InsideGoogle

« Previous | Next »

151 Comments »

1. Reported videos so far:

   Two clips from X-Men 3:
   http://youtube.com/watch?v=i7aHf5rDwas
   http://youtube.com/watch?v=scR2NMmdW4k

   Trailer for the Bond movie:
   http://youtube.com/watch?v=ziOQaQ7XL1Q

   TNT basketball clip:
   http://youtube.com/watch?v=QFcinlrgojk

   Titanic 2 mashup (uses lots of short clips from movies and music):
   http://youtube.com/watch?v=kfwnEVCwqsM
   http://youtube.com/watch?v=vD4OnHCRd_4

   Hannity and Colmes clip:
   http://youtube.com/watch?v=1G470rfJQCI

   Pokemon music video (contains copyrighted music, and is most popular video of all time):
   http://youtube.com/watch?v=0XxI-hvPRRA

   David Hasselhoff music video:
   http://youtube.com/watch?v=x20v9F-sWHQ

   Puff Daddy music video:
   http://youtube.com/watch?v=RJduo835kOw

   Scene from Napolean Dynomite:
   http://youtube.com/watch?v=ixsZy2425eY

   Comment by Nathan Weinberg | May 3, 2006

2. my suggestion: find a hobby!

   Comment by wizardofyendor | May 3, 2006

3. Yikes! I’ll be sure to stay on your good side!

   I was done with YouTube when they limited uploads to 100mb. There’s a lot of great material that’s more than 100 megs.

   Now if only Google Video would open up the marketplace and let anybody set prices for their stuff we’ll be in business.

   But you’re right, Google Video won’t be any better for posting content with questionable copyright, even for free.

   Comment by mb | May 3, 2006

4. “I also objected to them sending me emails that essentially accused me of copyright violations, and called me a criminal and repeat offender. I believe that such cases occupy far more of a gray area, in which the sharing of other people’s content, in small amounts for no profit, constitutes promotion of the content, and should be considered permissable until such time as the copyright holder objects, at which point it should be immediately removed with complete understanding that both parties acted in good faith. Again, they disagreed.”

   Very well said. I am constantly pissed off by both YouTube and Google Video. I agree with you that the best situation would be for them to hold stuff till the copyright holder objects.

   A lot of companies can’t outright support something but they can turn a blind eye to it. It’s common practice. Comedy Central can’t come out and say it’s ok to share clips form the Daily Show, as their lawyers would have a fit and it would weak their copyright. But they can not send out copyright notices - allowing but not condoning the act is about as much as the big companies can do.

   Comment by Cody | May 3, 2006

5. Is YouTube Making the Friendster Mistake?

   Trackback by Dare Obasanjo aka Carnage4Life | May 3, 2006

6. You got screwed, so you’re going to screw as many people as possible?

   Hmm… I never trusted YouTube to begin with.

   Go check out ourmedia

   Comment by ronen | May 3, 2006

7. Well, from YouTube’s and Google’s point of view, they don’t want hundreds of lawsuits. Sure, video sharing services may follow the *letter of the law*, but once they become popular, that won’t prevent lawsuits, which cost money. That last part is the problem - money. If you owned such a service would you rather piss off a few users uploading copyright content or ruin the profit in your business with tons of lawsuit and the danger of losing at least some of them.

   I’m surprised YouTube deleted your account though, I don’t think Google does this. Google rejects each copyright content uploaded, but they don’t delete accounts.

   Honestly, with what happened to napster, and lawsuits against sharing services, and what’s happening with Google Book Search, I can’t see any serious company offering a video sharing service without being tough on copyright issues; it just doesn’t make buisness sense.

   Comment by or | May 3, 2006

8. Clearly, YouTube thinks that unfair and intermittent enforcement of some fuzzy rules is the correct action in this situation. They’ll learn the hard way the mistake they’ve made.

   One suggestion:

   If you list the video’s you’ve reported on, then YouTube has a list of what objections it can probably ignore. Chances are, ignoring you is the first tactic they’ll be using, so why help them?

   Instead of listing videos you’ve reported on, I’d suggest only listing videos which have been taken down (implying that you did report on them). True, it’ll be a smaller list, and take time to grow, but your war on YouTube won’t be a quick one.

   If you do what to post a longer list, you might post a list of videos you suggest other people to report on as infringing on copyright, so that your visitors may do the same as you are doing.

   I like what you’re doing. They behaved horribly, and for that, you’re trying to destroy them. More power to you!

   Comment by Trogdor | May 3, 2006

9. Spare the Daily Show clips from your wrath! While I completely agree with your post, I dislike Google Video and there is no other reasonable alternative yet. Movie trailers I could care less about, as well as most other clips

   I became annoyed with YouTube when without warning they yanked the Chronicles of Narnia SNL rap because NBC made them take it down. The embedded player made it look like the video was still there and would even display “Loading…” when you hit play, but it never loaded. You had to go to the YouTube page to discover it had been removed.

   I think we need another similar viral video to become insanely popular, and then get it reported and yanked to get people to gain awareness at the suckage of YouTube.

   Comment by Niraj | May 3, 2006

10. Good luck on your venture… Can you keep a record of how many videos get removed and subsequent accounts?

    Comment by joshua | May 3, 2006

11. I was with you up until the end — “destroying accounts” seems awfully petty and will anger users more than YouTube.

    Comment by chuck | May 3, 2006

12. I’m very happy to see that this has sparked some good discussion.

    One thing, Trogdor: I disagree. I am only reporting videos that have a very legitimate reason to be removed, videos that contain clear copyright violations and are also very popular. By posting the list and my progress in public, YouTube will have to answer for itself if it doesn’t delete the videos. Of course, if it doesn’t, why? Do they want to apologize to the very active users whose accounts they’ve already deleted?

    Niraj: I’ll probably spare anything from Comedy Central, unless I hear people getting kicked for that stuff as well.

    Joshua: Absolutely.

    Chuck: It is petty. I’m pissed. I believe YouTube is goign to continue to grow, while degrading horribly as a service. Unless we show more of YouTube’s users the problem, and force them to abandon it for something better, or force YouTube to change policies, then it will become a permanent net fixture. I wouldn’t want our top video sharing site to be YouTube, not after what I’ve seen. Imagine if Flickr started deleting whole accounts of anyone who included three or more screenshots?

    Comment by Nathan Weinberg | May 3, 2006

13. Youtube delete Hulk, HULK SMASH!

    Comment by Stu | May 3, 2006

14. Somehow these guys have got to work out the copyright issue in some way, I wouldn’t have even launched a video sharing service without some better way of dealing with it.

    At the end of the day the service just can’t work unless users are allowed to share copyrighted clips - because clearly, that’s what users want to do with such a service. Take away every video that’s either a copyrighted clip, has a copyrighted audio track, or is a mashup of other copyrighted materials, and YouTube might have three videos left on it.

    Comment by Eric | May 3, 2006

15. You go girl!! (not that you are girl) but there is no similar expression for men/boys!!

    So again You go girl!!

    Comment by Terry Fernandez | May 3, 2006

16. Honestly, Nathan, you come across as unreasonable. You contribute to the success of YouTube by uploading copyrighted content without permission? Sure, that makes them successful. It made Napster successful. It’s also illegal. Why not steal a bunch of DVDs from the local Best Buy and hand them out in some other store for free. Bet that store will get lots of visitors. Or heck, you work really hard on the blog here. How about if someone decides to upload all your content onto their own side, shove in their own ads and make money for themselves based on your work? That OK?

    You seem to have been knowingly uploading content that you knew was copyright protected but didn’t care. If it was obvious to you that this material was subject to copyright (and all content in the US, by default, already has copyright protection), then it’s hard to work up sympathy that YouTube quite rightly told you to knock it off.

    The argument that YouTube should rely on the copyright holder to complain if simply absurd. If they have good reason to believe something has been uploaded without permission, I hope they do yank it down. At worst, since they are they publisher (not you), it’s certainly their call to make.

    Yes, the Google Earth clip might have been fair use. But maybe if you hadn’t apparently had a history already of uploading content that might not have been fair use, you’d still be part of the system there.

    As for the fact anything you upload potentially could disappear — Nathan, what do you expect when you use someone else’s server? Google Video could do the same to you. If you are so worried to maintain a digital archive you can totally control and protect, host the content yourself — and accept the risks if the content you host turns out to be a copyright violation.

    As for destroying YouTube, that just sounds petty — nor might it necessarily destroy it. I mean, if they keep all the infringing content, they’ll get destroyed by publishers. Something has to give — and your actions are less likely to hurt them than a major publisher will.

    Overall, I do sympathize with the confusing nature of copyright law and understand that it should and hopefully will change to allow more sharing, especially in times when sharing is much easier. I definitely sympathize if you feel rules have been unevenly enforced. But the solution isn’t going to be that they just turn a blind eye. That just turns into a black eye. YouTube simply has to clean up its act, or it’s going to vanish just as the original Napster did — unless, of course, someone gets copyright law changed in a way that allows more sharing but still provides decent protection to copyright holders.

