close
    • chevron_right

      YouTube under no obligation to host anti-vaccine advocate’s videos, court says

      news.movim.eu / ArsTechnica · Tuesday, 5 September - 20:08

    YouTube under no obligation to host anti-vaccine advocate’s videos, court says

    Enlarge (credit: NurPhoto / Contributor | NurPhoto )

    A prominent anti-vaccine activist, Joseph Mercola, yesterday lost a lawsuit attempting to force YouTube to provide access to videos that were removed from the platform after YouTube banned his channels.

    Mercola had tried to argue that YouTube owed him more than $75,000 in damages for breaching its own user contract and denying him access to his videos. However, in an order dismissing Mercola's complaint, US magistrate judge Laurel Beeler wrote that according to the contract Mercola signed, YouTube was "under no obligation to host" Mercola's content after terminating his channel in 2021 "for violating YouTube’s Community Guidelines by posting medical misinformation about COVID-19 and vaccines."

    "The court found no breach because 'there is no provision in the Terms of Service that requires YouTube to maintain particular content' or be a 'storage site for users’ content,'" Beeler wrote.

    Read 14 remaining paragraphs | Comments

    • chevron_right

      Sony copyright claims for Bewitched spell trouble for group that preserves old TV

      news.movim.eu / ArsTechnica · Tuesday, 5 September - 19:45

    Promotional art for the 1960s television show, Bewitched

    Enlarge / Everyday witch Samantha Stephens and the rest of the Bewitched crew. (credit: Sony)

    A nonprofit that preserves classic television videos may have its YouTube channel shut down tomorrow over copyright claims for Bewitched episodes that originally aired in the 1960s.

    The Museum of Classic Chicago Television has about 5,000 videos, including many decades-old commercials and news shows, posted on its YouTube channel and its own Fuzzy Memories website . President and chief curator Rick Klein's "quest to save vintage Chicago TV shows and commercials" was featured in a WBEZ story two years ago.

    But after 16 years of Klein and his group, who rely on donors and volunteers, archiving old videos, the TV museum's YouTube channel on August 30 received six copyright strikes for posting 27 Bewitched episodes owned by Sony Pictures Television. Copyright complaints were sent by MarkScan , a "digital asset protection" firm that content owners hire to enforce copyrights. MarkScan has been sending copyright complaints on Sony's behalf since at least 2014 .

    Read 20 remaining paragraphs | Comments

    • chevron_right

      YouTuber who crashed plane admits he did it for money and views

      news.movim.eu / ArsTechnica · Friday, 12 May, 2023 - 19:39 · 1 minute

    Screenshot from Trevor Jacob's YouTube video "I Crashed My Airplane."

    Enlarge / Screenshot from Trevor Jacob's YouTube video "I Crashed My Airplane." (credit: TrevorJacob on YouTube )

    A YouTuber who deliberately crashed a plane to "gain notoriety and make money" has agreed to plead guilty to obstructing a federal investigation, the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) announced yesterday. In his plea agreement, California pilot Trevor Jacob admitted to "deliberately destroying" the plane wreckage and repeatedly lying to officials.

    The crimes of destruction and concealment with intent to impede a federal investigation carry a maximum sentence of 20 years imprisonment and a potential fine of up to $250,000. The Los Angeles district court may impose a lesser sentence due to the plea deal, though.

    Jacob is scheduled to appear in court in the coming weeks, the DOJ reported. A DOJ public information officer, Ciaran McEvoy, told Ars that Jacob has not yet pleaded guilty. After an initial court appearance—essentially a bond hearing—a change of plea hearing will be scheduled. If Jacob pleads guilty at that hearing, a federal judge will schedule a sentencing hearing several months later. From there, Jacob would meet with the US Probation Office, which will draft a confidential pre-sentencing report recommending the sentence that the office thinks he deserves. Jacob and the prosecutors can either agree or disagree with that sentencing report, and then, ultimately, a judge will determine what sentence is imposed.

    Read 17 remaining paragraphs | Comments

    • chevron_right

      Twitter fails to remove, label graphic images after Texas mass shooting

      news.movim.eu / ArsTechnica · Monday, 8 May, 2023 - 17:12 · 1 minute

    A sign asking people to "Pray for Allen, Texas," stands at a memorial to those killed at the Allen Premium Outlets mall after the mass shooting on May 8, 2023, in Allen, Texas.

    Enlarge / A sign asking people to "Pray for Allen, Texas," stands at a memorial to those killed at the Allen Premium Outlets mall after the mass shooting on May 8, 2023, in Allen, Texas. (credit: Joe Raedle / Staff | Getty Images North America )

    Graphic images from a Texas mass shooting on Saturday that killed nine (including the gunman) and wounded seven are still circulating on Twitter after spreading virally all weekend. Critics told The New York Times that unlike other platforms, Twitter isn't doing enough to remove or label these "unusually graphic" images, especially in footage where dead bodies of some victims, including a young child, appear to be identifiable, Reuters reported .

