EEVblog Electronics Community Forum

EEVblog => EEVblog Specific => Topic started by: EEVblog on October 29, 2018, 06:40:49 pm

Title: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: EEVblog on October 29, 2018, 06:40:49 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ReOb8lHFixU (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ReOb8lHFixU)

Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: Barny on October 29, 2018, 07:20:53 pm
Well this sucks.
I hope you get this sorted out really fast.

If not, I think there are enough Streaming-Alternatives.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: eV1Te on October 29, 2018, 07:25:54 pm
I have gotten several copyright strikes on my videos, but after appealing them they often went away within a week or two. In my case I was using old classical music that is in public domain, but some movie company automatically flagged it as theirs since they were also in some movie they had made and everything inside their movie is assumed to be their copyright.  :palm:

It can't possibly be illegal or against YouTube guidelines to record/save a video or even less explain how you do it. That is identical to recording a TV show on your VHS recorder and that has been legal "forever".

Unless someone can point out exactly why this is against their rules I would suggest you to appeal the strike.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: MrMobodies on October 29, 2018, 07:31:35 pm
I did mention on your moving video "Would you mind showing your RAID system that you spoke about at some point?".

I wonder if that might have had anything to do with the bot scanning the comments or just coincidence.

It was only on the strike notice that I see that you did do a video on it.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: eV1Te on October 29, 2018, 07:36:29 pm
I noticed an interesting discussing in the YouTube comments for this video, I thought it was worth mentioning here as well:

YouTube hosts videos that are CC, hence by law you are allowed to download them. If YouTube does not provide a link and does not allow you to use third party tools, they are in breach of the law and that would invalidate their terms of services on this point.

I assume you do not want to go to court in order to battle this, but could be worth mentioning in your appeal in case you decide to go that route.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: julianhigginson on October 29, 2018, 08:02:29 pm
wow.. that seems a bit of a ridiculous overreaction to your video by youtube.

Especially since anyone can simply type "download youtube video" into google chrome, and have google search throw up pages and pages of links designed to get you pulling down youtube content for any reason you might want.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: drussell on October 29, 2018, 08:18:50 pm
It can't possibly be illegal or against YouTube guidelines to record/save a video or even less explain how you do it. That is identical to recording a TV show on your VHS recorder and that has been legal "forever".

Ahh, but you forget that the USA forced a change to all that with the introduction of the DMCA and has been globetrotting around, forcing parity with US copyright laws throughout the world.

While every time the issue had gone to court previously over the years (the cassette tape recording of vinyl, the Sony Betamax case, etc.) the result was the proper one, allowing recordings under certain circumstances.  The movie industry was so worried about the death of theater movies if home video were ever allowed to become a "thing", yet when they "lost", it spawned the home movie rental market which overtook theater revenues and made them more money than they ever imagined.  They never learned anything from experiences like that and continue to shoot themselves in the foot at every opportunity.  Good riddance, I cannot wait for the implosion....

Now that media is digital, "they" have changed the rules via the DMCA to say that everything is different now and you're essentially not allowed to record anything unless it is expressly allowed by the locked-down system provided by the overlords where recordings can be removed on a whim, etc.

For example, the guidelines for teachers who wish to show clips of something in their classroom is to use a video camera to record a television showing the desired programming and then show that recorded footage, thereby officially meeting the technicality of the rules to exercise their fair use rights, showing the media to their class for educational purposes.

Quote
YouTube hosts videos that are CC, hence by law you are allowed to download them. If YouTube does not provide a link and does not allow you to use third party tools, they are in breach of the law and that would invalidate their terms of services on this point.

Just because you are theoretically allowed to download a copy of something does not mean YouTube has a legal obligation to make downloads available.  Official YouTube policy is "NO DOWNLOADING, EVER!" and there is no law that forces them to add a download button.  Downloading can still be a breach of their TOS and they can essentially do whatever they want to try to prevent it.

Remember, from big copyright's perspective you never own any of the media content that you think you purchase.  You simply are purchasing a license to consume that media and they'll try their hardest to make you pay for that content as many times as possible.

I wonder how many people have paid for the same album on vinyl, then 8-track, then a cassette tape, then a CD, then one or more "digital" copies, often with DRM that ends up disappearing when some company goes out of business and shuts down their authentication servers, etc
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: kenabi on October 29, 2018, 08:19:05 pm
RIAA/MPAA and the other studio people probably got a scraper because of recent comments, and then you get a problem. they take their vivo/music money seriously, even when its not/doesn't involve their stuff.

so it comes down to money, and the fact that people refuse to accept that there's legitimate uses for some of the videos, and some of them can well be locally cached/saved for offline viewing without any concerns from the owners because free/fair use.

greed gonna greed, yo.

Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: Mr. Scram on October 29, 2018, 08:23:50 pm
Welcome to Youtube, where they can do whatever they want and you can go :palm: yourself. You don't like it? Though luck, there's no real alternative.

This is the problem with any kind of business relationship where one party is dependent on the other but not the other way around. Luckily Dave has structured his business in a way that Youtube is only a relatively minor part of it, but in many cases people can be made or destroyed by a party that often won't even comment on what they did.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: MrMobodies on October 29, 2018, 08:34:14 pm
Also the bots can do whatever they want, it if was a bot.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: NiHaoMike on October 30, 2018, 12:25:55 am
Could you use some alternative like Twitch? And I suggest putting the video on as many alternative platforms as you can.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: malaire on October 30, 2018, 12:59:30 am
Perhaps you should remove this video as you admit here publicly that you break YouTube ToS repeatedly by downloading YouTube videos.

Also I guess that what you are saying here could also be considered "encouraging Terms of Service violations" as you are saying that professional youtubers NEED to download YouTube videos, i.e. break ToS.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: SilverSolder on October 30, 2018, 01:31:53 am

What was that sci-fi movie starring Scwarzenegger, where a wall mounted machine would automatically print out a ticket if you used foul language?   Looks like we're there already, more or less!
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: Mr. Scram on October 30, 2018, 01:36:48 am

What was that sci-fi movie starring Scwarzenegger, where a wall mounted machine would automatically print out a ticket if you used foul language?   Looks like we're there already, more or less!
It was Stallone and it was Demolition man. :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rVQGT01Kzg (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rVQGT01Kzg)
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: Whales on October 30, 2018, 01:56:40 am
Not the most effective punishment: streaming is one front where youtube actually has competition.

Quote
YouTube hosts videos that are CC, hence by law you are allowed to download them. If YouTube does not provide a link and does not allow you to use third party tools, they are in breach of the law and that would invalidate their terms of services on this point.

Ah, well.  The video itself may be CC, but the delivery method is under another license  >:D

"But you're not allowed to add further restrictions..."  "Ah but we're not!  The video and the service are separate things!"

When it comes to static video: youtube is in the same position as eBay.  Heavier that Saturn, doesn't need to give a damn about small planets.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: boffin on October 30, 2018, 04:00:40 am
Of course now I want to go back and watch it, and I don't see it on the other video sites.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: firehopper on October 30, 2018, 05:50:57 am

What was that sci-fi movie starring Scwarzenegger, where a wall mounted machine would automatically print out a ticket if you used foul language?   Looks like we're there already, more or less!
there was also something in the 5th element from what I remember.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: mikeselectricstuff on October 30, 2018, 05:54:11 am
Quote
Official YouTube policy is "NO DOWNLOADING, EVER!" and there is no law that forces them to add a download button.  Downloading can still be a breach of their TOS and they can essentially do whatever they want to try to prevent it.
So why don't they block all the YT downloading sites?
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: Ferroto on October 30, 2018, 05:58:06 am
Just live stream on twitch :D

also youtube-dl is the superior program for archiving youtube content.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: helius on October 30, 2018, 06:00:10 am
I wonder to what extent this is related to the new "This video requires payment to watch" if you block ads. Somebody at Google is working on loss prevention.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: hans on October 30, 2018, 06:08:37 am
I've seen the same as well on LinusTechTips. I think they were punished for posting a video on YT that they were in fact live on Twitch. They do that every week, and pull the video down after the stream was finished.

One day they accidentally left that video up on YT, and got a community strike for it because the video was an initiative for users to leave the YT platform.
LTT was contemplating at the time streaming to YT exclusively or both YT and Twitch. YT basically shoot themselves in the foot by not allowing them to do any live streaming at all. I think they got it resolved in the end.. then again LTT is a pretty vocal & big tech channel..

Despite that, I think Twitch also has a clauses where they don't allow you to stream content to other platforms when you're monetized there.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: DC1MC on October 30, 2018, 06:16:37 am

What was that sci-fi movie starring Scwarzenegger, where a wall mounted machine would automatically print out a ticket if you used foul language?   Looks like we're there already, more or less!
there was also something in the 5th element from what I remember.

