Dr. Wolf's account terminated? SPREAD THE WORD!

[M'aiq the Liar 5,804]

Gary Incident was the one I knew about(via Total Biscuit's rant about the dude pulling a C&D on his video AFTER he had asked him to review it in the first place)

 

The developer of earth 2066 had done the same thing, even trying to pull a copywrite claim on the Jimsquition show after he had called out his malpractice.

[FoxyCryptid 4,330]

But they wont thanks to our current corporate lobbying friendly government. As long as the people on capital hill keep getting that money, they care not how many monopolies form.

 

That's a big problem with the current legal system, it's supposed to be fair and unbiased but tends to sway towards "whoever has the most money" instead of who is actually in the right or in the wrong. 

 

I can attest personally that the city here pulled some very unethical things regarding the ownership of my house and a "block grant" funded semi-renovation of it. Shit, they tried to get me to pay for a roof-repair that was contracted by the previous owner just because it was tied to the house in some convoluted way.  

The developer of earth 2066 had done the same thing, even trying to pull a copywrite claim on the Jimsquition show after he had called out his malpractice.

 

Yeah, i may not agree with a lot of Jim's politics, but he tends to make damn good points in his videos about serious issues in gaming. 

Edited May 7, 2014 by Shoboni

[nami438 90]

Are you saying that because they are the host, they should be able to pull your videos for whatever reason they see fit, regardless of whether or not they actually violate copyright law? That seems like an open invitation for censorship, if you ask me.

If they are hosting your video on their dollar, then yes, they should have 100% right to decide to take your video down. Youtube is a privately-owned site. It's similar to having the right to kick a guest (not a tenant) out of your house for whatever reason, no questions asked. Your house is your domain.

 

We don't agree with this, but such is life. Youtube.com, nor any non-government website, is not under the jurisdiction of the American democracy. Unless someone is willing to take said website's owners to court over it, but that costs money and time.

Edited May 7, 2014 by nami438

[Jeric 46,890]

A Podcast I listen to, This Week In Law, routinely has legal guests that advocated for significant punitive damages should an individual successfully challenge a DMCA takedown under Fair Use laws. Also, additional Safe Harbor protections for ISP's and hosting companies. They have them now, but they are vague and have been interpreted multiple ways.

 

Not sure I believe that there is an easy solution. Companies do have a right to protect their Intellectual Property, and on the other hand, removing Fair Use material is a violation of free exchange of ideas. This, patent trolling, and net neutrality are the biggest 'tech' issues that lawmakers have to grapple with in the coming years.

 

Either way, I hope that this user gets his content back online.

[nami438 90]

There are several developers on steam who are doing so. Both the makers of "gary's incident" and the "earth 2066" are or have been found using the current copywrite system to silence those who review their broken works. The law in its current form is far to easy for companies to abuse.

That's not the law's fault, that's Google's fault. If the reviewer were to take those game makers to American court over it, he'd win in a heartbeat. In the cases you brought up, the law is on the reviewer's side 110%.

 

Google is the one turning the law into these nasty, Draconian rules that they have set up, all from immense pressure from content owners.

Ultimately whether it is moral or not doesn't really matter, because if they annoy their users enough they'll start losing business to sites like Dailymotion.

I can only hope. If only DM had more viewers though.

Edited May 7, 2014 by nami438

[Thrashy 2,800]

If they are hosting your video on their dollar, then yes, they should have 100% right to decide to take your video down. Youtube is a privately-owned site. It's similar to having the right to kick a guest (not a tenant) out of your house for whatever reason, no questions asked. Your house is your domain.

 

We don't agree with this, but such is life. Youtube.com, nor any non-government website, is not under the jurisdiction of the American democracy. Unless someone is willing to take said website's owners to court over it, but that costs money and time.

 

Two questions you should ask yourself upon uploading a video to YouTube:

 

-Is the content contained within this video in violation of any laws, copyright-related or otherwise?

 

-Is the content contained within this video in violation of YouTube's ToS?

 

If the answer is "No" to both questions, then they have literally no valid reason to pull a video, whether or not it's on their dollar. You claim they have the "right" to do so, and yes, they have it. Does power imply wisdom? Would it be wise for YT to censor videos that have broken no federal, state, or international laws, nor any of the rules laid out YT themselves? The simple fact of the matter is that YouTube claims to be a platform for entertainment and discussion, and yet you're defending ownership of something as a (unarguably weak) justification for blocking such discussion in favor of sticking one's head in the sand, instead of allowing opposing viewpoints to be exchanged.

