/news/ - News

News & Current Events + Happenings

Posting mode: Reply

Check to confirm you're not a robot
Drawing x size canvas

Remember to follow the rules

Max file size: 350.00 MB

Max files: 5

Max message length: 4096

Manage Board | Moderate Thread

Return | Catalog | Bottom

News & Current Events + Happenings
/news/ deserves actual news. Declaring agendas are not news. Do not post trolling bait threads.
Post quality threads only, and it's voluntary to crosspost them to /pol/
Never mandatory.

Expand All Images

(587.88 KB 960x638 514374011.jpg)
YouTube sued for $720K over copyright strike retaliation Reader 08/29/2019 (Thu) 17:27:30 Id: ba5233 [Preview] No. 15105
DJ Short-E, a popular YouTuber who claims to have earned $310,000 from the platform, is now suing the company. The case is extremely unusual and centered around claims that YouTube not only failed to promote his videos, but also "retaliated" to the threat of a lawsuit by not processing copyright claims properly, resulting in his channels getting shut down for repeat infringement. While most YouTube users are simply visitors to the site, a minority produce their own content and upload it to the platform for others to enjoy.

Some can make a decent living when they enter a revenue-sharing agreement with YouTube but when things go wrong, those earnings can stop in an instant. According to popular YouTuber DJ Short-E (real name Erik Mishiyev), this happened to him – and he’s blaming the whole thing on YouTube using copyright-strikes as “retaliation” to his threats of a lawsuit. In a complaint filed in a California federal court Wednesday, Mishiyev describes himself as a “well-known Journalist and DJ, known as ‘Short-E’, who publishes original music, DJ mixes, and celebrity interviews in videos on YouTube.” Since 2007, Mishiyev says he’s run two YouTube channels – ‘djshortehot4eva’ and ‘theshorteshow’. These channels were monetized following an agreement with YouTube and after developing a subscriber base of 250,000 users, his channels generated more than 110 million views. For this, YouTube paid him $310,000 over a five-year period.

In March 2016, Mishiyev claims he began receiving copyright claims on his “highest advertisement revenue videos”. He says he responded with counter-claims to avoid YouTube’s “three strikes” process which would’ve disabled his channel. However, he reports that all claims were won and his channel was re-instated for monetization. A year later, Mishiyev says YouTube recognized him as a successful contributor by handing him a “Silver Creator Award” for reaching 100,000 subscribers. However, despite growing his audience at a rate of around 4,000 subscribers per month, views remained low when compared to similar channels. “Plaintiff was concerned about this suspicious activity and sought confirmation numerous times from YouTube that they were truly distributing his new videos to his fans and subscribers, but YouTube failed to provide such confirmation, stating ‘They could not share this information’ with him,” the complaint notes.

Mishiyev includes an email from one of his subscribers to back up his claims that YouTube failed to promote his content as per his agreement with the company. “I subscribed to both of your channels and turned my notifications on for you so I would know when you uploaded new videos,” it reads. “I subscribed about 2 weeks ago and haven’t got a single notification from YouTube but I noticed you have uploaded many new videos since I subscribed [to your channels]. Please fix this problem, i’m sure there are many other people who haven’t been notified either and that’s why I noticed your views are very low compared to other similar channels.” According to Mishiyev, YouTube’s failure to promote his content would cause him to lose $125,000 in revenue over a three-year period but after losing faith in YouTube’s support team, he told the company he would be filing a lawsuit if its conduct persisted.

In response, on December 18, 2018, YouTube reportedly sent a notice saying that they would be terminating Mishiyev’s accounts and removing his content. The very next day, serious copyright problems began. “On December 15, 2018 through January 15, 2019, Plaintiff was abruptly bombarded with copyright claims like he never had been before the entire time he had been managing and growing his channels,” the complaint notes. On January 22, 2018, YouTube reportedly blocked access to all of Mishiyev’s videos, replacing them with a notice that they had been removed due “to a copyright claim.” (continued)


Reader 08/29/2019 (Thu) 17:31:46 Id: ba5233 [Preview] No.15106 del
(102.88 KB 440x300 (1).png)
YouTube then placed “strikes” on his account but Mishiyev says that YouTube’s actions were actually in response to his threat of a lawsuit. “Although YOUTUBE stated they removed his channels and videos for copyright claims, the removals appeared to Plaintiff to be in retaliation for his placing them on notice that he would be filing a lawsuit,” Mishiyev’s lawyers write. According to the YouTuber, he followed the company’s rules by submitting counter-notices as required by the DMCA, noting that every time he had done that in the past he had prevailed since no one ever filed a lawsuit against him. Generally, when a counter-notification is filed and there is no lawsuit notification from a complainant, content goes back up. But YouTube apparently wrote back saying that at least some of Mishiyev’s counter-notices were “ineligible.”

