3 ms·
Do you have some more details about this? Because there's nothing informative in the article. I find it extremely difficult to believe that Google signed a con
by boring_twenties 5y ago
Do you have some more details about this? Because there's nothing informative in the article.
I find it extremely difficult to believe that Google signed a contract obligating it to host any and all content uploaded by the user, regardless of what it is. But hey, I've been surprised before.
- red_trumpet 5y agoIANAL, but if I understand this German article [1] correctly, then the changes in Youtube's ToS were not contractually effective, because the user was not asked to comply. The fine was then imposed because Youtube took > 3 weeks to comply with the court's order to make the video accessible. [1] https://www.welt.de/politik/deutschland/article232421961/OLG-Dresden-verhaengt-100-000-Euro-Ordnungsgeld-gegen-YouTube.html https://www.welt.de/politik/deutschland/article232421961/OLG...