Demolition Man, Sylvester Stallone: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LE3oczJ1zgM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LE3oczJ1zgM)

 DC1MC
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: helius on October 30, 2018, 06:18:15 am
Despite that, I think Twitch also has a clauses where they don't allow you to stream content to other platforms when you're monetized there.
Contract provisions of this type are called "in restraint of trade" and have been prohibited for hundreds of years.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: Mr. Scram on October 30, 2018, 06:22:19 am
Demolition Man, Sylvester Stallone: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LE3oczJ1zgM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LE3oczJ1zgM)

 DC1MC
Didn't read the thread, did you. ;D
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: DC1MC on October 30, 2018, 06:34:51 am
Demolition Man, Sylvester Stallone: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LE3oczJ1zgM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LE3oczJ1zgM)

 DC1MC
Didn't read the thread, did you. ;D

Not really, no, don't care too much about eviltube, but Demolition Man was a reasonably silly/funny movie .
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: elliottveares on October 30, 2018, 06:40:26 am
Can I point out to YouTube who are obviously dumb, that your web browser is temporarily downloading the video when you watch it.

To many ways you can download a video, least not by spoofing the user agent as a iPhone and then you can right click a video and click "Save as" where you can then save directly the .mp4 file!  :-DD

Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: EEVblog on October 30, 2018, 07:38:25 am
It can't possibly be illegal or against YouTube guidelines to record/save a video or even less explain how you do it.

It is not illegal, but it i against their T&C
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: timelessbeing on October 30, 2018, 07:49:58 am
This is silly. They are well alware that they cannot stop people from downloading their content.
I could just use screen capture software. Or even just hold a camera up to the monitor. And I don't need Dave to show me how to do it ... a bogan can figure that out. Would that get a strike too? LOL. I don't need Dave to "encourage" me either. The incentive is already there (fair use, debunking etc.) as Dave already explained.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: Lockon Stratos on October 30, 2018, 09:12:06 pm
@EEVBlog
Why dont you just use twitch for this one? Post the link on your website then post a short video announcing the move and updates will be posted on this site. This way youtube cant do anything about it  ;D .
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: IanMacdonald on October 30, 2018, 09:59:34 pm
That's nothing. Some time back our entire webhosting was taken down. The chain of events was that a cowboy outfit of some kind had contracted with Google to virus-scan all websites which were hosting Google ads. They had claimed that their scanning software was 100% reliable. (Yeah, suuuure) It found a false detection on one of our pages, and they told Google, who then contacted our hosting company, who took our account down.

The worst of it was, you couldn't talk sense to the people at Google.  :palm: They were 'sold on' being told that this scanning service was 100% reliable, and wouldn't listen to an IT guy telling them that NO AV software is ever 100% reliable. At least our hosting company is a bit more clued-up than that, and reinstated us rightaway.

We now use a download-server script that decrypts the files as they are asked for. That way, a spider cannot get at the executables to give a false detection. Has the secondary advantage that if the account were compromised it would be harder to maliciously alter the downloads. Had the inevitable complaints that other sites can't link directly to the files, but it's the lesser of two evils.

Oh, and we ditched Google ads. Wasn't earning us much anyway.

Although, if Dave Jones is a pirate, I guess we need to make him walk the plank. In which case he ends-up in his own locker, I guess.  ;D
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: EEVblog on October 30, 2018, 10:38:40 pm
@EEVBlog
Why dont you just use twitch for this one? Post the link on your website then post a short video announcing the move and updates will be posted on this site. This way youtube cant do anything about it  ;D .

That's against Youtube T&C as well (announcing streaming on another platform), big channels like Linus tech Tips have been striked for this.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: Mr. Scram on October 30, 2018, 10:42:21 pm
That's against Youtube T&C as well (announcing streaming on another platform), big channels like Linus tech Tips have been striked for this.
Would it be illegal to announce a stream, without specificying the how and why?

Disallowing the mention of competitors comes awfully close to the stuff Microsoft got fined for big time. Where's the EU when you need it?
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: LapTop006 on October 30, 2018, 11:09:59 pm
@EEVBlog
Why dont you just use twitch for this one? Post the link on your website then post a short video announcing the move and updates will be posted on this site. This way youtube cant do anything about it  ;D .

That's against Youtube T&C as well (announcing streaming on another platform), big channels like Linus tech Tips have been striked for this.

I guess that's a fairly recent change, a few channels I follow did that until recently (few months?)
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: FrankBuss on October 30, 2018, 11:16:13 pm
I noticed an interesting discussing in the YouTube comments for this video, I thought it was worth mentioning here as well:

YouTube hosts videos that are CC, hence by law you are allowed to download them. If YouTube does not provide a link and does not allow you to use third party tools, they are in breach of the law and that would invalidate their terms of services on this point.

This won't work. I'm sure they have a contract clause if one clause is invalid, that this doesn't affect the other clauses.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: drussell on October 30, 2018, 11:37:40 pm
Would it be illegal to announce a stream, without specificying the how and why?

Nothing about these things is illegal, but it may be against whatever rules you agree to when you sell yourself to Google/YouTube.  They can then use whatever recourse is specified in said rules to punish, suspend or terminate anyone who breaches said rules.

The most pertinent point is that the world needs a bigger variety of large, viable streaming services.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: FrankBuss on October 31, 2018, 12:21:26 am
Nothing about these things is illegal, but it may be against whatever rules you agree to when you sell yourself to Google/YouTube.  They can then use whatever recourse is specified in said rules to punish, suspend or terminate anyone who breaches said rules.

For normal customers, they can't declare everything in the rules, at least not in Germany. If something is "surprising", it might be not legal. And some rules might be illegal, because of other law, like antitrust, if they have a monopoly. If you are a business, it is more complicated, you are supposed to read the rules, no "surprises" for you, but they can be still against the law. But good luck suing Google for it, you get bankrupt first before you win the case, no matter what.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: MrMobodies on October 31, 2018, 12:26:41 am
So if it is not announced on Youtube but on the website that livestreaming is going on elsewhere is that okay?
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: Mr. Scram on October 31, 2018, 01:25:15 am
Nothing about these things is illegal, but it may be against whatever rules you agree to when you sell yourself to Google/YouTube.  They can then use whatever recourse is specified in said rules to punish, suspend or terminate anyone who breaches said rules.

The most pertinent point is that the world needs a bigger variety of large, viable streaming services.
I think it would be good to establish that many people use "illegal" and "not allowed" interchangeably. It seems the official definitions define it as both "prohibited by law" and "against the rules". A hands ball in a game of soccer is called illegal, even though it's not against the law.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: aqarwaen on October 31, 2018, 01:27:52 am
That's against Youtube T&C as well (announcing streaming on another platform), big channels like Linus tech Tips have been striked for this.
Would it be illegal to announce a stream, without specificying the how and why?

Disallowing the mention of competitors comes awfully close to the stuff Microsoft got fined for big time. Where's the EU when you need it?

and yet game companies like runescape,wow,lol are allowed to make streams both at twitch and youtube same time.i dont get how companies are allowed do it and not normal people.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: bob225 on October 31, 2018, 01:43:08 am
That's against Youtube T&C as well (announcing streaming on another platform), big channels like Linus tech Tips have been striked for this.
Would it be illegal to announce a stream, without specificying the how and why?

Disallowing the mention of competitors comes awfully close to the stuff Microsoft got fined for big time. Where's the EU when you need it?

and yet game companies like runescape,wow,lol are allowed to make streams both at twitch and youtube same time.i dont get how companies are allowed do it and not normal people.

If you have the bandwidth you can multi cast, but its not easy to setup, You cannot cross promote 3rd party services, the likes of twitch are YouTubes competition and there only doing what any company would do - try to make money and gain market share while retaining its customers

The main reason for YouTube giving strikes for showing how to use a downloader is simply, It's part of there premium service
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: drussell on October 31, 2018, 01:52:02 am
I think it would be good to establish that many people use "illegal" and "not allowed" interchangeably. It seems the official definitions define it as both "prohibited by law" and "against the rules". A hands ball in a game of soccer is called illegal, even though it's not against the law.

That is my point.  In this case, the precise definitions do matter.  There is a big difference between violating some kind of arbitrary terms and guidelines in a user agreement and something actually being against the law. 

It gets trickier if you sign a legally binding contract with some kind of clause that says you agree to be punishable, for example monetarily, for doing something forbidden by the contract rules.  Sometimes there are laws which state you cannot actually waive some right or enforce some rule in a contract.  This is where you need a lawyer.  :)

A properly drafted non-compete agreement when you sell a business to someone that stipulates you will not open up a competing business for x years, or whatever, is legally binding.  I'm not sure how well crafted the YouTube user agreement is for content creators and how the language specifies just precisely what you're agreeing to as far as exclusivity is concerned.  Is there something in there that says you agree to use YouTube and YouTube only for your online presence?  IANAL
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: Mr. Scram on October 31, 2018, 03:16:18 am
That is my point.  In this case, the do matter.  There is a big difference between violating some kind of arbitrary terms and guidelines in a user agreement and something actually being against the law. 

It gets trickier if you sign a legally binding contract with some kind of clause that says you agree to be punishable, for example monetarily, for doing something forbidden by the contract rules.  Sometimes there are laws which state you cannot actually waive some right or enforce some rule in a contract.  This is where you need a lawyer.  :)

A properly drafted non-compete agreement when you sell a business to someone that stipulates you will not open up a competing business for x years, or whatever, is legally binding.  I'm not sure how well crafted the YouTube user agreement is for content creators and how the language specifies just precisely what you're agreeing to as far as exclusivity is concerned.  Is there something in there that says you agree to use YouTube and YouTube only for your online presence?  IANAL
It's a case of patato versus patato. They're both made up rules. One tends to come with a bigger stick you get beaten with.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: drussell on October 31, 2018, 04:57:33 am
It's a case of patato versus patato. They're both made up rules. One tends to come with a bigger stick you get beaten with.

