6 ms·

> The fact that Google/Youtube has zero support infrastructure should be evidence that they are a monopoly and engaging in monopolistic activity. I'm not sure

> The fact that Google/Youtube has zero support infrastructure should be evidence that they are a monopoly and engaging in monopolistic activity. I'm not sure one has anything to do with the other.

rev0lutions 6y ago
100% it does. it means they have no incentive to justify their actions to the market
- kortilla 6y ago
  No, you can have a business model with no customer support without a monopoly. The potential lost sales are just part of the equation.
  - rev0lutions 6y ago
    i see what you're saying. yelp is a testament to your point. maybe it can be priced in even if its not a monopoly
xmprt 6y ago
If they weren't a monopoly then they wouldn't be able to get away with fraudulent activity like deleting someone's Google account or accepting false DMCA claims with no recourse or not paying out Ad Sense revenue because they flagged your account (without explaining why).
- qtplatypus 6y ago
  The accepting false DMCA claims is something that the DMCA system sort of requires them to do. However they have in the past sued people who have issued false DMCA claims.
  - monocasa 6y ago
    > The accepting false DMCA claims is something that the DMCA system sort of requires them to do. No, the DMCA allows for counter claiming and it not being an issue. Google's policies go beyond what's required for the DMCA, and stem from the early several billion dollar copyright lawsuit they settled out of court with the major labels fairly early on. It's an extralegal system negotiated between Google and the labels. > However they have in the past sued people who have issued false DMCA claims. Can you give an example of someone they've sued for making false claims?
    - gundmc 6y ago
      This requires very minimal effort to find. https://www.theverge.com/2019/8/19/20812144/youtube-copyright-strike-lawsuit-alleged-extortion-minecraft https://www.theverge.com/2019/8/19/20812144/youtube-copyrigh...
      - monocasa 6y ago
        It's not the copyright claims that they had a problem with (or else they'd go after any of the other false copyright claims), it's using their platform for extortion. The "I'm going to file false copyright claims unless you pay me" thing.
    - neotek 6y ago
      >No, the DMCA allows for counter claiming and it not being an issue. Google's policies go beyond what's required for the DMCA, and stem from the early several billion dollar copyright lawsuit they settled out of court with the major labels fairly early on. It's an extralegal system negotiated between Google and the labels. You're conflating two different things, perhaps intentionally. Content ID, which is the additional system you're referring to, does not and cannot cause an account to be closed[1]. If content in your video is flagged by Content ID, all that happens is that the advertising revenue from your video is directed to the purported copyright holder, or the video is removed from YouTube. You do not receive any strikes and your channel is not limited in any way. [1] https://www.youtube.com/howyoutubeworks/policies/copyright/#enforcing-copyright https://www.youtube.com/howyoutubeworks/policies/copyright/#... Copyright strikes[2] are a completely different kettle of fish, and Google is bound by the DMCA to immediately and without question remove the allegedly infringing content. In fact, they are expressly forbidden by law to perform any sort of investigation before making the content unavailable or they risk losing immunity under the safe harbour provisions. And far from accepting DMCA claims "with no recourse" as you suggest, they openly publish a variety of training materials to teach users exactly how to file a counter-claim[3], and they routinely accept those counter-claims and restore the content. [2] https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2814000 https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2814000 [3] https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2807684 https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2807684 >Can you give an example of someone they've sued for making false claims? Christopher Brady. https://www.engadget.com/2019-08-20-youtube-lawsuit-false-takedown-notices-extortion.html https://www.engadget.com/2019-08-20-youtube-lawsuit-false-ta... https://www.theverge.com/2019/10/15/20915688/youtube-copyright-troll-lawsuit-settled-false-dmca-takedown-christopher-brady https://www.theverge.com/2019/10/15/20915688/youtube-copyrig...

> The fact that Google/Youtube has zero support infrastructure should be evidence that they are a monopoly and engaging in monopolistic activity. I'm not sure one has anything to do with the other.

rev0lutions 6y ago

100% it does. it means they have no incentive to justify their actions to the market

kortilla 6y ago
No, you can have a business model with no customer support without a monopoly. The potential lost sales are just part of the equation.
- rev0lutions 6y ago
  i see what you're saying. yelp is a testament to your point. maybe it can be priced in even if its not a monopoly

xmprt 6y ago

If they weren't a monopoly then they wouldn't be able to get away with fraudulent activity like deleting someone's Google account or accepting false DMCA claims with no recourse or not paying out Ad Sense revenue because they flagged your account (without explaining why).

qtplatypus 6y ago
The accepting false DMCA claims is something that the DMCA system sort of requires them to do. However they have in the past sued people who have issued false DMCA claims.
- monocasa 6y ago
  > The accepting false DMCA claims is something that the DMCA system sort of requires them to do. No, the DMCA allows for counter claiming and it not being an issue. Google's policies go beyond what's required for the DMCA, and stem from the early several billion dollar copyright lawsuit they settled out of court with the major labels fairly early on. It's an extralegal system negotiated between Google and the labels. > However they have in the past sued people who have issued false DMCA claims. Can you give an example of someone they've sued for making false claims?
  - gundmc 6y ago
    This requires very minimal effort to find. https://www.theverge.com/2019/8/19/20812144/youtube-copyright-strike-lawsuit-alleged-extortion-minecraft https://www.theverge.com/2019/8/19/20812144/youtube-copyrigh...
    - monocasa 6y ago
      It's not the copyright claims that they had a problem with (or else they'd go after any of the other false copyright claims), it's using their platform for extortion. The "I'm going to file false copyright claims unless you pay me" thing.
  - neotek 6y ago
    >No, the DMCA allows for counter claiming and it not being an issue. Google's policies go beyond what's required for the DMCA, and stem from the early several billion dollar copyright lawsuit they settled out of court with the major labels fairly early on. It's an extralegal system negotiated between Google and the labels. You're conflating two different things, perhaps intentionally. Content ID, which is the additional system you're referring to, does not and cannot cause an account to be closed[1]. If content in your video is flagged by Content ID, all that happens is that the advertising revenue from your video is directed to the purported copyright holder, or the video is removed from YouTube. You do not receive any strikes and your channel is not limited in any way. [1] https://www.youtube.com/howyoutubeworks/policies/copyright/#enforcing-copyright https://www.youtube.com/howyoutubeworks/policies/copyright/#... Copyright strikes[2] are a completely different kettle of fish, and Google is bound by the DMCA to immediately and without question remove the allegedly infringing content. In fact, they are expressly forbidden by law to perform any sort of investigation before making the content unavailable or they risk losing immunity under the safe harbour provisions. And far from accepting DMCA claims "with no recourse" as you suggest, they openly publish a variety of training materials to teach users exactly how to file a counter-claim[3], and they routinely accept those counter-claims and restore the content. [2] https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2814000 https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2814000 [3] https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2807684 https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2807684 >Can you give an example of someone they've sued for making false claims? Christopher Brady. https://www.engadget.com/2019-08-20-youtube-lawsuit-false-takedown-notices-extortion.html https://www.engadget.com/2019-08-20-youtube-lawsuit-false-ta... https://www.theverge.com/2019/10/15/20915688/youtube-copyright-troll-lawsuit-settled-false-dmca-takedown-christopher-brady https://www.theverge.com/2019/10/15/20915688/youtube-copyrig...