DMCA dispute -- latest. Youtube becomes judge and jury *Mirror*
Top Comments
Video Responses
All Comments (13)
-
The "Safe Harbour" provision also REQUIRES punishment of false claims! It's all in the 500's of the DMCA paragraph numbering (Section 512C, unless I disremember me).
-
Thanks for mirroring this, the original slipped through my subs box for some reason.
-
Fingers crossed.
-
I agree, YouTube should have restored his video based on the necessity of law. If they felt that they video should be taken down due to their own private concerns they should have done so _after_ restoring it by claiming that it had violated the TOS -- an evil act, no doubt, but at least it's not legally indefensible.
-
hit them as hard as you can,you may be a old dog but you still have some teeth(metaphorically speaking)
-
best of luck to you! i enjoy your videos and it would be a shame to see them go because someone thinks they are breaking the copyright law when they aren't
-
@MookieMog I know, and i shouldn't criticise him for it, but i worked hard for my degree and i wish potholer hadn't (tacitly) endorsed her lie.
-
@1empathy Considering what happened to the two channels, it was probably the most responsible thing to have done to douse the flames.
Youtube has really messed up here (I originally put a line of expletives here). They cannot claim both the safe harbour and judging statuses simultaneously and they have to choose one or the other - the safe harbour status is better for them and for the users and if they want to go the way of NetFlix they just have to choose the judging approach.
johncrwarner 3 months ago 6
Thanks. Good to see people of principle taking a stand for the sake of every ones freedoms.
trifelgeputinage 3 months ago 5