Re:YouTube says it has ‘no obligation’ to host anyone’s video
by catalogia on Monday November 11, 2019 @01:18PM
(#21507227)
Forget the nazi shit for a minute: I doubt a youtube competitor upstart could get away with the sort of flagrant widespread copyright violation that was once common on youtube. Youtube itself got away with that for a few years, but can that stunt be replicated? I doubt it.
Re:YouTube says it has ‘no obligation’ to host anyone’s video
by edmundsauto on Monday November 11, 2019 @08:28PM
(#21510690)
Good point. OTOH, there wasn't as much amateur digital content back then -- pretty much anything I wanted to watch was owned by a larger company. Nowadays, hobbyists and retirees and all kinds of people own the rights to content that I would want to see.
The environment has changed a lot, and it might not be a prerequisite to copy YT's growth model.
Re:YouTube says it has ‘no obligation’ to host anyone’s video
by shadowgovt on Monday November 11, 2019 @01:27PM
(#21507327)
Unfortunately, that becomes a reason not to support YouTube alternatives if one doesn't actually want to create a breeding ground for that content that cannot practically be moderated.
It's a vicious cycle.
Re:YouTube says it has ‘no obligation’ to host anyone’s video
by wang_li on Monday November 11, 2019 @01:44PM
(#21507520)
Among quite a significant portion of the vocal participants in social media anyone right of Bernie is a nazi. They call orthodox jews (Prager, Shapiro), lefty academics (Haidt, Peterson, Weinstein), and liberal gays (Rubin) Nazis.
I suspect the "NaziTube" nicknames (did this happen somewhere? Or is it more of a hypothetical example) are because upstarts don't have the resources to ensure Nazi videos are blocked. Thus, they become a breeding ground for that pernicious type of scum that has been evicted from the larger, better resourced, systems.