    Comment by Danny Sullivan | May 3, 2006

17. […] Maybe when they have a site no one visits, they’ll realize just how stupid copyright is. permalink posted: 05.03.2006 You’re reading mikeschramm.com, a collection of writings and errata by MikeSchramm. […]

    Pingback by mikeschramm.com | May 3, 2006

18. […] Maybe when they have a site no one visits, they’ll realize just how stupid copyright is. permalink posted: 05.03.2006 You’re reading mikeschramm.com, a collection of writings and errata by MikeSchramm. […]

    Pingback by mikeschramm.com | May 3, 2006

19. …and that’s when YouTube stock went into the toilet.

    I mean, really, besides violating copyright, what is the purpose of their service? To upload family home movies, in a terribly low-quality format that can’t be shared? Well, sign me up!

    The low audio and video quality is key here. It’s not like people are sharing DVD quality movies. The video clips act more like advertising for the copyright holders, so it’s doubtful, if they have brains in their heads, that they would mind these “violations.” (And in many cases, such as your first example, they actually are advertisements, and what ad ageny wouldn’t be thrilled with free placement?) A cynic might wonder if perhaps YouTube would prefer that those copyright holders paid for advertising….

    Comment by telly | May 3, 2006

20. he calls it “destroying”, which sounds violent - but he means “ending”, which is entirely rational.

    Comment by Doof | May 3, 2006

21. Danny, so you are saying that my contributions to YouTube were illegal, and should never have been allowed. Fair enough. In that case, YouTube should just shut down right now, because, apart from videos that violate copyrights, they have no viral videos. Everything viral, from “Lazy Sunday” to “Numa Numa” is a copyright violation, and we should just give up on every having a successful viral video sharing site.

    As for someone uploading all my content, that isn’t what I am talking about. What if I sent DMCA takedown notices to every site that quotes a sentence of something I said, claiming my writings are copyrighted work? Worse, what if BlogSpot looked for blogs that quoted major news outlets, and deleted the entire blog? There’d be an uproar, certainly.

    I uploaded content that was already on the internet on other sites, moving it to YouTube so it would be in a format I could better share with others. While it is possible that Saturday Night Live complained about my clip, I highly doubt Google or Nova cared about their commercial, or that Fox cared about a poorly shot minute-long clip of 24.

    More importantly, even though YouTube was in the right deleting the videos, what reason was there to delete my entire account? There is no justification for deleting videos I created myself, that posed no copyright violation. That means that someone could build an archive of thousands of videos, only to have them all deleted because three are violations.

    This whole experience proves to me that YouTube doesn’t care about users, but about getting that one viral clip every once in a while that spikes traffic and makes them millions, then deleting the clip and accusing the user of being a pirate when the copyright holder complains. YouTube cannot profit immensely of a viral clip, then treat the uploader as a criminal.

    Danny, Google Video doesn’t delete accounts because of three bad clips, so already they are better at archiving legitimate content.

    I’m doing what I’m doing to prove to YouTube that they can’t run their service with a half-assed approach to copyright. Either ban all copyrighted videos (and watch traffic dissapear), or fight for fair use rights and agreements with media companies. Don’t indiscriminately delete accounts in an almost random fashion.

    The main point: Under the current laws, sharing of video content is impossible. YouTube has to find a better way, or it deserves to be replaced by someone who does. And until that happens, I am going to do everything in my power to convince users that using the service is a big waste of their time.

    Comment by Nathan Weinberg | May 3, 2006

22. More reported videos:

    Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles theme:
    http://youtube.com/watch?v=6D9p-wmtIJc

    Clerks 2 trailer:
    http://youtube.com/watch?v=JeAgPiCi94o

    NBA footage, off TV:
    http://youtube.com/watch?v=aWJtqiEwBus
    http://youtube.com/watch?v=SbluCSBWZPY

    WWE RAW footage:
    http://youtube.com/watch?v=tPWv_6A7VtE

    Real life Simpsons intro (number 3 all-time):
    http://youtube.com/watch?v=49IDp76kjPw

    Music video:
    http://youtube.com/watch?v=iT28V2dYsV4

    Another Bond trailer:
    http://youtube.com/watch?v=jVd-Sqc7hMw

    DateLine clip:
    http://youtube.com/watch?v=mzUgcmD1LpU

    Comment by Nathan Weinberg | May 3, 2006

23. In Germany, fair use also consists of how much of your own work is part of the new work. For example, when you copy 15 minutes of a movie and you don’t add any value of your own, it’s clearly not fair use (if that’s the proper translation for the German law). If you copy 1 minute of a movie, and you add 50 minutes of your own analysis, then this is much more fair use. It’s a bit about whether or not the extract is the focus of the publication or not.

    Comment by Philipp Lenssen | May 3, 2006

24. I don’t know if you’ve considered this, but by notifying youtube of copyrighted materials you’re probably doing them a huge favor. Youtube’s biggest worry right now is that of a lawsuit. They have enough user generated content to be successful on that basis alone.

    The problem that youtube faces is that once they implement a policy of proactively searching for copyrighted material on their own they’re wide open for attack for any copyright videos they leave up. Since searching won’t be perfect it makes more sense to implement a policy requiring notice from users, and therefore being able to claim ignorance if a copyright holder brings a suit against them. By notifying youtube you may be doing a job they would like to do, but can’t due to threat of legal liability.

    Now… if you really want revenge start flagging non-copyrighted videos as copyrighted to waste their time and resources…

    Comment by dopaminergic | May 3, 2006

25. […] » Screw YouTube » InsideGoogle » part of the Blog News Channel “I do have one thing left to do: Ruin YouTube.” A noble cause. (tags: video vendetta hate) […]

    Pingback by Zerolives.org » Blog Archive » links for 2006-05-03 | May 3, 2006

26. dopaminergic: That’s part of the idea. YouTube wants to remove copyrighted content? I’ll help them. Of course, in the process, they’ll lose any reason for people to use it…

    Comment by Nathan Weinberg | May 3, 2006

27. First, you assume the original copyright holder did not object to your videos that were uploaded. You definitely do not know that that is true - you just (wrongly) assumed YouTube was being arbitrary. Do you think they have time to police every video on the service or want to wander around looking at all the videos? Thats not what the DMCA demands, it demands that when they are notified they have to take it down. Dont slam YouTube, slam your freaking government for passing this law.

    Second, the DMCA demands that repeat offenders be removed. So yes, they had to remove your account. Sorry, but if you are going to upload copyrighted photos, videos, music then you run this risk on any legit web service. You were not using the videos for any purpose that is covered under the law.

    Third, seeing how reactionary you are I can see why other would target you for reporting. You are a hothead who hasnt even bothered to read the law - or the reality of NBC, ABC, Warner, EMI are hovering over any new media service just waiting to slam a lawsuit down on them.

    So ya, go on your little rampage and do nothing about the real villians - DMCA + the media powerhouses … oh, and China

    Comment by DMCA | May 3, 2006

28. Nathan, YouTube had every right to delete your account if you continuously disregarded their TOS. You were lucky to have received 2 warnings beforehand; their TOS doesn’t require them. I also don’t agree with your logic that punishing the people who use the service to upload videos, such as myself, is really going to affect YouTube. I would take it pretty personally if I was reported.

    One other thing, according to the latest estimates YouTube is losing roughly $1 million per month of the fairly little VC money they have. So they’re not actually “making millions” on you. Honestly I think whether there is a real business model here is a matter of debate.

    Comment by Dave | May 3, 2006

29. > We should just give up on every having a successful viral video sharing site

    I’ve watched a number of original viral videos that weren’t infringments. The light sabre duel; the freeway stoppage; the nintendo ds lite explanation. I learned about these and enjoyed them through viral marketing.

    Absolutely, watching the Lazy Sunday clip was great. I did it; plenty of others side. That was big time viral. Not legal, of course. And nor are we somehow entitled to have that.

    IE, just what are you thinking — that we are somehow entitled to a video sharing site, where copyright can be infringed just because you’d like to share it with others? Hey, I’ve got some cool music I’d like to share with you. Oops. I can’t just rip the song and post it online without violating copyright. I guess we should give up on having a successful viral music sharing site.

    So what if you found this stuff on the web already. It’s like saying you found a load of stolen goods, so you were just helping out by moving it to a place where it could be fenced better. And whether you think Google or Fox cared is not the point, unless you think it’s cool for people to just reprint your own material without your own permission because ah, Nathan probably won’t mind.

    As for deleting your account? I assume there are terms you agreed to there and that they were within their rights to shut you down. Sadly, it’s just a good learning lesson for you and others to realize that if you build something on someone else’s site — YouTube, Yahoo, Google, whatever — you don’t own or control it. Build the archives on your own site, then you’ve got nothing to complain about.