Touché...  :)

I would still only call one of them "illegal," though...
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: station240 on October 31, 2018, 05:10:21 am
If you have the bandwidth you can multi cast, but its not easy to setup, You cannot cross promote 3rd party services, the likes of twitch are YouTubes competition and there only doing what any company would do - try to make money and gain market share while retaining its customers

The main reason for YouTube giving strikes for showing how to use a downloader is simply, It's part of there premium service

My understanding is to get Twitch partnership (ad revenue sharing), you have to agree the content you put on twitch is exclusive.
It's not some huge restriction, and not everyone has to agree to it.

You're not restricted from mentioning that you have a Youtube channel, or putting different content/extracts from livestreams on YT.
If you don't have/want Twitch partnership, you can do whatever you wish.

Youtube on the other hand, put all sorts of restrictions for things you have to "earn first".
Put links in descriptions...
https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!topic/youtube/eVROjkqHs-8 (https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!topic/youtube/eVROjkqHs-8)
Put links in annotations/end screens
https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/6388789 (https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/6388789)
Livestreaming (not enabled by default, allow 24 hours to enable, kiss youtube's butt... um TOS)
https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2474026?hl=en (https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2474026?hl=en)
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: timelessbeing on October 31, 2018, 06:07:31 am
Something scarier comes to mind ...

What if Dave digs up a clip of an old video from his HD, and uses it?  Youtube were extremely vague in the letter (they could have mentioned the exact rules that were being violated). But "illegal activities" sounds like it refers to circumventing DMCA, which implies that Dave's content is copyrighted (owned) ... by Youtube. If I write a script and sell it to a Hollywood producer, it becomes theirs, and I can no longer use it, right?

Dave you are appealing the decision right? Have you heard back?
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: helius on October 31, 2018, 06:40:57 am
Any contract which you are not free to negotiate, and which contains surprising terms, is considered a contract of adhesion. The law looks dimly on such antics.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: FrankBuss on October 31, 2018, 07:14:33 am
Any contract which you are not free to negotiate, and which contains surprising terms, is considered a contract of adhesion. The law looks dimly on such antics.

But at least in Germany there is a difference if you sign it as a business or as a private person. The law expects that a business reads and understands all the surprises. So is EEVblog a business for Youtube? But I guess multinational law gets really complicated.

Interesting article about suing Google: https://www.quora.com/How-do-I-sue-Google (https://www.quora.com/How-do-I-sue-Google) At the end of the first answer:
Quote
...in legal circles, there’s something we call “The Google Rule.” The rule is this: Google never loses as a defendant. At least not in the U.S. Mainly because they hired the lawyers who literally wrote most of the laws they get sued under.
This is what I expected. I'm sure it is the same for other big companies with a lot of lobbying, like Microsoft or Apple.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: Lockon Stratos on October 31, 2018, 09:10:39 am
@EEVBlog
Why dont you just use twitch for this one? Post the link on your website then post a short video announcing the move and updates will be posted on this site. This way youtube cant do anything about it  ;D .

That's against Youtube T&C as well (announcing streaming on another platform), big channels like Linus tech Tips have been striked for this.
Then have David2 make a account on twitch, put the link on the site. Then when the time comes only announce when you starting to move on youtube.... They can put their T&C into their sitting furniture's hole if its on your site and do not mention the stream in the vid :D .
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: johnlsenchak on October 31, 2018, 09:23:15 am


I think the content  strike is totally  ridiculous being that Dave  has  been on Youtube for  how many years now?  Shouldn't they take that under consideration
before bringing the hammer  down on this  nonsense   8)
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: EEVblog on October 31, 2018, 09:36:02 am
I think the content  strike is totally  ridiculous being that Dave  has  been on Youtube for  how many years now?  Shouldn't they take that under consideration
before bringing the hammer  down on this  nonsense   8)

I think that you should get something for earning the position of being a big Youtuber (e.g. 100k silver award etc).
You hear it all the time about big channels being shut down automatically due to community strikes, that shouldn't happen.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: EEVblog on October 31, 2018, 09:37:45 am
Dave you are appealing the decision right? Have you heard back?

Appealed straight away, haven't heard back. You only have a few hundred characters to write your reply, so impossible to explain things properly.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: mrpackethead on October 31, 2018, 09:54:55 am
And a few hudnred characters is all a bot needs.  ;-) 
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: drussell on October 31, 2018, 10:56:57 am
But "illegal activities" sounds like it refers to circumventing DMCA, which implies that Dave's content is copyrighted (owned) ... by Youtube.

The strike isn't for violating the DMCA, it was apparently for having the gall to actually mention a method that people could use to download a copy of YouTube videos.  It seems that disseminating information like that has been ruled by their magical "AI" algorithm to be against YouTube rules.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: timelessbeing on October 31, 2018, 11:10:58 am
Breaking Youtube terms does not make something illegal -- against the law.

I don't think they would use the term so loosely. That would be idiotic and just plain wrong.

Using 3rd party software to circumvent measures designed to protect IP, however, is considered (in the USA) to be illegal, unless allowed by fair use rights. Dave being Australian ... I don't know what that does.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: FrankBuss on October 31, 2018, 02:57:40 pm
I don't get it why Google strikes for explaining how to download a Youtube video, when the first Google search link links exactly to a site where you can do this.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: station240 on October 31, 2018, 04:01:30 pm
Using 3rd party software to circumvent measures designed to protect IP, however, is considered (in the USA) to be illegal, unless allowed by fair use rights. Dave being Australian ... I don't know what that does.

Except youtube provide a means to download videos themselves, it's part of Youtube Premium.
So IP violation isn't the issue, as Youtube themselves provide a method to do just that.

Youtube have banned Dave for making livestreams, simply because he was demonstrating an alternative to their paid service.

They have also cracked down on anyone making videos promoting/mentioning alternatives to youtube like Twitch.
Upload a video titled "watch my livestream on twitch" and watch it get deleted.

Youtube have lost the plot, and gotten into the murky area of anti competitive behavior and censorship of content for no reason.
This isn't about copyright, it's about Google's money.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: Khaos on October 31, 2018, 05:13:36 pm
station240 is right on the money.

Although I had to look up what YouTube Premium is and apparently it's a rebranding of YouTube Red.
So after all these years, they finally thought that maybe calling it like a porn site was not the best name.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: MrMobodies on October 31, 2018, 05:23:30 pm

Youtube have banned Dave for making livestreams, simply because he was demonstrating an alternative to their paid service.

They have also cracked down on anyone making videos promoting/mentioning alternatives to youtube like Twitch.
Upload a video titled "watch my livestream on twitch" and watch it get deleted.

Youtube have lost the plot, and gotten into the murky area of anti competitive behavior and censorship of content for no reason.
This isn't about copyright, it's about Google's money.

So if Dave live streams separate content outside of Youtube whilst banned on youtube from live streaming there and on other platforms, he leaves no announcement on Youtube that he is live streaming elsewhere and youtube finds out, they can shut the channel down.

It just sounds like blackmail to me.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: tautech on October 31, 2018, 05:48:06 pm

Youtube have banned Dave for making livestreams, simply because he was demonstrating an alternative to their paid service.

They have also cracked down on anyone making videos promoting/mentioning alternatives to youtube like Twitch.
Upload a video titled "watch my livestream on twitch" and watch it get deleted.

Youtube have lost the plot, and gotten into the murky area of anti competitive behavior and censorship of content for no reason.
This isn't about copyright, it's about Google's money.

So if Dave live streams separate content outside of Youtube whilst banned on youtube from live streaming there and on other platforms, he leaves no announcement on Youtube that he is live streaming elsewhere and youtube finds out, they can shut the channel down.

It just sounds like blackmail to me.
Certainly anti competitive behavior.
They probably best watch their backs if the legislators get wind of it.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: MrMobodies on October 31, 2018, 06:17:54 pm
That kind of behaviour tends to put me off purchasing premium which I already did oh well it is too late now.

Sorry a bit ambiguous there, what I mean is what are the chances of them shutting down the EEVBLOGS Youtube channels if Dave is caught elsewhere live streaming unannounced and gets enough strikes.

You can see what I mean my blackmail.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: timelessbeing on October 31, 2018, 07:27:59 pm
I don't get it why Google strikes for explaining how to download a Youtube video, when the first Google search link links exactly to a site where you can do this.
Just because it exists on the internet, it doesn't mean Google is OK with it. They don't want it on THEIR platform. Censoring search results is prickly territory, even though they do it already to some degree.

Except youtube provide a means to download videos themselves, it's part of Youtube Premium.
OK so if you pay for premium, then maybe you are buying some limited rights to it. And even then, it might be locked by some kind of DRM. It's the same as illegally downloading music, versus buying it on iTunes.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: timelessbeing on October 31, 2018, 07:30:41 pm
It just sounds like blackmail to me.
Blackmail means extorting money from someone in exchange for not revealing something compromising about them. I don't see how that applies.

This isn't about copyright, it's about Google's money.
These days, copyright is about money.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: bitwelder on October 31, 2018, 07:44:54 pm
Dave you are appealing the decision right? Have you heard back?

