3 ms·
The ToS provide the binding right for the user to have the video hosted. It's in the name "terms of service": you follow the terms and in return you're provided
by yorwba 5y ago
The ToS provide the binding right for the user to have the video hosted. It's in the name "terms of service": you follow the terms and in return you're provided with a service. In this case, the plaintiff complied with the terms but was denied service. The court didn't approve of that. I doubt it has anything to do with their political alignment.
- onli 5y agoYou're probably right. I assumed that there is a clause in the AGB permitting Youtube to in general not host a video if they don't want to. Or that there is something creating a Hausrecht in there, given them the right to chose a customer. Doesn't seem to be the case.