    As for the current laws, sharing of video content isn’t impossible. If I make a DVD of a TV show, then lend it to someone else without payment, that’s long been acceptable use to my knowledge. Why it suddenly becomes wrong when I’m dealing with the web, I don’t know. I suspect, as Philipp touches on, it has to do with the amount of use. Loaning to an individual is a lesser amount of infringement and may fall under fair use. Duplicating online or offline for hundreds probably tips the scales.

    I suspect you’d have also been fine if the material you posted wasn’t in its entirety. The more you placed your own original work around it, the better as well.

    Ultimately, I’d say you’d have better things to do than take things out on YouTube. They’re going to be struggling with this issue and perhaps they’ll rise to the challenge in helping to change the laws or get us all better definitions of what’s acceptable. Perhaps not, and perhaps another service will come along that starts out fresh with figuring out this stuff in mind. But I really doubt you can expect to see some new service come along and say c’mon, throw all the clips you want at us, copyright be dammned and we’ll pick up the bandwidth. They’ll just become as big a target as YouTube is now.

    Comment by Danny Sullivan | May 3, 2006

30. I believe I may have been a victim of you (Who Else But Quagmire clip from Family Guy). I can’t say I necessarily approve, but I applaude your tactic. I would have probably done something similar.

    A thing to remember is that some clips can be under Fair Use. 17 U.S.C. § 107 states “(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole” is a consideration for fair use. I’m split on how to feel about what you’re doing. It’s funny though. Let’s hope someone creates a site where we can host whatever we want, and not be arbitrarily removed for pointless reasons.

    Comment by Bobby | May 3, 2006

31. Please reconsider Harming the accounts of others - don’t forget people will NOT be able to view these videos if you accellerate YouTube’s demise.

    They must react when violations are reported to avoid a multi million dollar suit - that would surely end most of the free content the world enjoys.

    Lets enjoy what we can — while we can.

    Comment by Search Engines WEB | May 3, 2006

32. […] “Vanopstal is hardly alone. A bitter Nathan Weinberg at InsideGoogle says that he was kicked off YouTube two months ago. Weinberg chronicles his dissatisfaction with the free (and reportedly money-losing) service, ultimately deciding that he has only one thing left to do: “Ruin YouTube” by systematically reporting all of the site’s traffic-generating but copyright-violating videos. Microsoft’s (Research) Don Dodge, who formerly worked at Napster (Research), adds a been there, done that post to the fray, noting sagely: “User-generated content is very difficult to manage and control.”‘ Source: Business 2.0 […]

    Pingback by User Revolt on YouTube @ Alice Hill’s Real Tech News - Independent Tech | May 3, 2006

33. we had HUGE problems with their content rules for stuff that Best Week Ever actually puts on the air, on vh1, with no problem. our account was permabanned for things like posting a video of someone talking about how awesome a show was, cutting to 10 seconds of the show, and cutting back. i understand that you don’t want someone posting whole episodes of shows, or even long clips. we started using iFilm not because they’re corporate cousins but because they’re a LOT more flexible about that stuff. plus, they released a vastly improved embedded player.

    Comment by jim | May 3, 2006

34. YouTube claims they give the accused the chance to make a DMCA counter-claim:

    What if I have been falsely accused of copyright infringement?
    We’ll let you know if we receive a copyright complaint about any of your video content that is hosted on YouTube. We’ll also give you the opportunity to file a DMCA counter-notification. (http://www.youtube.com/t/help)

    Did YouTube give you any such opportunity before deleting your videos?

    Comment by Jim Thompson | May 3, 2006

35. Fallout over YouTube’s new content policies

    It was about this time last month that news broke about YouTube’s new content policy. To summarize: YouTube, feeling the heat of copyright holders and trade associations like the MPAA, instituted a new policy prohibiting the uploading of videos longer…

    Trackback by Making Movies | May 3, 2006

36. Oh, priceless.

    1) You broke the rules
    2) They said knock it off.
    3) You ignored them and did it again.
    4) They said knock it off or else.
    5) You continued to ignore them.
    6) They plonked your ass.

    and now,

    7) You’re QUITTING!

    I hope you look back at this - soon - and realize what a fool you’re making of yourself.

    Comment by LOL | May 3, 2006

37. I still have the scars from my days at Napster. It seems that copyrights on the web are widely misunderstood. I wrote a post today focused on copyrights, fair use, and where the problems are. YouTube and MySpace need to have clear consistent policies…and stick to them. It looks like they are making it up as they go along.

    See http://dondodge.typepad.com/the_next_big_thing/2006/05/copyright_law_o.html

    Comment by Don Dodge | May 3, 2006

38. […] » Screw YouTube » InsideGoogle » part of the Blog News Channel “When I am done, the only popular videos on YouTube will be those with zero commercial value. We will see how well the service does without the Daily Show and South Park entire episodes that are its real bread and butter.” […]

    Pingback by Net Crap (5/4) at Musings of a Chicagoan | May 4, 2006

39. i am personally appauled at what has happened, and is happening, here. to think that my fellow men and women would possibly be engaging in *gasp* unintentional copyright fraud and intellectual property law violations. the thought!

    ok, now that i got that out. its really understandable from YouTube’s POV. someone has submitted something copyrighten. remove it, send warning. the deletion of your account, also understandable and i even support that decision. the fact that they did not give you the opportunity to even show proof that some of the copywrighten material was your own, is just stupidity or laziness… maybe both.

    as for the copyright infringement, the holder of the copyright doesn’t neccisarily need to bring the cause of action against the offender. there’s this lovely thing called prosecutors and district attorneys. they are the ones who have the right under the international intellectual property law to prosecute your sorry ass. that Inter IP law means that anything in any nation that has signed on with the law must recognize any patent, copyright, IP etc. for any person in any other nation that has also agreed to comply with it.

    personally, i think those that are found in violation should have their personal information handed over, along with a copy of the offending material, handed over to local authorities and have the company that has the copyright on the material be informed of the infraction.

    its obviously difficult for a company to remove all or even most of the possible offenders. and it is painfully neccisary for them to follow the course of action that they did. i do not agree with it.

    the reason why i don’t agree with it is that for something to be conisdered violating IP and copyright laws, a profit or the intent to make the offended party lose profit. this isn’t the only one, but its a major factor. if by posing a commercial and you state who produced the commercial and all relevant information and give proper credit, i don’t see how it is cause for legal action. the fair use doctrine was intened more for items that rely on a purchase of that item for a profit, like a DVD (btw if you stole the DVDs you only have larceny, if you give them away for no profit and w/o the stipulation that you must make a purchase to get one, you aren’t braking any laws). if you have a movie, The Matrix for example, and you take a clip of Neo fighting Morpheous. If you just post the clip, yes you are violating the section, because in order to normally see it, someone must either purchse or rent the movie, or you need to see it in theaters. now if you increase the lenght of time substantially by adding large amounts of animation, 3-d graphics etc. and increase it from lets say 5 minutes to 30 minutes. then its possible to become exempt under the fair use doctrine.

    i doubt you are making a profit by showing a commercial. i doubt the site is makeing a profit by hosting it. i’m willing to be that a company wouldn’t care too much if its product became better known.

    now for a quick commentary on what your doin….

    keep it up. for a site to use and abuse its memebers shows no loyalty to those who make it up. and that is not a site, or should i say internet community, that deserves to exits.

    Comment by Unsung Prophet | May 4, 2006

40. […] Youtube seems to be losing some of its early adopters: Coolz0r quits the service, while Nathan even embarks on a grassroots activism mission to ruin the company (by getting its most popular uploaders banned - I have mixed feelings about that one). The issue is: to protect themselves from lawsuits, Youtube is taking the approach of deleting videos and even users upon first suspicion of (copyright) problems. They already gave an ultimatum from NBC in Feb, then a proof to Jason Calacanis that it was ‘not a real business‘. […]

    Pingback by blog.forret.com | Youtube bandwidth: terabytes per day | May 4, 2006

41. “I do have one thing left to do: Ruin YouTube.”

    Childish.

    Grow up already.

    Comment by Another Idiot | May 4, 2006

42. This post is on CNN now:
    http://money.cnn.com/2006/05/03/technology/business2_browser0503/index.htm

    Comment by Philipp Lenssen | May 4, 2006

43. […] YouTube sees user rebellion MORE HERE EVEN MORE  […]

    Pingback by Grant Gochnauer - Blog : Technology : Foundation » News From The Web | May 4, 2006

44. yeah grow up and do something more productive with your time. You are acting like a petulant child whose been sent to bed early.

    Comment by Santa Clawz | May 4, 2006

45. […] Vanopstal is hardly alone. A bitter Nathan Weinberg at InsideGoogle says that he was kicked off YouTube two months ago. Weinberg chronicles his dissatisfaction with the free (and reportedly money-losing) service, ultimately deciding that he has only one thing left to do: “Ruin YouTube” by systematically reporting all of the site’s traffic-generating but copyright-violating videos. Microsoft’s (Research) Don Dodge, who formerly worked at Napster (Research), adds a been there, done that post to the fray, noting sagely: “User-generated content is very difficult to manage and control.” […]

    Pingback by Musings of the Great Eric » Blog Archive » YouTube figures out how to solve it’s financial woes | May 4, 2006

46. Nathan’s point that YouTube’s enforcement of the copyright infringement policy is inconsistant at best is valid. I tested a few of the links he reported and they’re still up. And yet their TOS states “and YouTube will remove all Content and User Submissions if properly notified that such Content or User Submission infringes on another’s intellectual property rights. ” Policy enforcement, of any type, should be uniform for all users.