 

Imagine if Feld0 (or whoever currently owns/co-owns MLPF) decided he didn't like something you said and decided, "Well, he didn't technically break any of the forum rules, but you know what? I own this place and I can do whatever I want. Permaban!" Would you argue for his "right" to do so just as shruggingly as you're doing in YT's favor? Or would you regard his actions as a massive abuse of authority?

 

...That's not a rhetorical question, btw, I'm legitimately curious - would you?

Edited May 7, 2014 by The Thrashy One

[nami438 90]

Two questions you should ask yourself upon uploading a video to YouTube:

 

-Is the content contained within this video in violation of any laws, copyright-related or otherwise?

 

-Is the content contained within this video in violation of YouTube's ToS?

 

If the answer is "No" to both questions, then they have literally no valid reason to pull a video, whether or not it's on their dollar. You claim they have the "right" to do so, and yes, they have it. Does power imply wisdom? Would it be wise for YT to censor videos that have broken no federal, state, or international laws, nor any of the rules laid out YT themselves? The simple fact of the matter is that YouTube claims to be a platform for entertainment and discussion, and yet you're defending ownership of something as a (unarguably weak) justification for sticking one's head in the sand instead of allowing opposing viewpoints to be exchanged.

 

Imagine if Feld0 (or whoever currently owns/co-owns MLPF) decided he didn't like something you said and decided, "Well, he didn't technically break any of the forum rules, but you know what? I own this place and I can do whatever I want. Permaban!" Would you argue for his "right" to do so just as shruggingly as you're doing in YT's favor? Or would you regard his actions as a massive abuse of authority?

 

...That's not a rhetorical question, btw, I'm legitimately curious - would you?

Good question. If Feld0 decided to permaban me right now just 'cuz, then yes, I'd argue that that's his right if you asked me. I don't think that that would be morally good, but legally (in American law, not sure how things go down in Canada) that's his right, since we never signed an agreement that he can't do that. This is his "house", so to speak, and I am one of his guests. Then I'd just go to some other forum.

 

What I or you think is morally right =/= what is legally okay to do.

 

You don't understand, if King Google pops his head out of that sand, he's gonna have a whole lot of rifles sticking right at him courtesy of Disney, Time Warner, Viacom, you name it. They're all fully loaded too. If the King was a brave man, he'd say "Give me liberty or give me death!" But he obviously isn't, he'd much prefer to get sand stuck in his ears. Otherwise, he ain't gonna be a king no more if you get my drift.

Edited May 7, 2014 by nami438

[Mars Caramel 319]

Oh, bloody hell! I only recently started watching his videos, and he gave some very good advice, not to mention how calm, civil, and loving he is. Is this really what's becoming of us? Will there be nothing left of this fandom if this keeps up? I just hope something is done about all of this, and hopefully prevent any more of this crap from happening.

[Thrashy 2,800]

Good question. If Feld0 decided to permaban me right now just 'cuz, then yes, I'd argue that that's his right if you asked me. I don't think that that would be morally good, but legally (in American law, not sure how things go down in Canada) that's his right, since we never signed an agreement that he can't do that. This is his "house", so to speak, and I am one of his guests. Then I'd just go to some other forum.

 

What I or you think is morally right =/= what is legally okay to do.

 

And AGAIN, power =/= wisdom. For YouTube to tighten its grip on free speech would be to repel millions of users, just as this hypothetical version of Feld0 being such a hypothetical dick would cause word to spread across the Internet to avoid MLPF like the plague. This isn't just a slippery slope fallacy; it's a realistic observation that human beings refuse to be told "you can't say that". People would abandon YouTube, and a replacement for it would arise in its place.

 

Defend abuses of power all you like, but in doing so, you're also defending actions that are directly detrimental to a business entity.

[Andaasonsan 3,205]

Imagine if Feld0 (or whoever currently owns/co-owns MLPF) decided he didn't like something you said and decided, "Well, he didn't technically break any of the forum rules, but you know what? I own this place and I can do whatever I want. Permaban!" Would you argue for his "right" to do so just as shruggingly as you're doing in YT's favor? Or would you regard his actions as a massive abuse of authority?

 

...That's not a rhetorical question, btw, I'm legitimately curious - would you?

Yeah. I actually kind of wish more forums would ban people "just because". Whenever you set up forum rules you always end up with people who find ways to be total dicks, without technically breaking any rules.

[nami438 90]

And AGAIN, power =/= wisdom. For YouTube to tighten its grip on free speech would be to repel millions of users, just as this hypothetical version of Feld0 being such a hypothetical dick would cause word to spread across the Internet to avoid MLPF like the plague. This isn't just a slippery slope fallacy; it's a realistic observation that human beings refuse to be told "you can't say that". People would abandon YouTube, and a replacement for it would arise in its place.

 

Defend abuses of power all you like, but in doing so, you're also defending actions that are directly detrimental to a business entity.