Appealed straight away, haven't heard back. You only have a few hundred characters to write your reply, so impossible to explain things properly.
Perhaps you can spend a few characters for a bit.ly link to a eevblog post with a longer explanation?
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: Brumby on October 31, 2018, 08:00:40 pm
It just sounds like blackmail to me.
Blackmail means extorting money from someone in exchange for not revealing something compromising about them. I don't see how that applies.

Wrong term.  Try "Extortion".
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: timelessbeing on October 31, 2018, 08:34:14 pm
Try "Extortion".
Except that nobody is holding a gun to Dave's head. If he doesn't like the terms, he can leave Youtube.


I wonder if Dave knows who owns the rights to his content?
Like if he decided to switch platforms one day, would he be able to re-upload his old content there?
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: timelessbeing on October 31, 2018, 08:53:02 pm
Certainly anti competitive behavior.
It's not that simple. Youtube invested into EEVBLOG to help make it what it is. That entitles them to certain rights. It's also how TV works.

However, if Dave were to start a new series called "Dumpster Divers" (it would be a reality show of course), and broadcast it on Vimeo or whatever, then Youtube would have no legitimate say in it.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: Brumby on October 31, 2018, 09:20:13 pm
Try "Extortion".
Except that nobody is holding a gun to Dave's head. If he doesn't like the terms, he can leave Youtube.

Extortion does not need a literal gun to someone's head - just a threat to something of value.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: timelessbeing on October 31, 2018, 11:14:32 pm
 :palm: I don't know what language you're speaking.

Youtube are saying "If you don't follow our rules (which you agreed to), then you can't work for us." There's no violation of law, or Dave's freedom here.

You might say it's greedy. It's not extortion.

The real question here, is did Dave break the rules. I think it should fall under fair use for education.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: EEVblog on October 31, 2018, 11:55:00 pm
I wonder if Dave knows who owns the rights to his content?
Like if he decided to switch platforms one day, would he be able to re-upload his old content there?

I own it.
Youtube get the typical "non-exclusive, worldwide, perpetual license". So even if I deleted my entire channel I guess they could bring my content back and I'd get no say in that.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: EEVblog on October 31, 2018, 11:55:50 pm
The real question here, is did Dave break the rules. I think it should fall under fair use for education.

I think I did, and as I said in the video I don't blame then for the strike. But disabling my streaming is stupid.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: EEVblog on October 31, 2018, 11:57:11 pm
Sorry a bit ambiguous there, what I mean is what are the chances of them shutting down the EEVBLOGS Youtube channels if Dave is caught elsewhere live streaming unannounced and gets enough strikes.

Only if I announce it on Youtube itself. I'm free to stream anywhere else I like.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: EEVblog on November 01, 2018, 12:00:10 am
Breaking Youtube terms does not make something illegal -- against the law.
I don't think they would use the term so loosely. That would be idiotic and just plain wrong.
Using 3rd party software to circumvent measures designed to protect IP, however, is considered (in the USA) to be illegal, unless allowed by fair use rights. Dave being Australian ... I don't know what that does.

Youtube do not own the content, they only have a license to use it. Therefore they cannot sue you for copyright infringement, that's up to the owner of the content. All they can do it terminate your account based on their ToS.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: SparkyFX on November 01, 2018, 04:23:02 am
It is always hard to argue about the definition of Terms of Service while actually appealing the strike itself.
The pattern matched a definition of some sort and the punishment is to disable features on the platform for the punished account.

I agree that it is a ridiculous and very narrow sighted decision in this case, otoh those people are paid for cases per hour and rather have the punishment hit too many accounts than too few. Why? Because the next case might argue that there are other videos with similar content that were never punished albeit reported for doing the same. Blocking a feature for 3 months isn´t the end of the world, but removes the foundation for bad actors to argue on. Not the worst outcome from the perspective of a paid community moderator, ridiculous when looked at in detail, anyhow, the definition of TOS for the individual user is probably impossible to argue on with the moderators. You would need a petition or other leverage to actually do something about it at a higher instance.

Therefore the membership duration or amount of subscribers of the channel has a lower priority than most might think, i mean the biggest channels made huge mistakes / tested the borders and that caused lots of problems to the platform. Those were imho more or less trolling by personality / type of channel, and will probably continue to do so, but no one measures that.

Those cases also mean that these factors do not help with the decision, or have special set of rules above a certain amount of subscribers/membership duration/amount of videos.

My biggest concern about the commercial aspect of youtube is that creators are more or less employees (somewhat dependent in a similar fashion), without being called so, without the duties, but also without the associated rights.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: MrMobodies on November 01, 2018, 08:10:06 am
It just sounds like blackmail to me.
Blackmail means extorting money from someone in exchange for not revealing something compromising about them. I don't see how that applies.

Wrong term.  Try "Extortion".

Yes, silly me I got the wrong term.
I got use to hearing other using it loosely.

Extortion in coercion.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: timelessbeing on November 01, 2018, 09:05:13 am
Youtube do not own the content, they only have a license to use it. Therefore they cannot sue you for copyright infringement, that's up to the owner of the content. All they can do it terminate your account based on their ToS.

It's important here to make a distinction. Copyright infringement -- using somebody else's copyrighted work to make money -- is one thing. There might be different laws in play here. The act of circumventing copyright protection measures (eg downloading content) is, in itself illegal, thanks to DMCA.

And if that's not the case, then I would ask them what is "illegal" about the depicted activities. Or are they simply trying silly scare tactics.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: timelessbeing on November 01, 2018, 09:10:59 am
The real question here, is did Dave break the rules. I think it should fall under fair use for education.

I think I did, and as I said in the video I don't blame then for the strike. But disabling my streaming is stupid.

Please elaborate how you did.

In the letter, they says that "such depictions need to be educational or documentary in nature", and they were (I think). So they do have some allowance for fair use. I think that what they are trying to convey in the letter, is that you didn't make it clear enough. They even tell you that in the letter. "Please include as much information as possible in the video title".

So maybe you just need to re-title the video and you're fine.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: thm_w on November 01, 2018, 09:26:00 am
Please elaborate how you did.

In the letter, they says that "such depictions need to be educational or documentary in nature", and they were (I think). So they do have some allowance for fair use. I think that what they are trying to convey in the letter, is that you didn't make it clear enough. They even tell you that in the letter. "Please include as much information as possible in the video title".

So maybe you just need to re-title the video and you're fine.

Educational in nature would imply to me the video is for some higher eductional purpose, ie a course on video editing and uploading.
If you distill that video down to just one set of instructions, "here is how to violate our guidelines and download a video" then it doesn't really count.

The same applies to nudity, can you have it on youtube if its part of some educational topic and the sole purpose of the video is not to violate the TOS? yes.

Of course there are grey areas, but I think this is hard to argue.


Here is the TOS:
Quote
5. Your Use of Content

In addition to the general restrictions above, the following restrictions and conditions apply specifically to your use of Content.
A.  The Content on the Service, and the trademarks, service marks and logos ("Marks") on the Service, are owned by or licensed to YouTube, subject to copyright and other intellectual property rights under the law.

B.  Content is provided to you AS IS. You may access Content for your information and personal use solely as intended through the provided functionality of the Service and as permitted under these Terms of Service. You shall not download any Content unless you see a “download” or similar link displayed by YouTube on the Service for that Content. You shall not copy, reproduce, distribute, transmit, broadcast, display, sell, license, or otherwise exploit any Content for any other purposes without the prior written consent of YouTube or the respective licensors of the Content. YouTube and its licensors reserve all rights not expressly granted in and to the Service and the Content.

C.  You agree not to circumvent, disable or otherwise interfere with security-related features of the Service or features that prevent or restrict use or copying of any Content or enforce limitations on use of the Service or the Content therein.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: EEVblog on November 01, 2018, 09:40:11 am
The real question here, is did Dave break the rules. I think it should fall under fair use for education.

I think I did, and as I said in the video I don't blame then for the strike. But disabling my streaming is stupid.

Please elaborate how you did.

Read the T&C
It says you can't download videos and you cannot incite others to break the T&C either.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: timelessbeing on November 01, 2018, 09:46:20 am
Ok I thought Dave explained in the video that he needed to download his own content for video editing. Teaching people how to do that is educational. His whole channel is educational. He didn't say, "Here's how you can download Miley Cyrus' new video for free!" Oh well I guess it wasn't clear enough.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: pylo on November 01, 2018, 10:25:38 am
Ok I thought Dave explained in the video that he needed to download his own content for video editing. Teaching people how to do that is educational. His whole channel is educational. He didn't say, "Here's how you can download Miley Cyrus' new video for free!" Oh well I guess it wasn't clear enough.

Going by that argument, showing any king of activity is educational, since it is only teaching stuff.

I guess the problem is, that Dave's channel is primarily is not a channel for other youtubers and vbloggers. Youtube knows that. You cannot expect Youtube (or anybody, for the matter) to easily accept that this information was only meant for video bloggers when they are only maybe 0.001% of all EEVBlog viewers.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: thm_w on November 01, 2018, 10:33:56 am
Ok I thought Dave explained in the video that he needed to download his own content for video editing. Teaching people how to do that is educational. His whole channel is educational. He didn't say, "Here's how you can download Miley Cyrus' new video for free!" Oh well I guess it wasn't clear enough.