    Family members do "not deserve to see the dead relatives spread across Twitter for everybody to see,” photojournalist Pat Holloway told the Times. Over the weekend, Holloway joined others in tweeting directly at Twitter CEO Elon Musk to step up the platform's content moderation.

    Twitter's policy on sharing content after a violent attack acknowledges that "exposure to these materials may also cause harm to those that view them." That policy is primarily focused on banning the distribution of content created by perpetrators of attacks, but it also places restrictions on "bystander-generated content" depicting "dead bodies" or "content that identifies victims."

    Read 16 remaining paragraphs | Comments

    • chevron_right

      YouTuber must pay $40K in attorneys’ fees for daft “reverse censorship” suit

      news.movim.eu / ArsTechnica · Friday, 10 March, 2023 - 20:24

    YouTuber must pay $40K in attorneys’ fees for daft “reverse censorship” suit

    Enlarge (credit: picture alliance / Contributor | picture alliance )

    A YouTuber, Marshall Daniels—who has posted far-right-leaning videos under the name “Young Pharaoh” since 2015—tried to argue that YouTube violated his First Amendment rights by removing two videos discussing George Floyd and COVID-19. Years later, Daniels now owes YouTube nearly $40,000 in attorney fees for filing a frivolous lawsuit against YouTube owner Alphabet, Inc.

    A United States magistrate judge in California, Virginia K. DeMarchi, ordered Daniels to pay YouTube $38,576 for asserting a First Amendment claim that “clearly lacked merit and was frivolous from the outset.” YouTube said this represents a conservative estimate and likely an underestimate of fees paid defending against the meritless claim.

    In his defense, Daniels never argued that the fees Alphabet was seeking were excessive or could be burdensome. In making this rare decision in favor of the defendant Alphabet, DeMarchi had to consider Daniels’ financial circumstances. In his court filings, Daniels described himself as “a fledgling individual consumer,” but also told the court that he made more than $180,000 in the year before he filed his complaint. DeMarchi ruled that the fees would not be a burden to Daniels.

    Read 6 remaining paragraphs | Comments

    • chevron_right

      Youtube soutien le patriarcat de l'industrie musicale

      Mathias Poujol-Rost ✅ · Sunday, 18 April, 2021 - 16:32 edit

    (Avertissement : cet article contient une capture d'écran, explicite)

    Si vous cherchez de la #musique pop ou électronique sur le site vidéo d'Alphabet Inc, vous trouverez notamment des chaînes qui diffusent des clips... pas officiels du tout. Et pour cause : nombre de ces pistes ou chansons n'ont pas de music video comme on dit.

    Alors des canaux #Youtube comme N&T Party, Perfect Music, VDJ Smile, ou encore Chill House Mix, EDM Mixes of Popular Songs, HG Club, Magic Music, Music Trap, SEC tvTM, Queen Deep, Shine Music diffusent des montages avec, pour le son : le morceau, et pour l'image : des femmes jeunes et minces qui dansent plus ou moins en rythme et sont plutôt peu habillée, ou en prenant des poses clairement suggestives.

    Une recherche approfondie sur le sujet trouverait sans doute des centaines de #comptes. Parmi ceux cités, les huit derniers sont carrément "validés" (✓) avec le pictogramme associé. #Google cautionne donc ce type de "contenu".

    NB : je n'ai pas essayé en activant un filtre familial ou "enfant".

    #patriarcat #sexisme #femmesObjets

    • To chevron_right

      YouTube Class Action: Not Even One Instance of Copyright Infringement Identified

      Andy Maxwell · news.movim.eu / TorrentFreak · Monday, 25 January, 2021 - 09:18 · 5 minutes

    Sad YouTube Back in 2016, Grammy award-winning musician Maria Schneider launched a scathing attack on YouTube, accusing the platform of “criminal rackeetering”.

    According to Schneider, YouTube has “thoroughly twisted, contorted, and abused the original meaning of the outdated DMCA ‘safe harbor’ to create a massive income redistribution scheme.”

    Last summer it became clear that Schneider’s opinions had not changed when her name appeared as a plaintiff in a class-action lawsuit filed against YouTube.

    As previously reported, Schneider is joined by a company called Pirate Monitor in the suit and together they accuse YouTube of being massively deficient in its copyright enforcement measures, including by denying smaller artists access to its takedown tools (Content ID), failing to terminate repeat infringers, while profiting from piracy.

    YouTube Accuses Plaintiff of Fraud

    Last September, YouTube fought back by alleging that agents of Pirate Monitor opened bogus YouTube accounts to upload its own videos and then filed takedown notices against the same content claiming that its rights had been infringed.

