7 ms·

YouTube can now terminate accounts that are “no longer commercially viable”

55 points by tech234a 7y ago

anm89 7y ago
As was brought up by markiplier recently this is extra scary because a ban here would ban you from Gmail, analytics, and any other Google service. Could I be locked out of Gmail tomorrow for blocking an ad on a music video? It's not clear to me that the answer is no.
- yabadabadoes 7y ago
  It claims to ban your Google account on all or part of the service, where that service is presumably YouTube. I would consider that wording a step away from destroying other Google properties to protect the YouTube bathwater. But I doubt that is the only condition, or that the legaleze completely matches their actual policy as implemented.
- whamlastxmas 7y ago
  Good, more of a reason for people to stop using G services
- pmlnr 7y ago
  The answer is yes. Yes, you can be locked out from your whole google account for violating the policies of any google service.
  - anm89 7y ago
    Yeah, I probably should have said: "The answer is almost certainly yes"
  - dplgk 7y ago
    What happens to my access to other websites where I've used my Google account to login?
tekstar 7y ago
I am so happy I (mostly) stopped using Gmail a few years ago. I still have an email account there but it just forwards my old mail to my new fast mail address. I never log in.
- phs 7y ago
  I'm in a similar position, but I still use it for oauth on applications that only support e.g. it and facebook.
lidHanteyk 7y ago
This commenter has it right; YT can't possibly be a money-maker: https://twitter.com/AlalmeCreative/status/1193607405336068096 https://twitter.com/AlalmeCreative/status/119360740533606809... Think about it. You can't even consider being a large video host without massive amounts of spare disk space, and you probably can't make enough on ads to pay just for bandwidth! I bet that this is why the new terms of service clarify that YT is an offering of Google, and not of some wholly-owned subsidiary. Google's search ads make so much money that you can buy as many computers as you like in pursuit of ads, and then if you happen to use those computers for storing cat videos, well, that's just good use of idle disks!
belltaco 7y ago
Wonder if they're considering mostly the bandwidth cost or the storage cost too? Lets say a channel with videos does not get a lot of views, so takes up storage costing X, vs. a channel that get a lot of unmonetizable videos which take up bandwidth cost Y in addition to storage. Maybe bandwidth costs Y are much higher, so the former channels are safe? Hopefully they give a long notice for the user to back those videos up, or there would be a lot of lost content. If it's a great purge, it's going to be a huge mess with even Internet Archive teams and volunteers not able to keep up with the immense storage and bandwidth needed.
TheChaplain 7y ago
This is a good time to remind yourself and friends about Google Takeout (https://www.google.com/takeout https://www.google.com/takeout) Use it to backup all your Google data to your own computer, once a year at least.
falcolas 7y ago
An interesting development, particularly if you take it in concert with the “Adpocalypse” (ad companies forcing YouTube to remove their ads from any potentially controversial content). For example, most violent (i.e. Call of Duty) video game videos are immediately and irrevocably demonitized, to the point where the creators are only able to continue thanks to external funding, either through Twitch or Patreon. Now then, those videos can still get tens and hundreds of thousands of views on YouTube. They are the very definition of “not commercially viable” to YouTube, since they can’t have ads on them, but they’re extremely well viewed. Makes you wonder what will happen next.

55 points by tech234a 7y ago

As was brought up by markiplier recently this is extra scary because a ban here would ban you from Gmail, analytics, and any other Google service. Could I be locked out of Gmail tomorrow for blocking an ad on a music video? It's not clear to me that the answer is no.

yabadabadoes 7y ago
It claims to ban your Google account on all or part of the service, where that service is presumably YouTube. I would consider that wording a step away from destroying other Google properties to protect the YouTube bathwater. But I doubt that is the only condition, or that the legaleze completely matches their actual policy as implemented.
whamlastxmas 7y ago
Good, more of a reason for people to stop using G services
pmlnr 7y ago
The answer is yes. Yes, you can be locked out from your whole google account for violating the policies of any google service.
- anm89 7y ago
  Yeah, I probably should have said: "The answer is almost certainly yes"
- dplgk 7y ago
  What happens to my access to other websites where I've used my Google account to login?

tekstar 7y ago

I am so happy I (mostly) stopped using Gmail a few years ago. I still have an email account there but it just forwards my old mail to my new fast mail address. I never log in.

phs 7y ago
I'm in a similar position, but I still use it for oauth on applications that only support e.g. it and facebook.

lidHanteyk 7y ago

This commenter has it right; YT can't possibly be a money-maker: https://twitter.com/AlalmeCreative/status/1193607405336068096 https://twitter.com/AlalmeCreative/status/119360740533606809... Think about it. You can't even consider being a large video host without massive amounts of spare disk space, and you probably can't make enough on ads to pay just for bandwidth! I bet that this is why the new terms of service clarify that YT is an offering of Google, and not of some wholly-owned subsidiary. Google's search ads make so much money that you can buy as many computers as you like in pursuit of ads, and then if you happen to use those computers for storing cat videos, well, that's just good use of idle disks!

belltaco 7y ago

Wonder if they're considering mostly the bandwidth cost or the storage cost too? Lets say a channel with videos does not get a lot of views, so takes up storage costing X, vs. a channel that get a lot of unmonetizable videos which take up bandwidth cost Y in addition to storage. Maybe bandwidth costs Y are much higher, so the former channels are safe? Hopefully they give a long notice for the user to back those videos up, or there would be a lot of lost content. If it's a great purge, it's going to be a huge mess with even Internet Archive teams and volunteers not able to keep up with the immense storage and bandwidth needed.

TheChaplain 7y ago

This is a good time to remind yourself and friends about Google Takeout (https://www.google.com/takeout https://www.google.com/takeout) Use it to backup all your Google data to your own computer, once a year at least.

falcolas 7y ago

An interesting development, particularly if you take it in concert with the “Adpocalypse” (ad companies forcing YouTube to remove their ads from any potentially controversial content). For example, most violent (i.e. Call of Duty) video game videos are immediately and irrevocably demonitized, to the point where the creators are only able to continue thanks to external funding, either through Twitch or Patreon. Now then, those videos can still get tens and hundreds of thousands of views on YouTube. They are the very definition of “not commercially viable” to YouTube, since they can’t have ads on them, but they’re extremely well viewed. Makes you wonder what will happen next.