1 year ago
@TehRealzTsunami Here, this is the one you want. watch?v=OQDBhg60UNI Sounds alot like him, just in a diff tone. Take care.
HaligonianType1 1 year ago
talk about taking the limit of youtube videos a little higher.. like 15/20 minutes. it seems not much, but i think it cuold do a big difference
talk about background music in home made videos and when used to make musical covers.
talk about the right too have free classic music on youtube, given that it is a human cultural patrimonium..
talk about making youtube more of a comunity and less of a company
AnarchyAlleyCat 1 year ago
@N0SACREDC0WS Many websites with comments sections at the very least give their users a few options on how they want the comments displayed. Oldest first, newest first, highest rated, lowest rated, etc.
JuggyMcNoobTube 1 year ago
things you should talk about:
The youtuber Jory Caron (the channel that hosts "Is it a good idea to microwave this") has had several issues with his monatized videos being falsely flagged.
Talk about false DMCA
talk about the false flagging of atheist videos
FangFiftyFive 1 year ago
Definately cover that
deathguitarist12 1 year ago
How about youtube actually DOING something about people that do these flagging campaigns? Or how about locking out someone's ability to give a video thousands of flags and/or votes.
Or how about youtube does something about the people that flag the video as inappropriate, which makes the video, forever more, require over 18 login.
I think there should be some sort of way youtube can go back and look at who has flagged who, and take legal action against them. Just freaking do SOMETHING.
squirreljester2 1 year ago
LiberalViewer,
I would recommend 2 things.
1) Talk with dprjones (YT user and lawyer who works pro bono for people who are censored on YT) about filing false DMCA's.
2) You might want to bring up Thunderfoot's "YOUTUBE vs the USER" video where Youtube ACTUALLY censored that video by removing it because it was critical of them (and suggested one of the few ways you could get their attention).
Good luck!