The complaint adds that YouTube later retracted its statement that the videos were ineligible for counter-notification and promised to process them. It’s not clear what happened next but it didn’t help Mishiyev’s predicament. “To date, Plaintiff’s strikes have not been removed, his counter claims have
not been processed, and his videos and channels have been permanently removed, though no claimants presented evidence that they filed any lawsuits. Thus, evidencing that YOUTUBE did not simply remove his content because of copyright claims, but instead in retaliation for placing them on notice that he was filing a lawsuit against them,” the complaint asserts. As a result, the now-former YouTuber says he lost $90,000 in revenue between January 2019 and July 2019, adding that when lost subscribers, views, future views, performance bookings, and lost advertising and sponsorship deals are taken into account, YouTube’s actions have caused him damages of $720,000, for which he demands compensation in full.

Mishiyev is suing YouTube for breach of contract, interference with contractual relations, interference and negligent interference with economic advantage, and negligence. He also demands an injunction preventing YouTube from “banning Plaintiff from the full use of the internet and YouTube’s services.”

YouTube’s jewish CEO Claims YouTube is an Open Platform Reader 08/29/2019 (Thu) 17:53:11 Id: ba5233 [Preview] No.15107 del
(282.31 KB 508x755 1412624109.jpg)
(I'm going to keep this related news to one thread)
The Jewish CEO of YouTube Susan Wojcicki is claiming that YouTube is an open platform and is defending its status as an open platform.
As YouTube deals with an onslaught of controversies — from the spread of extremism to child sexual exploitation issues — critics have questioned the site’s policy to let just anyone with an internet connection to upload a video. But YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki on Tuesday doubled down on the site’s open platform. “As more issues come into view, a rising chorus of policymakers, press and pundits are questioning whether an open platform is valuable…or even viable,” Wojcicki wrote in her quarterly letter to YouTube creators. “Despite these concerns, I believe preserving an open platform is more important than ever.”

She said the site’s open nature allows a more diverse set of voices to be heard. But that openness also has a dark side, allowing disinformation, racism and influence campaigns by foreign actors to spread on the platform. The challenge, she said, is finding the “balance” between openness and policing the site’s community of more than 2 billion monthly visitors. “It sometimes means leaving up content that is outside the mainstream, controversial or even offensive,” she wrote. “But I believe that hearing a broad range of perspectives ultimately makes us a stronger and more informed society, even if we disagree with some of those views.”
[This lying bitch is funny, because I've had 15 accounts banned from YouTube since 2009.]

So YouTube is an open platform she says. I’d like to know in what sense. They’ve thrown an endless number of people off the site and messed around with their algorithms to highlight mainstream Jewish content over individual content producers. And as we just noted, James Allsup a right-leaning content producer with around 500,000 subscribers just had his channel shut down for no specific or explainable reason. But this Jewish cunt is claiming that YouTube is an open platform. If that’s the case, maybe I’ll start up a YouTube channel to rant about kikes, niggers and non-White savages. If it’s truly an open platform, she’ll have no problem with this type of informative content on the site. [Infostormer reports. Maybe he has no idea how swiftly views opposing jewry are eliminated over there.]


Reader 08/30/2019 (Fri) 18:52:25 [Preview] No.15111 del
Fuck Jewtube, I rarely go there anymore, at least not for any informative news, only to scour for any legit informative videos still under the radar which I quickly download and mirror when found to the other alternatives like Bitchute and Dtube. If they lose a big enough loser base they won't be able to keep their monopoly so think of this censorship as bad move on their part that we can surely exploit to our advantage.

Reader 08/30/2019 (Fri) 19:41:39 Id: 8e5153 [Preview] No.15112 del

Reader 09/01/2019 (Sun) 06:25:28 [Preview] No.15116 del
Alternative Tech Platforms List:


This looks like a pretty decent list I stumbled upon recently on one of the alt sites. It lists alternatives to all the major tech media platforms.

Reader 09/01/2019 (Sun) 06:32:50 [Preview] No.15117 del
I also suggest anyone who supports free speech and basic privacy check out a couple of new alternative privacy-based browsers that hold a lot of potential.



Both block third party scripts & cookies by default and are void of any third party bloatware unlike most modern browsers. Epic also has a built-in VPN. Dissenter has an extention that allows anyone to comment and chat with one another wherever they visit in real-time, with no censorship or internet policing, making it one of the first p2p-based browser communication platforms of its kind.

Reader 09/03/2019 (Tue) 02:51:51 Id: b2d80c [Preview] No.15125 del
>Alternatives for Twitter
Poal is a Voat/Reddit clone, not a Twitter clone. Excellent list, though. Some of these places I had never even seen before.

That's not really a YouTube alternative, it's basically a site like HookTube was before that got shut down.

Top | Return | Catalog | Post a reply