    Comment by Lisa Laviolette | May 4, 2006

47. I will only target those with copyright infringing content.

    *loads Youtube.com*

    *stares at blank screen*

    Comment by Fatal Fury | May 4, 2006

48. Geeks Declare War on Youtube (no video included)

    No video in this post but some youtuber related news: A well-known blogger, who has contributed some of Youtube’s most popular clips, has had it up to here with their overzealous censorship and has now vowed to destroy them by…

    Trackback by Tuberaider Video | May 4, 2006

49. he’s not acting like a child. since YouTube has an inconsitant and poorly enforced policy he’s makeing them enforce it. if you demand that people report improperpostings, how is doing it childish? he was affected by this, and retaliation is understandable, but what if NBC posted some clips of their own TV shows. and they were banned. wouldn’t that cause an uproar. 2 of those reports were of his OWN material. you can not violate your own copyright. so how is it possible for them to say he did?

    Comment by Unsung Prophet | May 4, 2006

50. Who are you to decide whether someone’s copyright material that they created should be released for publicity purposes?

    If everyone releases a different couple of minutes nothing new is left to be seen so you have deprived them of their unique resource.

    I hope someone steals your website.

    You are deluded.

    Comment by bittorrent | May 4, 2006

51. Friends,

    May I recommend a site that a few friends and I have made called:

    www.138fx.com

    We decided to offer an unlimited size/length policy (all FREE of course), plus a lot of cool social sorting features. We just got it done and are looking for members to check it out and give us feedback on it. We want to dev this site with an open source like policy of listening to the community so please check it out, sign up, upload stuff, and let me know what you think !!

    Comment by colin | May 4, 2006

52. Youtube is getting all of the press, but I’m starting to like Blog Cheese better because its so easy to upload video. I’m kinda curious to know if anyone else is using them.

    http://www.blogcheese.com

    Comment by Andrew Fife | May 5, 2006

53. Hate you YouTube

    Trackback by NEO Binaries: The online resource to Web based applications. Listings, reviews, news, articles and the first web2.0 community | May 5, 2006

54. I posted a 30 second clip of an episode of SportsCenter and it was removed after several weeks. It’s not like ESPN sells that content to anyone or makes archives available, all my clip did was advertise ESPN and their programming. It’s not YouTube that sucks, its the content providers and the DMCA that barely know what the Internet is.

    Hell, I’ve seen movie trailers removed due to the DMCA. Explain that one.

    Comment by Brian | May 5, 2006

55. Ahhh, yes, that big myth — non-commercial use, doesn’t make any money, the creator doesn’t complain, that’s “fair”, that’s not “illegal”, that must be ok. Heck, it promotes the creator’s stuff, so I’m actually HELPING him!

    You don’t have to “make money” to break the law. You don’t have to be doing it for “commercial reasons” to be breaking the law. You don’t have to copy the whole thing to be breaking the law. You don’t have to claim it’s yours to break the law. And the creator doesn’t have to “vigorously defend” his copyright. These are all mistakes, you can look them up.

    http://www.templetons.com/brad/copymyths.html

    There’s where some of the most common myths about copyright are debunked. And the DMCA just makes it worse. Instead of whining about YouTube, why not complain to your Congresscritters about DMCA and get the damn thing repealed? Or fight against the RIAA and the MPAA and their nonsense? At least those are worthy fights, not your ridiculous journey to the petulant side of the Force.

    Comment by ArdRhi | May 5, 2006

56. Hi Nathan,

    I read your post regarding YouTube. A very interesting continuaton of this on-going discussion.

    I thought I would throw our name in the ring since we support video on NowPublic. Anyone can use NowPublic to store and distribute their video if they want.

    Tell me what you think if you have the time.

    All the Best,

    Calder Lorenz
    clorenz@nowpublic.com

    Comment by Calder Lorenz | May 5, 2006

57. Well. Neener, neener, neener, huh? I can’t recall a more proudly childish act in recent memory. Let it die its natural death without causing interruption to anyone else’s life, especially out of pure malice and some elevated sense of purpose.

    Comment by Jill Draper | May 5, 2006

58. Why not give www.zippyvideos.com a try? A nice thing about zippyvideos is that you can mark uploaded videos as private, so that only those you send the link to can view them and therefore the whole world doesn’t see them (and perhaps increase your chances of getting reported for copyright infringement).

    I’d also be interested to hear other’s opinions on ZippyVideos.com (but please also email me as I doubt I’ll check back here)…

    Comment by Marc | May 7, 2006

59. Porn, Copyright Violation, Sexual Predators vs Angry Users

    Don Dodge has a great piece covering the issues that YouTube and Myspace are dealing with. He goes through these 3 big legal issues and then ends with some sage advice: OK, three big problems to deal with. Then they…

    Trackback by Are you a beauty? | May 7, 2006

60. Nathan

    Thought I would add my voice in support of your efforts but also say that efforts to fight RIAA, MPAA and their congressional lapdogs are the real problem, as has been said. This was a great country when we had representatives that gave a s*** about their constituents. Now they’re just corporate whores.

    Comment by Rick Gambrell | May 7, 2006

61. I agree with you completely!!! I’ve been wanting to download clips from American Idol shows and everytime I try to search for my favorite idol performance Youtube doesn’t have it. I’m tired of youtube and is looking forward of using another video uploading site that allow me to watch my favorite AI performance.
    btw, I found a cool site called broadcube.com. It’s pretty cool and they haven’t restrict me from downloading my favorite shows. Also if this site broadcube.com can bring youtube.com down so be it. Besides the name is a bit similar, maybe people would remember broadcube and start using that site. Btw I don’t own broadcube.com so I’m not trying to advertise the site by any means or spam your blog. I just wanted to tell you about a new site that I think is probably better then youtube.com

    Comment by Mary | May 7, 2006

62. Wow, somebody here is a sore loser. Nobody likes a tattle tale.

    Comment by Bob Hope | May 8, 2006

63. Wow. The Internet is serious business! Rock me like a hurricane, Nate Dogg!

    Comment by tom sherman | May 8, 2006

64. […] Ofcourse Miel’s buddy, Nathan, joined in as well and thus the ripple grows. . . […]

    Pingback by Hitchhiker’s Guide to 650 :: Web 2.0 Community Management :: May :: 2006 | May 8, 2006

65. You are a petty child. It is that simple. You can think of nothing but yourself, you are what this nation has become. Your mommy should have put you over her knee and spanked you.

    You are not special.
    The world does not revolve around you.

    Now grow up and try being a man.

    Comment by Braken | May 10, 2006

66. By the way
    Broadcube.com is a spammer and should be avoided.

    Only the copyright holder can file a DMCA take down notice, so this little boy is only throwing an ineffectual tantrum. He is the child in the baby seat of a grocery cart trying to topple the candy rack because his mommy won’t buy him any candy.

    Comment by Braken | May 10, 2006

67. holy shit what a whiny cunt.

    kill yourself.

    Comment by you're a fat faggot | May 10, 2006

68. Seriously, what a whiny fucking douche you’ve turned out to be. Congrats on being a giant weepy vagina on the internet.

    Comment by Man are you a worthless quim | May 10, 2006

69. To braken. How is broadcube.com a spammer?. I don’t understand. It’s just another video download sharing site just like youtube. BTW I don’t own the site. So I’m not spamming. I just wanted others to know that there are other sharing videos better then youtube. Youtube is NOT the only sharing video site where you can broadcast yourself. There are others. this person has the right to his opinion. If he doesn’t like youtube then it’s his decision. Many people don’t like youtube because it regulate people from uploading certain videos. I agree with the topic starter.

    Comment by Mary | May 13, 2006

70. […] Ofcourse Miel’s buddy, Nathan, joined in as well and thus the ripple grows. . . […]

    Pingback by Best of eBay Blogs » Blog Archive » Web 2.0 Community Management | May 16, 2006

71. You come by your name honestly

    Whine berg.

    Comment by G. Bush | May 16, 2006

72. Wah! Youtube is mean! Wah!

    Comment by Percy Dovetonsils | May 17, 2006

73. […] Screw YouTube InsideGoogle part of the Blog News Channel 70 Responses to Screw YouTube . Nathan Weinberg Says: May 3rd, 2006 at 1:47 am … You got screwed, so you re going to screw as many people as possible? … […]

    Pingback by Screw » Screw YouTube InsideGoogle part of the Blog News Channel | May 18, 2006

74. […] » Screw YouTube » InsideGoogle » part of the Blog News Channel (May 3, 2006)One man’s harrowing and unsuccessful battle with the YouTube administration heralds the dawning of a new era…mostly he was just one of the ones chosen when YouTube started to make the point about no copyrighted material unless you own the copyright.  […]

    Pingback by Bullfrog117 Links » Blog Archive » Old News | May 20, 2006

75. “Every day, I will destroy at least one account. I will only target those with copyright infringing content. When I am done, the only popular videos on YouTube will be those with zero commercial value. We will see how well the service does without the Daily Show and South Park entire episodes that are its real bread and butter.”