We still disagree on what is or isn't educational. Since youtube doesn't spell it out, I have to make some assumptions.
Think about an educational video being something that is appropriate to show in a high-school classroom, as a way of teaching course material.

https://www.copyrightuser.org/understand/exceptions/education/ (https://www.copyrightuser.org/understand/exceptions/education/)

Quote
One of the most important exceptions for education permits the use of any type of work for the purpose of teaching (or as the law puts it: ‘for the sole purpose of illustration for instruction’). This means that copyright in the work is not infringed by an individual teacher or a student as long as they are copying the work to give or receive instruction (or when preparing to give or receive instruction), and the copying is used to illustrate a point about the subject being taught.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: EEVblog on November 01, 2018, 11:29:23 am
Ok I thought Dave explained in the video that he needed to download his own content for video editing. Teaching people how to do that is educational. His whole channel is educational. He didn't say, "Here's how you can download Miley Cyrus' new video for free!" Oh well I guess it wasn't clear enough.
We still disagree on what is or isn't educational. Since youtube doesn't spell it out, I have to make some assumptions.

Youtube can interpret the rules any way they like.
There is nothing that says educational intent has to override the other rule about not encouraging to break the T&C.
No point arguing over it.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: timelessbeing on November 01, 2018, 11:40:54 am
Going by that argument, showing any king of activity is educational

No, there needs to be an academic discussion of it. But I don't think educational content necessarily needs to be in a lesson plan format. Just look at all the science learning channels on Youtube.

Then there's the documentary scenario. Which also sort of applies.
For example, I can make a documentary about software piracy and show people downloading software, and talking about it. It's not meant to encourage anybody. It is for analytical purposes.

To be honest, it's been too long since I watched Dave's video in question so I can't remember the "feel" of it. But I do get the impression that Youtube are flexing their power here.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: timelessbeing on November 01, 2018, 12:11:17 pm
There is nothing that says educational intent has to override the other rule about not encouraging to break the T&C.
No point arguing over it.

Of course they don't have to do anything. It's their platform and "because we say so" is all they need.
But when did we ever need a point to argue about something.  :P

I thought we were discussing whether they had legitimate reason for the strike, or if they're just making stuff up, or using a blanket algorithm. Also the claimed "illegal" activity.

Let's look at the T&C...

"You shall not download any Content unless you see a “download” or similar link displayed ..."

Clearly, as someone pointed out, this is nonsense because your browser needs to download it for you to watch it. It was written by an amateur. So then we're left guessing what they actually mean. You can't store it? Replay it? Well your computer already does that too. Is there a time limit? Or do they mean that you can't use it in another work? Is recording the same thing as downloading?

If I record a 5 minute clip from TV news or what have you, and play it back during a Political Science lecture, do I have to call the station, read their T&C, and ask permission? No. I think a court would say that's a basic given right.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: mrpackethead on November 01, 2018, 01:23:00 pm
Dave,  *someone* else could stream your move.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: Brumby on November 01, 2018, 06:57:20 pm
Dave,  *someone* else could stream your move.

I would not suggest trying that on Youtube.  It could easily be claimed as a sock puppet effort ... at which point live stream restrictions will be the least of the problems.
Title: Look for Alternatives
Post by: phunkz on November 02, 2018, 01:13:57 am
Don't bet all you money on one horse.

Youtube can and will misuse their abilitys because they can or they will be orderd to. Even if its not the case in this case.

We need at least two if not 4 or 5 nearly equally sized plattforms. I know that changes nothing for know.
Just to think about it.

I personally would prefer a p2p-like-organization for every webservice but especially for a p2p-tube.
Maybe with certificates to indicate self-produced content which that can be distributed without harm to the nodes.
And maybe with some nodes who also act as streaming server for http(s)-clients with their available content.
Or with a browser which supports a protocol for showing p2p-content from different sources and some content browsing capabilities.

Just imho.

PS: same for web searching aka googeling.
Title: Re: Look for Alternatives
Post by: FrankBuss on November 02, 2018, 06:17:31 am
I personally would prefer a p2p-like-organization for every webservice but especially for a p2p-tube.

There is already such a service, PeerTube. The Blender foundation moved all their videos to it after Youtube blocked their channel:

https://www.blender.org/media-exposure/youtube-blocks-blender-videos-worldwide/ (https://www.blender.org/media-exposure/youtube-blocks-blender-videos-worldwide/)
Title: Re: Look for Alternatives
Post by: timelessbeing on November 02, 2018, 06:45:48 am
Good for them. The videos play really smoothly.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: daniel5555 on November 02, 2018, 06:53:55 am
Don't know about you, but I'm also disturbed a bit by the fact that YouTube actually feels entitled to punish the account owners by restricting access to features like live streaming... I mean, sure, if someone is infringing their TOS just delete the video and close the account if the infringements continue.

But why do they think it's appropriate to actually punish people, like they are some sort of moral authority while in fact they're just a shitty company that exists only because of content made by someone else?

Hopefully a better alternative will come around in a couple of years or, even better, hosting companies will start offering streaming services at a large scale and affordable prices.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: timelessbeing on November 02, 2018, 08:14:19 am
Dave,  *someone* else could stream your move.
Personally, I do not need to watch somebody move.  :=\

But why do they think it's appropriate to actually punish people, like they are some sort of moral authority
Yeah it's really weird.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: Khaos on November 02, 2018, 01:01:41 pm
Most of you overreact a little bit, because you feel like using YouTube is like this basic right and a public space.
YouTube is a business and can decide how to do business, under what terms and with whom, for whatever reason they decide.

They can ban you for not liking you, just like a store can throw you out and give you a ban.

ToS is basically house rules. If you come to my house and I ask people never to speak of flat earth, lets say, and you violate that, I throw you out, its my house.
Its perfectly common for businesses to ask you not to advertise another business on their premises.

You have to differentiate a little what your feelings are from what the legal situation is. You feel like anyone "ought" to be able use YouTube and be able to do whatever you feel is "reasonable". But these websites are businesses. And especially with a monopoly you will get some very unfavorable terms.

Dont get me wrong, I also feel like its bullshit, but it makes sense from their perspective.
Dave's criticism is something that makes sense about the type of response and punishment.
I assume taking away streaming is default for the first strike and wasnt like a Dave specific decision, therefore I think the reason they take away streaming is partly just because they felt like they should take away something even for the first strike. And streaming is probably the least used feature of all of them, so they just picked that one.
Giving a strike at all for this is pretty petty. But its automated :|
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: Mr. Scram on November 02, 2018, 02:16:21 pm
It's important here to make a distinction. Copyright infringement -- using somebody else's copyrighted work to make money -- is one thing. There might be different laws in play here. The act of circumventing copyright protection measures (eg downloading content) is, in itself illegal, thanks to DMCA.

And if that's not the case, then I would ask them what is "illegal" about the depicted activities. Or are they simply trying silly scare tactics.
They don't have to use scare tactics, as their word is law as far as content on the platform is concerned.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: cdev on November 02, 2018, 02:32:39 pm
I would be glad to collaborate with other folks in producing (our own and emphatically non encumbered) content. I would like to see a return to independent non-corporate controlled web communities that were not funded by tracking users or similar.

Its not rocket science, its fairly simple.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: cdev on November 02, 2018, 02:38:36 pm
Well, that certainly makes sense... (not)
maybe their business model is in trouble. the way they seem to act certainly makes me suspect that may be true.

Employees protesting because of lack of needed moral compass.


Youtube have banned Dave for making livestreams, simply because he was demonstrating an alternative to their paid service.

They have also cracked down on anyone making videos promoting/mentioning alternatives to youtube like Twitch.
Upload a video titled "watch my livestream on twitch" and watch it get deleted.

Youtube have lost the plot, and gotten into the murky area of anti competitive behavior and censorship of content for no reason.
This isn't about copyright, it's about Google's money.

So if Dave live streams separate content outside of Youtube whilst banned on youtube from live streaming there and on other platforms, he leaves no announcement on Youtube that he is live streaming elsewhere and youtube finds out, they can shut the channel down.

It just sounds like blackmail to me.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: FrankBuss on November 02, 2018, 02:40:53 pm
Most of you overreact a little bit, because you feel like using YouTube is like this basic right and a public space.
YouTube is a business and can decide how to do business, under what terms and with whom, for whatever reason they decide.

They can ban you for not liking you, just like a store can throw you out and give you a ban.

I don't think they can do what they want, because they have a monopoly. A shop owner would get in trouble as well, if he e.g. bans all black people from his shop. You are not completely free as a company to do what you want.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: Mr. Scram on November 02, 2018, 03:15:00 pm
I don't think they can do what they want, because they have a monopoly. A shop owner would get in trouble as well, if he e.g. bans all black people from his shop. You are not completely free as a company to do what you want.
They can ban people without shirts, which this is closer to than banning all black people.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: EEVblog on November 02, 2018, 03:30:17 pm
ToS is basically house rules. If you come to my house and I ask people never to speak of flat earth, lets say, and you violate that, I throw you out, its my house.
Its perfectly common for businesses to ask you not to advertise another business on their premises.

I'd like to happily point out that the ToS of the EEVblog forum is that you can promote and link to other forums  ;D

Quote
You have to differentiate a little what your feelings are from what the legal situation is. You feel like anyone "ought" to be able use YouTube and be able to do whatever you feel is "reasonable". But these websites are businesses. And especially with a monopoly you will get some very unfavorable terms.