I am hoping this happens, too. But so far it hasn't, so King Google has got no worries!

 

I defend a business's right to do whatever it wants to itself, including dumb stuff that will only bring it to its knees in the future. Let the foolish wallow if they refuse to seek help.

 

Come with me, look at the forest instead of the individual trees. Losing its userbase is not the only negative thing that can happen to Youtube over this.

[Andaasonsan 3,205]

And AGAIN, power =/= wisdom. For YouTube to tighten its grip on free speech would be to repel millions of users, just as this hypothetical version of Feld0 being such a hypothetical dick would cause word to spread across the Internet to avoid MLPF like the plague. This isn't just a slippery slope fallacy; it's a realistic observation that human beings refuse to be told "you can't say that". People would abandon YouTube, and a replacement for it would arise in its place.

 

Defend abuses of power all you like, but in doing so, you're also defending actions that are directly detrimental to a business entity.

I think we've reached the we're just talking past each other point.

 

Basically I think it's silly for someone to talk as though they're somehow entitled to a YouTube account or have some legal right to it.

 

It's really annoying if they remove videos for no reason, and it's bad for them in the long term, but I don't think it's "wrong" for them to use that power.

[Thrashy 2,800]

Come with me, look at the forest instead of the individual trees. Losing its userbase is not the only negative thing that can happen to Youtube over this.

 

I find this statement hilarious, given the statement that directly follows it. It shows that you clearly do not understand the effects of YouTube losing its userbase - something I understand all too well.

 

If I am looking at each individual tree, then perhaps you, sir should stop looking at each individual leaf.

[nami438 90]

I find this statement hilarious, given the statement that directly follows it. It shows that you clearly do not understand the effects of YouTube losing its userbase - something I understand all too well.

 

If I am looking at each individual tree, then perhaps you, sir should stop looking at each individual leaf.

I said in an earlier post a page or two back, that Youtube could lose its userbase over this. Realistically that won't happen, since the big Youtubers (I'm talking Pewdiepie and Smosh big) aren't affected by this tango, they either have permission or make all of their content, but just assuming.

 

Do you know what will happen to Google if they decide to stop letting companies claim copyright over any little thing?

 

 

Oh, bloody hell! I only recently started watching his videos, and he gave some very good advice, not to mention how calm, civil, and loving he is. Is this really what's becoming of us? Will there be nothing left of this fandom if this keeps up? I just hope something is done about all of this, and hopefully prevent any more of this crap from happening.

I do too! If only there was some agreement we could sign, $50 a year to make all the pony content you want, and Hasbro gets a percent of any extraordinary profits... wouldn't everyone be happy?

Edited May 7, 2014 by nami438

[Kel_Grym 1,917]

Looks like this maybe a problem on Youtube/Google's end rather than Hasbro. Their content flagging system is rather contrived and faulty. Since it was on charges of suspicious activity, either the content filter misread his account, someone was hacking him or, as unfortunate as this may sound, he was doing suspicious activity. 

 

But at least something good came out of this. It showed how much we care about our fellow Bronies since we are paying so much attention to this. 

 

Hopefully this all gets sorted out. 

 

I might not. Youtube is notorious for this.

 

ObabScribbler has a youtube account where she does fanfic readings (which is supurb btw) and her account has gotten false flagged a few times of a comic dub that had Rarity and Applejack ONLY in the same bed together. Apparently that was inappropriate so she got flagged. Considering all the racier things out there on youtube, it's ridiculous...

[Thrashy 2,800]

Basically I think it's silly for someone to talk as though they're somehow entitled to a YouTube account or have some legal right to it.

 

It's really annoying if they remove videos for no reason, and it's bad for them in the long term, but I don't think it's "wrong" for them to use that power.

 

It has nothing to do with entitlement, as you so politely put it. Business ethics exist for a reason. Many, in fact. And one of the biggest ones is to prevent companies from alienating their consumers. I'm not arguing against this because I want YouTubers to have free reign to do whatever the hell they want, I'm arguing this because I don't want to see YouTube go down in flames by ignoring their own sense of business ethic. I want YouTube to continue to thrive. It's been one of the very best platforms for both entertainment and serious discussion that the Internet has ever bore witness to. We should all be concerned when they do something that could jeopardize their own future.

 

Do you know what will happen to Google if they decide to stop letting companies claim copyright over any little thing?

 

There's a massive difference between allowing a company to make such a claim, and completely axing a video (or even a channel outright) for that claim, whether or not it's been proven valid. Every claim should be scrutinized before a user gets disciplined for it, and failure to do so is simply bad business no matter how you try to justify it.