    LOL!

    Oh man - you really gave me a good laugh! I’m sorry - I’m not trying to be mean or anything, but you can’t be serious about this. The fact that I suspect you *are* serious is what gave me a good laugh.

    I can’t believe how much it bothers you that YouTube tried to remove the copyrighted material that you uploaded, fully understanding you were breaking laws/rules in doing so. I can’t believe it pissed you off so much just because there are others who get away with it.

    Calm down, Nathan. Take a nice, deep cleansing breath of fresh air. Feel better? No? Oh well, I tried.

    We all know the rules about putting out copyrighted materials. Just because it takes a lot longer for some people to get shut down doing so should not cause you such ovbious anger. If YouTube is to survive, they will eventually have to figure out a way to greatly minimize the copyrighted materials that end up there.

    Another point is that I’m pretty sure that even if YouTube was 100% free of improperly posted copyrighted materials, they’ll still be doing very well. It is not the copyrighted materials they rely on - it is the very easy to use, and free video service that draws people in. One never knows what crazy stuff they’ll find on YouTube. It’s become a great place for me to spend my lunch breaks at work. There are so many idiots out there who post videos of themselves being idiots, it’s a riot! There are a zillion creatively charged video artists out there who make such cool and interesting production videos as well… and there are also those who *try* and fail miserably. It’s all fun.

    At the risk of sounding like a YouTube employee (which I am not, but I’d jump on the opportunity to become one as I predict they will become even bigger and more successful in the near future) I think you should really just lighten up and enjoy what’s out there. I bet you could make some original material and put it up there and get a good number of hits!

    Life is too short to get so angry about stuff like this. Relax and enjoy life - it’s far too short to spend your time trying to kill an unstoppable (at least for now) website one account at at time.

    But if you must, then I wish you well. Perhaps your efforts will lead you to something more meaningful in your life.

    - Sammy

    Comment by Sam Silver | May 22, 2006

76. Why instead of wasting your time destroying an effective FREE web-broadcasting service, you don’t put your talent and energy in creating and promoting your own videos. It’s far more valuable than to promote SNL or other TV Shows that don’t even need that kind of promotion.Youtube is a great oportunity for everyone to broadcast their own films for FREE.

    Comment by Dominique | May 24, 2006

77. It does definately suck when users have embeded a video in thier site and youtube later pull it for no reason.

    Comment by GoogTube | May 30, 2006

78. […] is doing the illegal sharing and we are acting to shut off those offenders… little by little. Trackback· […]

    Pingback by Cruz » YouTube Service - No problem with serving copyrighted content? | May 31, 2006

79. I have been wondering about how Youtube get around with the copyright infringement issue. Just blame it on the user huh?

    Comment by Cruz | May 31, 2006

80. […] definately respecting copyright by slowly removing the “offending” accounts… Trackback· […]

    Pingback by Cruz » YouTube Service - No problem with serving copyrighted content? | June 1, 2006

81. i can’t get on you tube anymore. I don’t really know why. was there a limit you can view before regiseting? damn! I would join up if they made it an option. how can i get on again.

    Comment by Reno | June 2, 2006

82. Childish to try to destroy youtube!

    Why not register umpteem names and pop your video clips back up there…!?!

    Comment by shard | June 6, 2006

83. How immature is that? It would take you such a long time to get every user kicked off. Besides, those users never did anything to you. It’s the owners of YouTube you can have your quarrel with, as if that will really come of anything. So, how many accounts have you destroyed so far? Stupid.

    Comment by Michael | June 7, 2006

84. […] Screw YouTube InsideGoogle part of the Blog News Channel 83 Responses to Screw YouTube . Nathan Weinberg Says: May 3rd, 2006 at 1:47 am … You got screwed, so you re going to screw as many people as possible? … […]

    Pingback by image transation fader java applets slide show - Screw Links | June 14, 2006

85. Honestly, I’m sorry that that happened to you, and I agree that it’s very unfair. But instead of being an immature jerk, and trying to get everyone else kicked off, simply to “ruin YouTube,” you’d be better off just sucking it up and making a new account.

    Comment by Ashley | June 16, 2006

86. Thats sooo not right!!!!! 2 wrongs dont make a right its because of pplz like u that alot of drama uploaders are being suspended theres alot of people who actually needed to watch dramas on youtube becuz on youtube they are hardsubbed. god ruin everyones fun just because of ur experience..

    Comment by Jess | June 19, 2006

87. […] Screw YouTube InsideGoogle part of the Blog News Channel You got screwed, so you re going to screw as many people as possible? … image transation fader java applets slide show - Screw Links Says: … […]

    Pingback by Screw » image transation fader java applets slide show | June 19, 2006

88. […] Interessante Hintergrund-Lektüre zum Thema - auch unter dem Gesichtspunkt der Urheber-Rechtverletzungen: www.ln-online.de/artikel/1893014 google.blognewschannel.com: screw youtube und www.ln-online.de/artikel/1893213 […]

    Pingback by Lars-Schenk.com » Blog Archiv » Google Video Uploader - Can not log in | June 28, 2006

89. Yes I have some objections, your an ass, you are becomming what you hate about them by trying to destroy access to footage, but as long as you want to be their little nazi bitch keep going.

    Comment by mike | July 16, 2006

90. I can’t count how many times I’ve heard a song in a YouTube video and then gone off to download it, or seen a movie trailer there or a video game AMV and gone to the store and purchased them on the spot. Companies don’t seem to realize how much business they earn from fans like us who want to share their work with the world. It’s basically free advertising.

    As a YouTube Video Maker, the whole legal action thing scares me, though.

    Comment by Ali | August 8, 2006

91. They not only ban you, but if you re join under another email, and try to upload the videos that were banned with the suposed offending videos, they are regected in terms of violation.

    you have to re doo them. I am currently redoing this to find out the parramiters of the system they use.

    I too lost all my 100 pluss vids, even the game made films and non copy infringing films, I have noticed the most popular films get axed quite quickly. I upload to a site that doesnot host watchable films, you have to download them first. and have no problems there. I’m not in the land of sueing and I realy don’t give a dam about copyright, the rich just get richer all the time at the expence of telling us what we cant and can do. and thoes mega rich are destroying the very world we live on, and far worse than stopping simple file shareing.

    Comment by JasonDoherty | August 16, 2006

92. I lost all my videos when my account was canceled. I noticed that the video was still listed under other peoples accounts. Some had posted the video months before me.
    I wonder if they selectively leave some of the most popular one to keep the website traffic building.
    Has anyone else had their account canceled or video removed and found the video still posted under other accounts???

    email me let me know maybe your legal rights were violated kmp396 at yahoo.com

    Comment by Kevin | August 17, 2006

93. I had two YouTube accounts suspended because of anonymous complaints. The ridiculous aspect is that the specific videos I was suspended for are now on Youtube! I signed up a third account and EVERYTHING I try and upload is rejected for copyright infringement within seconds of uploading. The content doesn’t matter.. I tried my own home made vids.. I tried vids of my cats.. I tried vids I made on my digicam of squirrels in the back yard.. Doesn’t matter.. I am banned from uploading ANYTHING. All because of anonymous complaints about obscure clips that are on youtube at this very moment.

    SCREW YOUTUBE! I’ve had it with them!

    Comment by Davinci | September 7, 2006

94. I should add, I had 127 vids in the first account and 105 vids in the second account..

    That’s a hell of a lot of work down the drain without any chance to defend myself against these phantom complaints!

    Comment by Davinci | September 7, 2006

95. It seems to me that upon being unfairly deleted from YouTube you have essentially taken the side of the corrupt media conglomerates that are forcing services like YouTube to act in such a paranoid manner in the first place.

    Comment by Greg | September 17, 2006

96. Hum, je pense pas que ce soit la meilleure manière de procéder bien que ta “rage” soit justifiée en partie.
    Tu prives certains utilisateurs de contenus qui auraient pu les intéresser.
    Enfin..
    Sur le fond je suis totalement d’accord, la forme m’agaçe.
    (yes I am aware that it is in french but too lazy to translate. since nobody will read it anyway, I just wanted to express myself)

    Comment by C | September 19, 2006

97. I am happy to read that I’m not the only one who has gone through this!

    The difference is…I OWN the copyright for every clip that was uploaded! There was no questionable content - you could safely show a 13-year-old these clips. They promoted a fashion website!

    Even better - these clips had already been on YouTube for month due to others stealing them. I didn’t mind, because it’s a backhanded promotion. The stolen clips are still ON YouTube! When I uploaded them myself, to make it easier for supporters to find, I received the same messages Nathan did.