The problem is a lot of the older channels feel as though they "built" Youtube into what it is, and they aren't wrong. So it's not unreasonable to expect some form of better treatment. Big channels that are just automatically shut down etc is crazy, it's just a dick punch to all the hard work put in. In essence Youtube doesn't exist without it's content creators, and technically content creators and Youtube are business partners, yet they often treat us as a throw-away commodity.

Quote
Dave's criticism is something that makes sense about the type of response and punishment.
I assume taking away streaming is default for the first strike and wasnt like a Dave specific decision, therefore I think the reason they take away streaming is partly just because they felt like they should take away something even for the first strike. And streaming is probably the least used feature of all of them, so they just picked that one.
Giving a strike at all for this is pretty petty. But its automated :|

The problem I have is that there is no benefit at all to being a big channel that's been around for a decade, you are treated the same in the T&C as the lowest generic new shit-posting hate channel.
My channel could be shut down entirely within hours by anyone disgruntled enough to false flag videos.
I think there should be some "reputation" based system for channels offering at least a modicum of protection.

I know there are a LOT of big channels (at least 17,000 bigger than mine!), but I don't think it's too much to ask that any big channel (say silver award level) cannot be automatically shut down without someone senior at Youtube looking at the case and pressing the button themselves.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: timelessbeing on November 02, 2018, 05:37:19 pm
Giving a strike at all for this is pretty petty. But its automated :|
The letter said it was flagged, and then reviewed.

Yeah it a private business, but they do a terrible job explaining their actions. How are you supposed to follow their rules if it's a moving goal post, or secret! The Blender Foundation story is a good example.

A channel like Dave's should get a little more trust from Google. Like they could have given him an opportunity to fix it.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: SparkyFX on November 03, 2018, 03:28:04 am
I would be glad to collaborate with other folks in producing (our own and emphatically non encumbered) content. I would like to see a return to independent non-corporate controlled web communities that were not funded by tracking users or similar.

Its not rocket science, its fairly simple.
I think it´s a catch-22, as soon as the platform exceeds a certain amount of viewers/readers the costs for servers and access add up and you need a business model that actually works. The word forum comes from the old roman government institution, which was established and protected as such, but don´t ask me what they did with a troll or if they have had anonymity.

First thought for most communities would be to crowd-fund or have member fees, but the dynamics of large groups then can kick in harder. It might (!) divide the community in two classes, leading to two sets of rules for the same problem -> injustice -> protest.

For a general discussion platform which does itself not focus on a certain topic, any action the operator would take could be a reason for users to protest or leave, any troll could try to find an argument to demotivate or incite the community about whatever SJW shit comes to mind - which might mean that sanctions tend to end up a lot more drastic as in this case and does pretty much the opposite of what was intended (i am talking about establishing taboo topics or even words, rashed banning at will, in short: over-moderation, which will even affect or drive away the general user if not explained transparent enough). All others, that do have some focus on a topic, can work around by limiting the platform to on-topic discussions a bit.

Such things can tick you off more than the actual webhosting itself. You could try to delegate such things but you can not buy competent moderation (google learns that the hard way by now). On one hand a moderator should filter out the ugliest stuff one could think about and on the other hand needs to be able to have a philosophy level discussion about a sanction. That does not work concurrently - neither can you really buy both.

In other words: member fees would not only risk the community, but at the same time the income. A not directly community driven income halves either risk.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: station240 on November 03, 2018, 03:54:28 am
Don't know about you, but I'm also disturbed a bit by the fact that YouTube actually feels entitled to punish the account owners by restricting access to features like live streaming... I mean, sure, if someone is infringing their TOS just delete the video and close the account if the infringements continue.

But why do they think it's appropriate to actually punish people, like they are some sort of moral authority

Youtube wrote the punishment on the basis that the TOS breach was copyright violation related.
So if you say uploaded a video you ripped off a DVD, then they check every video you upload for 3 months before it can go live.
Disabling the ability to livestream is just to stop people broadcasting their plunder goods.

However it makes no sense when it's an honest mistake, or applied to a TOS rule which is "pro youtube" or 3 months is far too long.
Youtube should have written the rules as 1 week to 3 months, then clarified which ones are serious enough to get 3 months.

The 3 strikes = channel deletion is also insane, what power crazed idiot though that was a good idea ?
All it takes is for some crackpot to false flag a few videos and boom.

Recent events prove Google has little morals.
Quote
Andy Rubin is the creator Google's Android software. He reportedly received $90 million in severance pay in 2014 after he was accused of sexual misconduct.
Rubin denies the allegations.

"We're walking out in support of those who've been harassed anywhere in the workplace and to ensure perpetrators are not rewarded or protected," said one Google employee.
https://abc7news.com/business/enough-is-enough-bay-area-google-workers-walk-out-in-protest/4596806/
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: cdev on November 03, 2018, 04:26:01 am
People contribute to their society, in the form of social capital - originally we created a vibrant community in the dissemination of, by means of a technology people- scientists working in pure science, created. The web. People build social capital by helping one another, sometimes that by sharing their knowledge with one another, and by raising the level of discourse which accelerates learning.

Corporations are a imaginary construct, an immortal and immoral 'person' who is not constrained by physical need to occupy a specific place, drink water, breeathe air or anything physical. It lives forever and often cannot really be held fully accountable for anything, this was originally done to protect the wealth of the wealthy from people they may have injured, who deserved compensation. The corporation was created to protect them.

Corporations had not even the tiniest part in creating the web, nor did they create Linux, Python, or hundreds of other enabling technologies. However, they want us to think they did, and let them take money from others for it.

This would be okay if it was done in a way which was compatible with their actual contributions to it and their contributions to society which are ambiguous. Not all good by any means at this point.

We need to check the power of these things. because they are amoral and should not be trusted. They are not people nor are they like people.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: bob225 on November 04, 2018, 04:46:29 am
Quote


The 3 strikes = channel deletion is also insane, what power crazed idiot though that was a good idea ?

Some ex bbs/forum Mod/Admin in a office fighting for the control of power - drinking a monster while playing doom

Quote
All it takes is for some crackpot to false flag a few videos and boom.

Ah the Delboy vs The Workshop battle springs to mind (evans coolant) - It come down to the police being called for harassment (unfounded accusations)

There are plenty of crackpot's out there on the interwebs

Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: Beamin on November 04, 2018, 12:30:04 pm
Well this sucks.
I hope you get this sorted out really fast.

If not, I think there are enough Streaming-Alternatives.


That's interesting I honestly can't even name one, just youtube or bust. I hate monopolies but only use google, youtube, gmail etc
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: Beamin on November 04, 2018, 12:39:43 pm
Doesn't sound "fair enough" at all.

Does anyone know how "the algorithm" works? I know I saw a video where they were fixing a TV without sound that had the simpsons playing on it for a  minute and the video was removed. Amazing that it could do that as the video was highly distorted out of focus and out of frame. Much harder to see then those shows they speed up and distort to get around detection certainly unwatchable if you tried to watch that as a substitute for a real video.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: drussell on November 04, 2018, 04:01:52 pm
Does anyone know how "the algorithm" works?

No...  Nobody knows and they are always modifying and tweaking it.  (Well, except for a few people in Google ivory towers protected by NDA.)  As soon as people start to figure out what they're doing, they have to change it around to prevent people from artificially gaming the system.  Catch-22

Quote
I know I saw a video where they were fixing a TV without sound that had the simpsons playing on it for a  minute and the video was removed. Amazing that it could do that as the video was highly distorted out of focus and out of frame.

shango066
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: timelessbeing on November 04, 2018, 06:45:46 pm
I think the video title "How to download Youtube videos" might have shown up on the algorithm radar.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: Khaos on November 06, 2018, 03:12:44 am
Yeah I never argued YouTube isn't being shit or stupid or both.

I think there should be some "reputation" based system for channels offering at least a modicum of protection.

I completely agree and frankly don't understand how this is not a thing. (apparently)
How hard is it to prioritizes incoming support tickets by channel size?
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: Mr. Scram on November 06, 2018, 03:15:21 am
Don't know about you, but I'm also disturbed a bit by the fact that YouTube actually feels entitled to punish the account owners by restricting access to features like live streaming... I mean, sure, if someone is infringing their TOS just delete the video and close the account if the infringements continue.

But why do they think it's appropriate to actually punish people, like they are some sort of moral authority while in fact they're just a shitty company that exists only because of content made by someone else?

Hopefully a better alternative will come around in a couple of years or, even better, hosting companies will start offering streaming services at a large scale and affordable prices.
Your house, your rules. It's like how Dave gets to decide what to do with people who are a nuisance.

It's only a problem because we all complain about it, but still flock to Youtube regardless.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: daniel5555 on November 06, 2018, 06:11:26 am
Most of you overreact a little bit, because you feel like using YouTube is like this basic right and a public space.
YouTube is a business and can decide how to do business, under what terms and with whom, for whatever reason they decide.

They can ban you for not liking you, just like a store can throw you out and give you a ban.
No, we most definitely don't overreact. I don't recall anybody in this thread saying that using YouTube is a right.

The problem with YouTube is not that it has arbitrary terms and conditions that are enforced by algorithms. The problem is not even that YouTube doesn't give a shit about creators - people who make money for YouTube in the first place.

