>Can't we blame them for shitty support at least? For not providing any explanation at all? For not having an appeal process? By all means, that's a well known

>Can't we blame them for shitty support at least? For not providing any explanation at all? For not having an appeal process? By all means, that's a well known problem with Google, way beyond Youtube. The way they treat content creators and smaller customers is frankly disrespectful. That being said I still think that while they could handle these matters better, in this case I suspect that the end result would effectively be the same. >For always taking side of the IP Owner? For deleting the channel instead of some other mechanism? For not actually fighting for reasonable IP laws for this kind of video? No, that part is not something I'd necessarily blame them for. You're asking them to go through a world of trouble for content that's not even theirs. When you create a Youtube account you're not entitled to Google's legal team. You're not a partner in this relationship, you're arguably not even a customer unless you buy ads. >I don't know why people come out to defend the shitty actions of a Fortune 50 company and explain why the underdog had it coming. The relative size of these entities is frankly irrelevant in this case. I could spend all day bashing Google for various things (and do on occasions, as my comment history shows) but in this case I'm not sure that the guy uploading unlicensed song covers while claiming fair use and getting copyright struck to death is really the best showcase of Google's abusive practices.