    It was obviously a competitor flagging my account. YouTube support was NO help.

    Now I have stolen copyright all over YouTube, but cannot upload the legit copies!

    ARGH!

    Comment by Teri | September 19, 2006

98. I suggest that you fight fire with fire and film a parody video of your situation and post it on YouTube.

    Comment by Derek | October 9, 2006

99. Dude… screw youtube. Keep it up!

    Comment by Anonymous | October 20, 2006

100. I owned the copyright to my videos that were banned. My videos were flagged by people who disagreed with my views, nothing more. The last video to be flagged and the one that got me kicked off was an anti-republican sketch - a parodic infomercial accusing the Republicans of swallowing every lie their party told them.

     These anonymous users who flagged me were CENSORING my anti-republican views. It was CENSORSHIP, pure and simple. This is a serious violation on their part - a violation of the Constitution of many countries - including the United States Constitution AND a violation of my basic human rights.

     My account was removed today and I have just sent Youtube a series of emails. I have encouraged my subscribers to do the same - I had a feeling this would happen and so I prepared an alternative account for them to go to in the event of this happening. My subscribers have been very supportive and find this all very unfair - and that was BEFORE my account was outright cancelled. Now Youtube will probably wash their hands of this, they’ll say it’s not their fault. Hell, they might even not respond at all.
     However I’d be tempted to go after these abusive users rather than Youtube. I’m talking about the trolls, the bullies, the fascists, the nazis, on Youtube.

     I’d like to hear people’s suggestions of what to do. There must be someone out there who knows a better solution - please share it.

     Nance
     formerly the Youtube user “Vodkatini”

     Comment by Nance | November 12, 2006

101. I also call out videos on youtube but the ones I hate or think are not worth it. Everything from a stuipd girl singing to a fight between two guys to clips from cartoons and animated junk. I also go after the most popular videos and stuff. Reason cause three acounts I had were closed and I opened another just to favorite some stuff I download off keepvid before it gets erased. But even that I am decreasing the use of, since the site in becoming crap. Stuff, I used to post were Tonight show clips, Mad TV, NFL clips, MLB clips, Supermodels, home movies, news, music videos, shopping channels, spanish tv shows, and even foreign channels I found on the web. When my first two acounts wwere suspended, I quit using the third. The firat one I was using since December 2005, The second one I started on April when some videos were erased off the first account. Well, Then in August first the second account and then the first account were erased. So I stopped uploading. Then finally in October the third account which I started using in July was erased. So with that I have created a new account, but have not and will not upload a thing on it. So I am instead downloading the vids I like and then I am destroying an account or some accounts or that account or calling out a video I hate. The reason is simple cuase either some idiot called me out as well and destroyed my accounts or youtube crackerheads did or were forced by some idiot from NBC or CBS or someone. So I am on a crusade as well. P.S. I have called out some NBC and CBS clips that those morons put up, but I doubt they were deleted.

     Comment by ex youtube fan | November 20, 2006

102. hey vodkatini, where can i get ur videos again, i miss seeing them, ur videos pwn. i dont see how ppl get offended by them, i mean its your opinion, if they dont like it, TURN IT OFF PEOPLE!. z0mg. if u want add me to ur msn psychodelicpenguin@hotmail.com
     neway ttyl, oh yeah Austrlalia > England

     Comment by anonpenguin | November 30, 2006

103. I don’t see why the copyright holders don’t cash in on their products online like letting people endlessly watch their shows at their website with their ads. What if I miss a show’s and want to catch up? I don’t see why I couldn’t go to comdey central and watch every show(old & new) on its website. TV and TV station are old fashion its time for media when I want it. Radio station stream why can’t tv networks.

     Cable is old school like radio shows when the tv came out. Take Comedy Central they could pull two revenues tv ads & net ads. Then Comedy Central could give royalies based on clicks to a episode it looks like it would be a better outlook for revenue. Fresh ads with old epsiodes sounds like a jingle.

     All tv networks need to use their power and emprace the internet instead of trying to keep current ways. Time Waner & Aol merged good deal for both because the outlook was one needed internet and one needed broadband. The internet is far better then the TV! I watch, read, work on it. Its form of entertainment is far better then a boring tv that has 4 buttons and time restrictions. I feel sorry for music company they let itunes sell there product for them. If it belongs to you do something with it other then collect dust. Collect your due profit its simple case of supply and demand. Wheres the demand TV or internet? Internet has something the TV don’t interaction. If i own nbc I would ask myself who’s getting rich internet companies and why.

     Comment by Eric | December 3, 2006

104. So, how many accounts did you destroy so far, Nathan? Seeing as you’re still using YouTube, I don’t think it’s too much.

     I agree with Eric completely. I’ve been watching http://arresteddevelopment.msn.com/ with the ads, but what happened? They only have five episodes available, and only make new episodes available every once in a while. I consider this to be an encouragement for me to BitTorrent it instead. I mean, come on. I’m even watching the ads, but they’re still making it uncomfortable for the user to even watch the series.

     THEY DON’T EVEN HAVE A FEED that alerts users new episodes have been posted. Jeez.

     Comment by Tim | December 5, 2006

105. have you got a life?

     Comment by martijn | December 7, 2006

106. Weinberg, people like you ruin it for everybody. Your behavior is rediculous. I would spit on you.

     Comment by James O | December 9, 2006

107. You’re doing the right thing dude. My videos were always getting banned on You Tube and like you I got fed up with their crap. Some videos I posted were found everywhere on the Internet but You Tube found them inappropriate.

     Right now the most popular person on You Tube is some outwardly gay guy calling himself William, yet that’s ok and appropriate there just as long as you don’t have anything over appealing to heterosexuals. Nothing against gays but there seems to be a double standard on You Tube although (to me) William’s behavior shouldn’t be considered suitable for all ages. William is using You Tube for some kind of self-promotion and is becoming more and more popular because he’s such a cute fag (give me a break!). I think people should stand up to You Tube and use William and the sacrificial lamb. Flag his videos inappropriate, as our way to send a message to You Tube if they ban our stuff so should someone spewing an alternative lifestyle that I honestly don’t think all kids should see and easily accessible on You Tube.

     Secondly, I applaud any blogs such as this one that displays personal opinion and has guts. I once had a blog that exposed my former employer after being unfairly dismissed. My blog was truthful and honest and contained my actual recollection of how this company operated. Before I knew it, there was a knock on my door and I was presented with a lawsuit complaint filed in court. I stood by my opinions and responded that I had proof of my actions and could prove so in court. Because my wife was basically scared I removed the blog anyway and the complaint was soon dropped. I wish that the blog had remained because I think the world needs more David’s standing up to more Goliaths, this is why I applaud your actions and wish you the best. One should never give up something they believe in and show the world that there is a right and a wrong.

     Comment by Don Delury | December 20, 2006

108. I have tried to read all of these but really can’t be bothered. Nathans position can be boiled down to simply him wanting to do what he wants to do. Then coming up with some half-arsed justification.

     You dont own the copyright they are not yours to copy. Simple. Dont start with the play ground argument of ‘They did it too Miss!’It has’nt worked since you were 5 it is’nt gonna work now. So they took some stuff off you did own. Grow up! What do you expect when you fuck with someones business?
     Shit you sound like a little whiney kid. Get over it. ‘A digital archive for the future’ Get over your self. Yeah Xbox needs you.
     As we say in England. Twat!

     Comment by mrforde | January 1, 2007

109. Well thats being a bitch in plain words. You get kicked off for something stupid and you make yourself stupid by “ruining” Youtube for other users. You know what, cry me a river and get the fuck over it! Really, as if your little videos were worldly important. Most users know the rules, they check the copyrights, etc. Sure, Youtube makes mistakes but hell, they are human. Destroying accounts. Now thats what pisses me off the most. Have you ever considered that maybe someone did the same thing to you? Its people like you who ruin everything for others.

     As someone else said, I spit on you. You are not worthy of any praise you get.

     Comment by Demonw0lf | January 2, 2007

110. I can’t understand what your complaint is. You are a pirate/copyright thief, plain and simple. You deserved to be thrown off after the first instance.

     Comment by Najd | January 28, 2007

111. Intellectual Property is a big issue these days. But furthermore, once you sign up with YouTube you agree to their Terms of Service Agreement, in which it specifically states (and I quote):

     “..YouTube reserves the right to remove Content and User Submissions without prior notice..”

     and also more importantly…

     “..YouTube also reserves the right to decide whether Content or a User Submission is appropriate and complies with these Terms of Service for violations other than copyright infringement and violations of intellectual property law, such as, but not limited to, pornography, obscene or defamatory material, or excessive length. YouTube may remove such User Submissions and/or terminate a User’s access for uploading such material in violation of these Terms of Service at any time, without prior notice and at its sole discretion.”