The problem with YouTube is that it is a market failure. Or, in other words, it is the only effective way to get your videos out there. Sure, there are other streaming services, like Dailymotion and such. But in terms of their effectiveness it's not that they're just a fraction of what YouTube is - they simply don't exist. It is a vicious circle of sorts - you absolutely must upload videos on YouTube if you want any visibility and by doing that you only increase YouTube's importance.

The reason why YouTube acts the way it acts is because they know well that either video creators will swallow their bullshit, or they effectively will have to cease to exist as video creators.

And there's no solution to this problem right now. That's why I hope that streaming videos will eventually become significantly cheaper, so most people will be able to self-host.

Don't know about you, but I'm also disturbed a bit by the fact that YouTube actually feels entitled to punish the account owners by restricting access to features like live streaming... I mean, sure, if someone is infringing their TOS just delete the video and close the account if the infringements continue.

But why do they think it's appropriate to actually punish people, like they are some sort of moral authority while in fact they're just a shitty company that exists only because of content made by someone else?

Hopefully a better alternative will come around in a couple of years or, even better, hosting companies will start offering streaming services at a large scale and affordable prices.
Your house, your rules. It's like how Dave gets to decide what to do with people who are a nuisance.

It's only a problem because we all complain about it, but still flock to Youtube regardless.
No, it's only a problem because you can't have YouTube-like functionality without YouTube. If you don't like Dave, you can create your own forum about electronics without spending too much money on that, and slowly make it popular somehow. But if you don't like YouTube, there's nothing you can do. You can't stream hundreds of videos for tens of thousands of viewers, which is what Dave uses YouTube for. That's completely out of reach for the vast majority of people and we are not even talking about YouTube's integration with Google, which is what makes your videos reachable in the first place.

So yes, I'll have to continue to use YouTube. But don't expect from me any kind of sympathy towards it. Just as they have a right to be assholes on their property, we also have a right to complain about them being assholes since we don't have any alternative to use.

The 3 strikes = channel deletion is also insane, what power crazed idiot though that was a good idea ?
The one that surely has a high opinion of himself.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: cdev on November 06, 2018, 10:46:09 am
Let me tell you folks something. Corporations are literally trying to take over the world and give themselves a free pass that supersedes democracy.

They are trying to make everything, including the very right to exist, revolve around money, just as jobs are going away, due to AI.

So, people are going to find one day that we've created a monster in the form of corporations.

Sure there is a way around it, build your own site and set up your own blog software to allow embedding of your content.

Compress your videos as best as you can. It isnt rocket science, you know.

BTW, a certain mega corporation whose name starts with an A seems to deliberately make their code and browser needlessly complex. No law says people have to use them. YET.

Just say "know"

Hell, nothing is stopping you from using the simplest HTML possible to do whatever you want.

Lots of good reasons exist for doing that.

People don't have to ask for permission to innovate.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: NiHaoMike on November 06, 2018, 03:40:51 pm
You can't stream hundreds of videos for tens of thousands of viewers, which is what Dave uses YouTube for.
Bittorrent has proven its scalability for well over 17 years.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: drussell on November 06, 2018, 11:10:08 pm
You can't stream hundreds of videos for tens of thousands of viewers, which is what Dave uses YouTube for.

Why not?
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: cdev on November 07, 2018, 07:31:25 am
NOTE: I am talking here about making and providing ones own original content, NOT others. Do not upload other people's content to the net!


The argument people often make is based on bandwidth costs which were much higher in the past combined with file sizes that were also much larger. Modern compression tools are fast and can compress streaming content so very much smaller than they were able to in the past.

If you have a modern computer it seems that the file size now ends up with after compressing videos for streaming is not so super large. Compression is improving all the time. Maybe not if you upload very high res video or high bit rate but more modest requirements on the content side will compress to be much smaller.

So, maybe if you do it that way you cant get the huge volume and you do have to pay somewhat, but no law says that every content provider has to supply video, either.

More generally other kinds of content, even static HTML can be great to make and nobody is forcing people to use corporate services.

Frankly, as somebody who likes to see diversity on the net, it is distressing to see people thinking that corporate sites are their only option, they are not.

Its not that difficult - people should make their own web pages+ serve them.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: daniel5555 on November 07, 2018, 08:39:59 am
You can't stream hundreds of videos for tens of thousands of viewers, which is what Dave uses YouTube for.
Bittorrent has proven its scalability for well over 17 years.
Well, just because you can download a copy of a recent Blu Ray release of some blockbuster in a couple of minutes doesn't mean you would be able to stream hundreds of videos by using the same protocol.

Bittorrent transfers files by little blocks and it usually does that without any specific order. So if there are a lot of seeds, each of them can just transfer slowly their share of blocks - so the overall speed will be incredibly fast.

Streaming works differently. Each seed would have to transfer with the speed that is equal or faster than the video's bitrate. A FullHD video with decent quality can have a bitrate of 10 megabits per second. That's quite a lot for a single seed. Assuming full-duplex 50 Mbps connection it could probably serve 3-4 clients before totally saturating the connection.

Then you have the storage problem - how many people would actually have a lot of videos from, say, Dave's channel, which currently has more than a thousand? Then what about monetization? A lot of video creators are only able to create because they receive some income from doing it, how you would provide it with Bittorrent?

And we didn't even start talking about initial distribution, video encoding, search engines...

Bittorrent is sure great for file sharing. Not so sure about video streaming. It can work in some cases. Probably not in general case, until 1 Gbps speeds or similar will become commonplace.

You can't stream hundreds of videos for tens of thousands of viewers, which is what Dave uses YouTube for.

Why not?
I'll try to be as short as possible... Basically, it just requires way too many resources. In order to make your own little YouTube, you have to provide the following:

1. Video encoding. It's a very costly task in terms of computation resources even right now.

You can try that at home. Just attempt to re-encode a FullHD movie on your home PC. You will quickly discover that in order to achieve a high quality/bitrate ratio you will have to use aggressive settings. Those will make the encoding incredibly slow even on modern CPUs. Soon you'll want to use a dedicated server for that task, with a specific CPU that has a lot of cores or some sort of dedicated hardware for video encoding.

Also remember that you won't have to do just one encoding. You'll have to make versions for 720p, 360p, etc., since there are people on slow connections and old devices.

Those kind of processing power is expensive. It's not a cheap VPS you can buy for $20 per month.

2. Video streaming requires lots and lots of bandwidth. Even if you find exaggerating that 10 megabits per second figure I provided earlier, even if you assume just 2,5 megabits, for example, it will still require insane amounts of bandwidth for any kind of significant audience.

The latest video from Dave already got >30K views in just 21 hours. I can safely assume that there could be a thousand of viewers watching this video simultaneously. Assuming it has a bitrate of 2,5 megabits and everyone watched it in that quality, it gives you 2,5 Gbps bitrate. This is not a usual speed. Most hosting services offer just 100 Mbps data links. Everything above that will surely cost additional money. Pretty sure it won't be cheap, and not every hosting provider is technically prepared for that kind of load on its infrastructure.

Also data transfer itself usually costs money. Those 30K views assuming the same bitrate for a 10 minute video would be ~5200 gigabytes of data. Not an insignificant amount. Definitely not the usual amount of data transfer that this forum, for example, has.

3. But assume you can deal somehow with tens of thousands of views per day... What will happen if one of your videos will become viral or simply more popular than the rest? Will your infrastructure handle hundreds of thousands of views? Millions?

When a video becomes viral or significantly more popular than the rest, it is a huge opportunity for a channel. It can bring a lot of new viewers and help to achieve additional notoriety. That is, if your infrastructure can handle it. Otherwise it will become just a missed opportunity and a service outage for the regular viewers.

4. Now think about how people find videos in the first place... Dave mentioned in one of his videos that around 50% of viewers come from searching. It's possible that I myself discovered his channel when I was searching for some specific topic on electronics.

This happens because YouTube is integrated with Google search. Will your own hosting service offer the same kind of visibility for your videos?

5. And that's not all. But let's forget about little details, I think what I described is already enough.

If you don't agree with my points, really you don't even have to argue. Just go and implement your own "YouTube" that's capable of reliably serving tens of thousands of views per day and offer it as an alternative to YouTube for Dave. I'd be really happy to be proven wrong and I would use that alternative instead of YouTube.

Unfortunately, it's unlikely that it's possible to do that without spending an amount of effort and resources that is completely out of reach for most people.

The argument people often make is based on costs which were much higher in the past combined with file sizes that were also much larger. If you have a modern computer it seems that the file size now for many videos is not so super large. So, maybe if you do it that way you cant get the huge volume and you do have to pay somewhat, but I am also speaking more generally about other kinds of content, even static HTML. I find it totally depressing that people dont make their own web pages+ serve them.
Right now you can buy an inexpensive VPS for $5 per month that can effectively and reliably replace your mail from Google, host your own blog and website (not static HTML, but something more interesting, like Wordpress), which you can use as replacement for your social networks and do some other neat stuff, such as file hosting, code repository, etc. It requires some effort, but it can be done.

Video streaming, however, is still out of reach for the reasons I described above. Yes, technically you can do it... For 10 simultaneous viewers or such (discarding the video encoding and all other stuff). But for anything serious it just doesn't work.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: cdev on November 07, 2018, 09:19:08 am
I was not talking about Bit Torrent, or anything related to the sharing of copyrighted content.