Edited May 7, 2014 by The Thrashy One

[nami438 90]

There's a massive difference between allowing a company to make such a claim, and completely axing a video (or even a channel outright) for that claim, whether or not it's been proven valid. Every claim should be scrutinized before a user gets disciplined for it, and failure to do so is simply bad business no matter how you try to justify it.

Exactly, it is very bad business. But obviously not bad enough to Google, because they haven't stopped.

 

Edited May 7, 2014 by nami438

[Jeric 46,890]

This is a great debate and all, but has there been any update on what exactly happened? Just curious since I still think this was either an algorithm issue, or a phishing hack.

[Ragland Tiger 3,556]

A humorous explanation of copyright law and "fair use".

 

[Virgil 686]

http://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/youtube-restore-the-drwolf001-youtube-channel

Someone started this up, and while I still think the Docs been the victim of a phishing scheme, this might help prod the folks at google to sort this thing out faster.

[FoxyCryptid 4,330]

Two questions you should ask yourself upon uploading a video to YouTube:

 

-Is the content contained within this video in violation of any laws, copyright-related or otherwise?

 

-Is the content contained within this video in violation of YouTube's ToS?

 

If the answer is "No" to both questions, then they have literally no valid reason to pull a video, whether or not it's on their dollar. You claim they have the "right" to do so, and yes, they have it. Does power imply wisdom? Would it be wise for YT to censor videos that have broken no federal, state, or international laws, nor any of the rules laid out YT themselves? The simple fact of the matter is that YouTube claims to be a platform for entertainment and discussion, and yet you're defending ownership of something as a (unarguably weak) justification for blocking such discussion in favor of sticking one's head in the sand, instead of allowing opposing viewpoints to be exchanged.

 

Imagine if Feld0 (or whoever currently owns/co-owns MLPF) decided he didn't like something you said and decided, "Well, he didn't technically break any of the forum rules, but you know what? I own this place and I can do whatever I want. Permaban!" Would you argue for his "right" to do so just as shruggingly as you're doing in YT's favor? Or would you regard his actions as a massive abuse of authority?

 

...That's not a rhetorical question, btw, I'm legitimately curious - would you?

I've been on places like that. I recall being on one site where a mod left an abusive comment on my blog then gave me warning points for hiding it. He didn't even try to hide the abuse of power, the "ticket" issued by him and the system even gave "this will teach you to hide my comments" as a reason for the warn. 

 

 

Yeah. I actually kind of wish more forums would ban people "just because". Whenever you set up forum rules you always end up with people who find ways to be total dicks, without technically breaking any rules.

 

I'm not gonna lie, the forums on DeviantArt(more so in the off-topic sections, the art related sub-forms are still fine) has reached a point of being full of this(as well as actual abusive behavior the mods don't give a shit about). There's one person that calls every brony that comes through a "horsef***er" "just because" and she hasn't even been suspended. 

 

She once blew up on me just because I made a joke(aimed at no-one in particular) and thought I was aiming it as her. 

[nami438 90]

This is a great debate and all, but has there been any update on what exactly happened? Just curious since I still think this was either an algorithm issue, or a phishing hack.

None so far, just his report on what happened and that his Youtube page claims he was banned due to "multiple copyright infringements".

Edited May 8, 2014 by nami438

[cuteycindyhoney 13,341]

Just because it's legal doesn't mean it's moral.

Oh please! Do you even see who dopy that looks? You actually truly believe it's immoral for Hasbro to protect their legal rights? Hasbro owns all the rights to all character designs in MLPFIM. Just because someone likes those characters, doesn't mean they're allowed to totally ignore the law whenever they feel like it. This statement has nothing to do with Dr Wolf's YouTube account being closed. As yet, nobody knows the real story.

Edited May 8, 2014 by cuteycindyhoney

[Sir Wulfington 276]

Oh please! Do you even see who dopy that looks? You actually truly believe it's immoral for Hasbro to protect their legal rights? Hasbro owns all the rights to all character designs in MLPFIM. Just because someone likes those characters, doesn't mean they're allowed to totally ignore the law whenever they feel like it. This statement has nothing to do with Dr Wolf's YouTube account being closed. As yet, nobody knows the real story.

 

But what is Hasbro "protecting" them from?

[cuteycindyhoney 13,341]

But what is Hasbro "protecting" them from?

Now you're just sounding foolish. They're protecting their copyrighted property from people using them in any way shape or form without their permission. What about that is so hard for bronies to comprehend? It doesn't matter if the person isn't making a profit monetary wise. They DO NOT have permission, or a legal right to use the characters and situations created by Hasbro, or Hasbro's paid agents. (The writers and animators working on the show) 

Edited May 8, 2014 by cuteycindyhoney