     Why are you complaining that you breached the contract? That itself can be a lawsuit, as well as making defamatory statements against You Tube. Just because a company sets up a service so people could upload content doesn’t mean it’s a right to do it and if you’re content is taken off and others’ aren’t, it’s because they have the rights to do it. If you set up a business of doing something and people argue because 1 person can do 1 thing and another can’t, are you going to let the people run your business and make the law for you? Just my two words of wisdom.

     Comment by James Kurth | February 8, 2007

112. James:
     Law is not justice. Justice is not law.

     I realize “we” try to make the two come close, and the law not being justice is no excuse, but that doesn’t make uploading videos any more fun.

     Comment by Tim | February 10, 2007

113. Hey, I find your idea rash and an a automic failure. I went on google to find out why youtube users were being kicked off so badly, at first I thought it was Viacom’s fault but after reading this blog, I realized it’s YOUR FAULT! I have no ffin cable, all I have is a really bad internet connection and some sites to look upon for entertainment. And NO I’m not some fat junky that hates going outside, I’m just the type of person who get bored easily and likes to watch something fun, besides reruns of friends and scrubs all of the time! You are ruining other peoples accounts just because you got kicked off Youtube?! Well boohoo for you, that one person is right you do need a hobby! I’M VERY ANNOYED BY YOUR STUPID AND PATHETIC REACTION TO SOMETHING SO MEANINLESS! ALL OF THE BEST USERES BEING KICKED OFF BECAUSE OF YOU! Well jerk mission acomplised, bravo on your pathetic dispay on supposely getting revenge on YouTube. Even if you the best of the best off, your idea is still going to fail.

     -WOM, I DIDN’T REALIZE HOW ANGRY I WAS.

     -P.S. X BOX IS GAY ANYWAY.

     Comment by Passed Profanity | February 14, 2007

114. Its corporate greed

     Comment by Keisha | February 15, 2007

115. סמן תוכן זה כלא ראוי - YouTube וצנזורה

     הפוסט הבא התחיל בתור שיחה שהיתה לי עם אחת המשתמשות ביוטיוב, בו היא סיפרה את סיפורה. העברתי את הסיפור לעידוק ושאלתי אותו אם זה מעניין מספיק ב…

     Trackback by Intellect or Insanity | הבלוג של יהונתן קלינגר | | February 19, 2007

116. Youtube deleted my account just because I uploaded a 30 second clip of a TV show.

     Bastards

     Comment by Jeebus | February 23, 2007

117. you`re not judge jury and executioner jerkoff

     you broke the rules and now you`re getting pissy because you`re getting punished for it. bitch…bitch…bitch who`s next? the library because they won`t let you keep the book?

     go to hell loser

     Comment by wtf? | February 25, 2007

118. Enjoy best Youtube videos at : funny You Tube videos site.

     Mark

     Comment by Mark | February 26, 2007

119. While it increasingly illustrates itself as the feckless and arrogant alter ego of Google, YouTube is emerging as the poster-child for repressive corrupt companies in the US.
     Poorly managed, poorly laid-out, poorly staffed and poorly coded, YouTube is setting new records in garnering enemies while snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
     The rate of random, often non-sensical censorship of comments, deletion of videos, deletion of accounts and blacklisting is increasing at a blistering pace. Attributed by insiders to out-of-control workers who, with little oversight from their employer, pursue random vendettas and harassment against users, YouTube is severing the hands that feed it.

     Comment by Manfred | February 27, 2007

120. A very unreasonable action of yours. If you don’t agree with their rules, then just don’t play around in their garden. Why you are so determine to have other people’s accounts suspended too is beyond me. Just like sick-minded HIV positive people that enjoy deliberately spreading around their disease. Stop it.

     Comment by unreasonable | March 8, 2007

121. Just to let you people know…Google Video and Youtube are run by the SAME company. It is called GOOGLE!! So do some research, then try to write intelligently.

     Comment by to stupid people | March 13, 2007

122. Wow, moron, this story was written well before Google bought YouTube. How about reading the date?

     Comment by Nathan Weinberg | March 15, 2007

123. It seems posts about YouTube attract the same quality of comments as YouTube videos themselves do.

     Comment by Tim | March 15, 2007

124. I agree with what you’re saying, but I don’t agree with your actions because that shows your pettiness. My video was flagged by some hater the other day so I’m on my last warning now. But I have not gone on a flagging binge to other peoples’ videos. That helps Youtube more than it hurts and it hurts the USERS most of all. Youtube should delete copyrighted material, but I don’t agree with the random manner in which they do it. They act like I’m the sole offender and delete my things, while a million others have the same copyrighted material up and are not touched. If they are going to delete copyrighted material everyone needs to be dealt with the same. I hope the laws are changed some. I don’t agree with the uploading of complete TV shows or movies cause the companies would be losing money from that cause you wouldn’t go buy the DVD or watch the TV anymore. It would work if the companies would switch some stuff over to the internet. But my videos were fan videos of my favorite movies. Its not a complete movie, its less than 5 minutes long, and its just a fan video. Its a form of flattery to a movie if people are making fan videos about it. I’m not profiting from it and its not going to take away from DVD sells or anything, and might even promote it. So I hear what you’re saying and I think its correct, but I don’t think waging war against Youtube is going to have much effect and it hurts the users the most when they know their video was only deleted because someone flagged it. I’ve got no objections if a company specifically asks that any of their content youtube finds be removed.

     Comment by crystalized | March 17, 2007

125. In all honesty your response is pathetic, uncalculated is hurting the users more than it is YT…
     People will upload copyright material regardless of your actions and all you are managing to do is help moderate YT for a fraction of the offending content.

     If you want to see the site go down/get slapped then it is better to let it get caught with the material rather than do the occasional clean-up campaign.

     As far as the copyright infringement/piracy comments go, be sensible. Even if you rip the videos they are barely up to the standard of a 5th gen video tape copy other than on a mobile phone screen they are useless.

     Comment by Trip 3 | April 2, 2007

126. YT suspended my account ‘permanently’ recently for the same thing. No warning. They emailed me that they had removed a few, ‘copyright infringement’ but by the time I got the email a couple of hours later, they had suspended me ‘permanently’. No warning that they were going to do it, just did it. Hundreds of uploads, links to my website, gone, scores of subscribers, too. What a miserable nuisance and waste of time.

     I went and ’searched’ for all of the clips that others had uploaded that were the same. Tons of links to YouTube of the same clips. That’s mostly what YT is, a repository of copyright infringements and the rest is teens exploding Mentos.

     I don’t know if you realize this, but YT has some bugs in its programming, unfinished pages. Like the programmers forgot to link a few things back, never tested all the links. I’m a bit compulsive about web design, and I was surprised to see YT with what is real low-rent coding, not user friendly.

     On the ‘comment’ and ‘reply comment’ on the pages where your videos display is one of the bugs. Viewers would comment and if I would try to reply, I’d get the ‘thank you! Your comment has been posted’ but it was hit and miss if it really was posted. It would take hours, too, when it did post a comment or reply, from the ‘thank you’ to actually showing up. I’d get email that ’soandso has commented on your video’, I’d click on the link and there would be no comment. I’d leave the email in my box, go back later, and it usually took hours to get posted.

     I tried emailing YouTube, to notify them about fixing the bugs, but it’s impossible to email them. All of their ‘Help’ links and screens, FAQs are ultimately dead-ends. I finally found a phone number to call in Calif, but you get the bum’s rush on the phone. It’s really incredible when you consider this is a company that sold for how many billions of dollars?

     I’d been uploading to YouTube for months and sensed that there were times when ‘processing’ took longer for particular clips I had uploaded with certain political points of view than others. I tend not to editorialize the titles that I gave the clips, just straight out what it was. It would be hard for someone to know if I’m a leftie or rightie from the clips and the titles, and I did that on purpose.

     One particular clip I did editorialize on the title, and after 5 hours of ‘processing,’ when I couldn’t mail anybody to find out what the problem was, the only thing left that I had any control over was ‘edit your video’. Even if it’s not ‘processed,’ you can do that. In the editor I renamed it, ‘WHY IS THIS CLIP BEING CENSORED?!?!’ I then kept refreshing the screen, about 5 times and within a couple of minutes, it was ‘LIVE’.

     I sensed that there was a particular time of day, 3 am to 10 am ET, thereabouts, when everything I uploaded almost instantly went ‘LIVE’. Sometimes I’d make it ‘private’ and watch the number of ‘views’ it racked up within the first few minutes of ‘LIVE’. I’m telling you, there’s a cool group working there, it seems, like in the middle of the night and early in the morning. They would make the uploads ‘LIVE’ most of the time without even looking at them. ‘0′ views. Unless it was cool stuff, Chris Rock clips, stuff like that.

     But then, there’s this one shift with ’stick up their a** fascists’. Anything politically left-leaning, they would hold up. One in particular I had a similar experience with as the ‘WHY IS THIS CENSORED?!?!’ It was about a politician, one of the ‘gang of 14′ that was controling the filibustering of Supreme Court nominations on cable news. He was all cagey and evasive, and I knew what he was going to do from the interview. I gave it a sensational tabloid headline, I don’t remember exactly what it was, but I titled it something like ‘Joe Schmoe flips his party the bird’. That was another one, it took hours. It wasn’t until I changed the title to something like ‘Joe Schmoe and Wolf Blitzer’ that it went ‘LIVE’ within a minute. Dick Cheney probably has the NSA running YouTube and Google.