Which I would strongly recommend against doing.


But suppose somebody wants to write their own content, whether its a web page or an audio podcast or a "gopher" server, or whatever. Or video, which tends to use up far more bandwidth than the others. Just do it.

Also, lets not kid ourselves here. Dave's content is popular but its taken him a long time to build up his brand. Thats not going to happen to most content providers and lord knows, its a double edged sword for some of the better known online people. I wouldn't want to be them.

Apart from people who are 'trending' and longtime consistent content producers like Dave, right after they upload a new video, I doubt if that many people are downloading most YouTubers content at the same time. Most people are just trying to contribute something to others and share what they know.

So, suppose you put up your own content on your Raspberry Pi or whatever, your pogo plug or your digitally enabled cheese board, via your home net connection.

(People don't need a VPS.) Or get a VPS. Either way its better than having to worry about arbitrary corporate policies.

Suppose you suddenly become popular and then it buffers a little bit. Or even gets a mention on some huge site and gets slashdotted. Ive had something like that happen to sites Ive been involved with. You'll survive.

Most likely scenario, viewers have to pause it until it catches up, who cares?

The important thing is you maintain your independence.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: daniel5555 on November 07, 2018, 09:47:45 am
But suppose somebody wants to write their own content, whether its a web page or an audio podcast or a "gopher" server, or whatever. Or video, which tends to use up far more bandwidth than the others. Just do it.

Also, lets not kid ourselves here. Dave's content is popular but its taken him a long time to build up his brand. Thats not going to happen to most content providers and lord knows, its a double edged sword for some of the better known online people. I wouldn't want to be them.

Apart from people who are 'trending' and longtime consistent content producers like Dave, right after they upload a new video, I doubt if that many people are downloading most YouTubers content at the same time. Most people are just trying to contribute something to others and share what they know.

So, suppose you put up your own content on your Raspberry Pi or whatever, your pogo plug or your digitally enabled cheese board, via your home net connection.

(People don't need a VPS.) Or get a VPS. Either way its better than having to worry about arbitrary corporate policies.

Suppose you suddenly become popular and then it buffers a little bit. Or even gets a mention on some huge site and gets slashdotted. Ive had something like that happen to sites Ive been involved with. You'll survive.

Most likely scenario, viewers have to pause it until it catches up, who cares?

The important thing is you maintain your independence.
I don't have anything to object regarding what you have written... But the thing is, the problem exists for the actual content producers or the ones who aspire to become like them, or who seriously aims to share their content with a lot of people.

Those who just upload videos once in a while don't really care in general. If they get hit by YouTube policies, they tend to just upload their video to some file sharing hosting, such as Dropbox, and move on.

But I don't think we're generally talking about those casual uploaders. It's really people like Dave who have a problem with this and they can't really use any of those straightforward and simple alternatives.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: thm_w on November 07, 2018, 10:36:51 am
Most likely scenario, viewers have to pause it until it catches up, who cares?

That would kill 90% of your audience instantly.
What does dave have, 100mbps or so? You could handle ~25 simultaneous viewers at the most, after that it would tank and buffering would take forever.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: EEVblog on November 07, 2018, 11:06:44 am
For those that care, I've had my videos available and served from my own website since the beginning, knock yourself out:
http://www.eevblog.org/video (http://www.eevblog.org/video)
Reduced size and quality of course for practical reasons.
What happens when I release a video and just a few thousand people try to download/stream that video file at the same time, it slows to a crawl.
Anyone who thinks they can serve their own videos to a large audience has clearly never tried it.

And the entire point of being on Youtube (apart from the video CDN) is because that's the only place people go to search for and watch video.
If I or any other Youtuber leaves Youtube then their audience will eventually dwindle away to almost nothing, and growth would drop to zero instantly.
Like it or not Youtube is the only game in town.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: cdev on November 07, 2018, 11:18:03 am
These make an interesting read.

Note: I am not trying to draw or make any conclusion about any specific service providers, whatsoever.  I am just saying that the door should never be closed to new services and often monopolies are unhealthy.
 


There are a number of papers online about Internet filtering law and policy.

This was the first one I read, quite a few years ago.
 
The World Trade Law of Internet Filtering, by Tim Wu.

https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=882459 (https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=882459)

... more...

Access Denied

https://ia801902.us.archive.org/14/items/AccessDenied_201701/Access%20Denied.pdf (https://ia801902.us.archive.org/14/items/AccessDenied_201701/Access%20Denied.pdf)

Also:

http://access.opennet.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/accesscontrolled-chapter-6.pdf (http://access.opennet.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/accesscontrolled-chapter-6.pdf)

Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: Mr. Scram on November 07, 2018, 02:41:36 pm
What does filtering have to do with a bandwidth problem? There seems to be a lot of noise.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: bitwelder on November 08, 2018, 06:50:15 am
Heck, that TV is running webOS, so probably there is a way to access it via ssh/terminal and run the diagnostics.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: cdev on November 08, 2018, 07:00:27 am
Although its rarely discussed, an important problem is the fact that neural networks are behind more and more Internet filtering. Its unfortunate enough that there are few real alternatives, as Dave stated, for a content provider. I have had similar experiences, elsewhere, and it left me similarly speechless at the bizarre and unpleasant situation which is developing, on a global scale.

There is a growing global dialogue about algorithmic discrimination.These community strikes seem to me to be a form of that. The corporations whose staff train these bots are unaccountable to anybody.

In some situations, we're losing a lot as a society because of the lack of transparency, so much that one has to ask the question, is this intentional? Most would say it isn't. If so, then we need to fix it, can't society do something to restore a better balance?

Re bandwidth: The country I live in is kind of in the grip of a sort of mercantilist obsession. What this means is that everything has its price. In an internet where everything can and is bought and paid for, some entities likely will get preferred delivery of their packets while others packets may be relegated to the fringes of the nets capacity, the end of the queue?

I like the Internet as common carrier model a lot more.
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: SparkyFX on December 04, 2018, 06:17:24 pm
There is a growing global dialogue about algorithmic discrimination.These community strikes seem to me to be a form of that. The corporations whose staff train these bots are unaccountable to anybody.

In some situations, we're losing a lot as a society because of the lack of transparency, so much that one has to ask the question, is this intentional? Most would say it isn't. If so, then we need to fix it, can't society do something to restore a better balance?
Most of the problem stems from the way the users use the system. If you have proper keywords in your video meta/description, users that actually search for them will still get them, algorithmic filtering or not, the filter can only choose from the base amount of data. They are not blocked in any way, it is "just" the suggestions for the available and limited space or attention span that is affected. Of course there are plenty of people that outright spam the meta for better search ranks - which means they kind of try to game the system.

The algorithms are most likely trained in favor of popularity, which is the meta-currency the whole business model is all about.

I despise how people prefer videos over written text or original documentation for some topics, and even then complain about a video in a non-constructive way. Imho it was their mistake to prefer the watered down abstract of the source in the first place, or they simply misunderstood it is better to not replace what they watched for a source. Nevertheless, there still is a huge benefit in guidance for knowledge, the expectations of the viewers should just match the intention of the content creator, which is why keywords (or whatever lead the viewer to the channel) need to match the content and should not be used to game the system. This is where re-uploads actually do harm as well.

So if someone wants to improve this system with and for society, what needs to be done is educate the users how to improve their google-fu, point out interesting & relevant sources directly instead of trying to become the middleman, express in a non-misleading way as much as possible and try to only add cognitive gain to a conversation. Might sound harsh to express it this way, but those are typical netiquette points most people here do anyway - unless it starts to get philosophical and therefore my word count per post explodes ;). That´s why i don´t really see a problem with such algorithms as long as users can still communicate about these things on a platform - in comments, forum posts or even in videos - and are able to modify the way they find the content themselves. Should this not be possible it really becomes a problem.

Quote
I like the Internet as common carrier model a lot more.
In short: you might have ordered an uplink with a certain bandwidth for a certain price, but the middleman decided he wants to charge money for the kind of content you transceive from third parties. All he needs to do is packet inspection and therefore a break of privacy rights to do that. Sounds fair, right? I reckon they don´t teach the details of the internet protocol or privacy rights at business schools - or there was some floating definition of it used in the reasoning... thats more likely the cause of the problem. The politicians here have equally floating definitions at hand sometimes... so it is not a local problem.

Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: justanothercanuck on December 06, 2018, 04:30:41 am
more news coverage

https://torrentfreak.com/banksys-own-video-shredded-by-youtube-following-canal-copyright-claim-181205/

looks like you weren't alone  :palm:
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: cdev on December 08, 2018, 06:08:29 am
It seems that the cable channel that included portions of Banksy's video - Did they somewhere falsely claim they owned copyright of it? Or did it occur by accident?
Title: Re: Youtube Community Strike
Post by: thm_w on December 08, 2018, 10:21:44 am
It seems that the cable channel that included portions of Banksy's video - Did they somewhere falsely claim they owned copyright of it? Or did it occur by accident?

I thought dave explained in the video, but basically when any big corp uploads a video, they choose to add it to youtubes "Content ID" system. Then if any section (10s or so?) matches an existing 10s section in the content ID system, its flagged.

https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2797370?hl=en