5 ms·
Of course it’s not set up to handle this kind of thing, which is exactly why they do it. You may be legally in the right but have no real recourse.
by bambataa 9y ago
Of course it’s not set up to handle this kind of thing, which is exactly why they do it. You may be legally in the right but have no real recourse.
- zdragnar 9y agoWhat alternatives might be available that simultaneously preserve due process for both the accusor and accused when potential damages are anywhere from zero to less than the costs of filing a lawsuit? In the US, I'm not sure if small claims courts would handle such a speculative case. We could set up extrajudicial processes via executive bureaucracy, but the end result is simply less transparent courts. I suppose we could compel businesses to manually validate takedown requests and the like... I am also imagining that would be ripe for abuse to the point it ends up being used antagonistically and ultimately drives down shared revenue for all participants to offset the cost.
- bambataa 9y agoA less automated process. Maybe YouTube’s algorithm flags your video but instead of taking it down automatically it gets reviewed by a person who maybe even contacts you. That way you get a chance to justify yourself. Sure, it’s more work for them but it means the uploaded gets a voice in the process that they seem to currently lack. I imagine some of the more obvious false positives could be easily ha does this way.