     Does anybody have some recommendations for sites to upload to, other than YT and Google? Or suggestions about what else I might do to service my website with clips without this kind of grief again?

     Comment by Jackie | April 11, 2007

127. I personally recommend Revver.

     http://one.revver.com/revver

     Please note, though, that they are even stricter on copyright infringements, but I doubt they’d just remove your account or something evil like that. Give it a try.

     Comment by Tim | April 11, 2007

128. haha, Your LUCKY! I DID NOT EVEN GET A WARNING!! that is soo not cool

     Comment by Prathik | April 26, 2007

129. I agree with the thread author, I had a similar experience with youtube. Only my vids were deleted just because I had to block some snot nosed punk who was trolling and leaving obscene mindless turrets rants on my channel,So he decided to report me as a copyright infringer in retaliation for blocking him ..and youtube didn’t even question the issue that the kid wasn’t even a copyright holder.
     Also without ANY so-called copyrighted content Youtube is a pretty boring place. I mean who wants to watch home-vids of someones kid playing in a mud puddle or some mindless bimbo who sings like a goat! Youtube’s saddly mistaken if they think their going to make it with that crap.

     Comment by Chase J | April 28, 2007

130. Thank you for your informations

     Comment by Emad Hassan kenona | May 2, 2007

131. you tube u can go suck my fuckin balls

     Comment by forrest | May 8, 2007

132. Yeah. I got a suggestion. Stop taking your anger out on people -using- youtube, and hit youtube yourself. Maybe some of us -want- to watch those videos that are now gone? Maybe instead, contact the copyright owner and get Youtube sued? Either way, I’m pissed cuz I can’t watch my show and there’s nowhere else to see it.
     “This video is no longer available due to a copyright claim by DN Dream Partners, VAP Inc., Shueisha, Inc., and Mad House, Inc.”
     Thanks a lot.

     Comment by Somebody | May 18, 2007

133. How can you submit a copyright violation report? I tried to but it only said how to do it if you are the owner fo the copyrighted material.

     Comment by turkey22 | May 20, 2007

134. heh ..Lie!

     Comment by Chase | May 21, 2007

135. I was kicked off youtube yesterday too. Because I uploaded a video of me singing a Prince song at a gig. From this, UMG filed a complaint and youtube suspended my account.

     If thats the case, then 90 percent of videos on here should be removed too. ow many people have uploaded their covers on here? Untold.

     If Youtube remove all members covers and disable their accounts then thats fair enough, but if they did that, then youtube will suffer the same fates as napster and audiogalaxy

     Comment by alex stassi | June 6, 2007

136. Your experience with YouTube is somewhat bizarre, but your intention to “destroy” other YouTube accounts is equally pathetic, childish and rather self-centered. Perhaps YouTube is doing us all a favor by exposing such immature users who pout when they break the rules.

     Seriously, get a life.

     Comment by Jason | June 13, 2007

137. I had a ton of videos on youtube, that I personally filmed, I even uploaded a T.V show WITH PERMISSION.

     I emailed the copyright holder studio in Japan asking to have permission to upload a ’subbed’ version of their T.V show.

     3 weeks later I got a email back from them apologizing for not being able to sell a copy in my location, and for not being able to sell the show ’subbed’.

     I was faxed a permission with a signed signurature from the company that held the copyright. The show is many years old, and they weren’t making money off it anymore.

     Youtube deleted all my videos saying I didn’t have permission when I actually did, since I stated in my video description that I had proof of permission.

     They deleted them……..

     And when I contacted youtube and asked why they deleted my videos, they didn’t believe what I had to say.

     Comment by Nate | June 15, 2007

138. Youtube sucks anyway. It’s for newbs that just want to surf videos. If you’re serious about videos, get a divx.com account or something equal to that. They don’t compress the hell out of your work either. Screw youtube.

     Comment by Jeff | July 3, 2007

139. Yea I had account for uploading mad tv clips when u search the same one theres like a dozen results but they choose to delete mine, I got 2 notices at once 20th century fox said it was copyright. and then the next day all toghether 3 emails sent at the same time banned me. it made me mad but ive started over and doing ok. I do think its stupid youtube does shit like this, but you have to understand if they dont remove those videos they will get sued and so i have 1 thing to say to you, you got deleted get over yourself, get a life and stop reporting innocent people because your a cry baby and need a pethedic vendetta, get over yourself and stop screwing other people over because you did. And just make another account and use tellyadder or tubestar or tubinator to promotoe your videos. Just start over thats what i did.

     Comment by YOUR A CRY BABY | July 4, 2007

140. I agree. I got this username thinking YouTube is so cool.
     But I later realized that on some occasions it jinxed up some rules. I got angry when I realized it was doing nothing to stop the evil replies of racism, sexism, and religionism(Racism with religion).
     Please make sure you ruin youtube!

     Comment by Tubeyou | July 28, 2007

141. gah. mine just got deleted today for repeat offense. what the hell is youtube if not to upload copyrighted shit. im so pissed. i had a gazillion videos on there..that were all pretty much music videos that i put together..and ratings were great…not im left with shit. pissed man pissed. i understand what you’re saying here

     Comment by Merrijoy Vicente | September 21, 2007

142. Yea, thanks jerks, people in America who can otherwise get no access to great Japanese anime, have no where left to turn. All of my favorite shows have been removed and flagged, and my goto guy has been suspended for it. That’s fair. No, if the company cares, they can report it, they’ve done it before, and those shows I can get here in America quite easily. Take rampage one youtube? Are you a complete moron? How about you go outside for a while, go to the park, come back and think about what you posted. Don’t ruin a good thing for the people who use it legally, and choose to upload some of there favorite clips. Youtube will understand it more, if people complain. If they lose people, they lose business, and basically begin to believe that the idea was a flop and give up.

     Comment by rcdraco | September 23, 2007

143. How can I join your crusade? I just got my Youtube account pulled this morning. I’m angry since there are other users with EXACTLY the same content I had up, yet their accounts are still up and active. They also have SEVERAL of the same kinds of videos I had up.

     Comment by Prometheus1816 | October 3, 2007

144. GET A LIFE NERD

     Comment by ede | October 14, 2007

145. let’s all boycott flipping youtube for screwing us all over and make www.megavideo.com the next best web publisher!!!

     Comment by downwithyoutube | October 26, 2007

146. Can’t believe they frickin ban and delete all my videos, which made them so popular in the first place GRRR. BOYCOTT!!!!

     Comment by downwithyoutube | October 26, 2007

147. YouTubeRobot.com today announces YouTube Robot 2.0, a tool that enables you to download video from YouTube.com onto your PC, convert it to various formats to watch it when you are on the road on mobile devices like mobile phone, iPod, iPhone, Pocket PC, PSP, or Zune.
     Product page: youtuberobot.com
     Direct download link: youtuberobot.com/download/utuberobot.exe
     Company web-site: youtuberobot.com
     E-mail: support@youtuberobot.com

     Comment by matilda | November 8, 2007

148. My account FORDORG got suspended by these _sholes at YOutube WITHOUT ANY PRIOR WARNING! How come? I tried calling them - yeah, “We are experiencing a huge volume of calls”. My ass, huge volume! Why they do not just warn somone before uspending his/her account but, instead, they, the smart assholes, just disable it and that is it!

     I have a very nasty situation. I lost 500GB of personal data, i.e. I lost all my digital life in the past 15 years. As this wsa not enough, Youtube suspended my account where I had numerous messages from friends I met at their _ucking site. Now I do not even know their nicks or Youtube site…

     _uck Youtube!

     Comment by Fury | November 14, 2007

149. Is there a number, an 800 number of customer service where I can talk to an operator at goggle or youtube? that’s my question, thanks

     Comment by kevin | November 20, 2007

150. i aGREE

     Comment by kevin | November 20, 2007

151. Actually, if you think about it, he’s not being as selfish as some of you make him out to be. In fact, he’s making a public service announcement for the the benefit of all us netizens. Every user that gets burned like he has (morality aside) by YouTube is a potential recruit to spread the word and do likewise. Viral marketing rears its ugly head! So while the initial individual intention might be one of spite, the collective retribution is so much more rewarding and is effective at achieving the goal of forcing YouTube to maintain its integrity (thus placing it in the crucible to see if it really can survive entirely on user-generated content) or risk bringing its hypocrisy into the limelight. Heck, I haven’t even been affected yet, but I think I’ll join the mob just the same. YouTube must shape up or ship out!

     Comment by PacoBell | November 26, 2007

Leave a comment

Name (required)

e-Mail (required - will not be published)

Website

Site info

close to attraction
WordPress adaptation by Tara Aukerman | Original design by Andreas Viklund