    According to YouTube, this was a ploy to gain access to Content ID after the company was previously denied access for having no track record of properly using the DMCA takedown process. This new and fraudulent approach only supported its earlier decision to deny access to the Content ID tool, YouTube said.

    In November, the plaintiffs fought back, stating that YouTube had failed to provide any evidence to back up its allegations. But a month later, YouTube told the court that the same IP address used to upload allegedly-infringing content was also used to file DMCA notices to take it down.

    Plaintiffs and Defendants Are Digging In

    A case management statement published this week reveals that little progress has been made in respect of bringing the parties closer together.

    The plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and the Class, repeat their claims that “millions” of copyright works have been distributed via YouTube in breach of copyright while alleging that they have no “viable means” of enforcing their rights other than via manual searches and takedown notices.

    Furthermore, since YouTube only implements its repeat infringer policies for non-Content ID identifications, the plaintiffs argue that the video platform cannot claim safe harbor protection under the DMCA. For its part, Youtube says this is an attempt to relitigate its earlier copyright battle with Viacom, which found that YouTube is entitled to safe harbor protections.

    “No law supports Plaintiffs’ assertion that denying them access to [Content ID] somehow makes YouTube liable for copyright infringement,” the video platform adds, noting that Schneider already has access anyway.

    “Plaintiff Schneider already has access to Content ID through her publishing agent, who has used Content ID for years on Schneider’s behalf,” YouTube adds.

    But there are more fundamental issues too.

    Zero Copyright Infringement Alleged in Complaint

    According to YouTube, Schneider has named just three copyrighted “works in suit” and Pirate Monitor has identified three too. However, neither has identified any infringement.

    “[T]he Complaint failed to allege a single instance of infringement for even one of the six copyrighted works. That alone renders the claims deficient. Beyond that, Pirate Monitor recently admitted — five months into the case — that it does not have standing to assert infringement of one of the three works it asserted in the Complaint.”

    YouTube says that Schneider did list around 50 new works that weren’t mentioned in the complaint during interrogatory responses but failed to allege ownership or registration. But there are other problems too.

    “Schneider has failed to identify a single alleged infringement for approximately half of the new works, and the instances of alleged infringement she did identify all fall outside the three-year statute of limitations. Further, it now appears clear that Schneider’s publishing agent licensed YouTube to use all of Schneider’s musical works, which would independently defeat any infringement claim,” YouTube adds.

    Class Action Unsuited to Copyright Disputes

    Given the complexity of copyright infringement cases, YouTube says that the plaintiff’s suit will not be maintainable as a class action. Referencing an earlier failed attempt by the Premier League, YouTube describes the current litigation as a “Frankenstein monster posing as a class action.”

    Evidence Preservation

    According to Schneider and Pirate Monitor, YouTube isn’t taking its evidence preservation responsibilities seriously having rejected some of their demands. The plaintiffs say that YouTube is refusing to preserve videos that are deleted by users, even if they infringe their rights, demanding that the plaintiffs need to identify each one first.

    “Defendants have also repeatedly taken the position that they will not preserve any evidence relating to the putative class in this case,” they add, a reference to entities that are not yet part of the class action – which could be almost any rightsholder.

    Somewhat predictably given the scope of the plaintiffs’ demands, YouTube insists that it is preserving evidence but can only do so when the plaintiffs identify those works, noting that it does not have to guess at what that content should be. Also, when considering that almost any copyright holder could join the class action at a later point, effectively asking YouTube not to delete anything is a step too far.

    “[P]laintiffs have made the extraordinary and unreasonable demand that YouTube preserve all ‘material and content’ uploaded to YouTube, notwithstanding users’ ordinary rights to delete their own data, simply because Plaintiffs have brought this case as a putative class action,” YouTube writes.

    “They have cited no authority requiring anything like that, which would inflict huge costs and burdens on YouTube — essentially redesigning YouTube’s entire data retention system in violation of user privacy rights and at a cost of hundreds of hours of engineering time and millions of dollars — that are disproportionate to the legitimate needs of a case in which there are only two named plaintiffs asserting, at most, a small number of copyrighted works, and who have very low prospects of ever certifying a class.”

    The case has been scheduled for trial starting November 28, 2022, but whether it will ever get there remains a question. The only certainty at the moment is that the parties couldn’t be any further apart in their positions and neither is showing any signs of giving an inch.

    The joint case management statement can be found here (pdf)

    From: TF , for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.

    • chevron_right

      Voici toutes les plateformes qui ont bloqué Donald Trump

      Marie Turcan · news.movim.eu / Numerama · Friday, 8 January, 2021 - 10:05

    Les plateformes retournent leur veste à 15 jours de la passation de pouvoir entre Donald Trump et Joe Biden. [Lire la suite]

    Abonnez-vous à notre chaîne YouTube pour ne manquer aucune vidéo !

    L'article Voici toutes les plateformes qui ont bloqué Donald Trump est apparu en premier sur Numerama .