4 ms·

Not just history of the internet: Youtube takes down videos of war crimes. Destroying or covering up evidence of war crimes is, itself, a war crime. I'm surpris

Not just history of the internet: Youtube takes down videos of war crimes. Destroying or covering up evidence of war crimes is, itself, a war crime. I'm surprised that Youtube isn't in hot water over that. https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20170812/01102937985/once-again-rather-than-deleting-terrorist-propaganda-youtube-deletes-evidence-war-crimes.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20170812/01102937985/once-... https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/youtube-ai-deletes-war-crime-videos-extremist-material https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/youtube-ai-deletes-war-cr...

josefx 5y ago
Isn't YouTube headquartered in one of those countries that officially consider foreign war crime tribunals directed at their citizens a reason to invade the responsible country?
- AegirLeet 5y ago
  I looked it up and YouTube is indeed headquartered in the United States of America, a known rogue state that regularly commits war crimes.
  - shadowgovt 5y ago
    We should probably stop trusting them with the video cultural memory of the Internet.
- Vinnl 5y ago
  Context: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hague_Invasion_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hague_Invasion_Act
j16sdiz 5y ago
I am not sure what we want YouTube to be. Sometimes we want it big enough to fight against state-level censorship; sometimes we want it small enough to obey anti-trust or privacy law.
skissane 5y ago
> Youtube takes down videos of war crimes. Destroying or covering up evidence of war crimes is, itself, a war crime. I'm surprised that Youtube isn't in hot water over that. Do they actually delete the videos? For all we know, the video is still stored on Google's servers indefinitely, there is just a flag set which blocks public access to it. If a government or UN agency asks for a copy of the video, is Google able and willing to provide it? Knowingly destroying evidence of a crime is (often) a crime; denying public access to evidence of a crime is not a crime, especially if you are still happy to provide it to the proper authorities on request. Regarding "Destroying or covering up evidence of war crimes is, itself, a war crime", I don't believe that is actually true. Under the Rome Statute of the ICC, war crimes are crimes against article 8; destroying evidence of a war crime is not a war crime, because it is not an article 8 crime, it is a crime against article 70 ("Offences against the administration of justice"). Other international treaties against war crimes (such as the Geneva Conventions), and national laws against war crimes (such as the US War Crimes Act codified at 18 USC 2441), likewise do not consider destroying evidence of a war crime to be a war crime, instead it is a non-war crime against the administration of justice.
- snerbles 5y ago
  That's the rub of it...eventually there will be crimes that involve said "proper authorities" who will not want the public to know.
ggggtez 5y ago
You can just look up their terms of service which I'm fairly sure leave a carve out for news items ... But you are making an assumption that the average worker (probably from India) making $1 an hour, can tell the difference between newsworthy war crimes, and a snuff film. I don't think anyone is going to get that right 100% of the time. So no, I don't really see it as a problem.
Aunche 5y ago
They're deleting a digital copy of evidence of war crimes. It's not like you can prank someone into being a war criminal filling up their storage with war crime videos, so that they're forced to delete it.
- pessimizer 5y ago
  If I leave a gun I used to kill someone at your house (and you're aware that it is a murder weapon), can you just destroy it without being an accessory? Also, lol at Youtube getting filled with war crime videos. Youtube has plenty of space.

josefx 5y ago

Isn't YouTube headquartered in one of those countries that officially consider foreign war crime tribunals directed at their citizens a reason to invade the responsible country?

AegirLeet 5y ago
I looked it up and YouTube is indeed headquartered in the United States of America, a known rogue state that regularly commits war crimes.
- shadowgovt 5y ago
  We should probably stop trusting them with the video cultural memory of the Internet.
Vinnl 5y ago
Context: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hague_Invasion_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hague_Invasion_Act

j16sdiz 5y ago

I am not sure what we want YouTube to be. Sometimes we want it big enough to fight against state-level censorship; sometimes we want it small enough to obey anti-trust or privacy law.

skissane 5y ago

> Youtube takes down videos of war crimes. Destroying or covering up evidence of war crimes is, itself, a war crime. I'm surprised that Youtube isn't in hot water over that. Do they actually delete the videos? For all we know, the video is still stored on Google's servers indefinitely, there is just a flag set which blocks public access to it. If a government or UN agency asks for a copy of the video, is Google able and willing to provide it? Knowingly destroying evidence of a crime is (often) a crime; denying public access to evidence of a crime is not a crime, especially if you are still happy to provide it to the proper authorities on request. Regarding "Destroying or covering up evidence of war crimes is, itself, a war crime", I don't believe that is actually true. Under the Rome Statute of the ICC, war crimes are crimes against article 8; destroying evidence of a war crime is not a war crime, because it is not an article 8 crime, it is a crime against article 70 ("Offences against the administration of justice"). Other international treaties against war crimes (such as the Geneva Conventions), and national laws against war crimes (such as the US War Crimes Act codified at 18 USC 2441), likewise do not consider destroying evidence of a war crime to be a war crime, instead it is a non-war crime against the administration of justice.

snerbles 5y ago
That's the rub of it...eventually there will be crimes that involve said "proper authorities" who will not want the public to know.

ggggtez 5y ago

You can just look up their terms of service which I'm fairly sure leave a carve out for news items ... But you are making an assumption that the average worker (probably from India) making $1 an hour, can tell the difference between newsworthy war crimes, and a snuff film. I don't think anyone is going to get that right 100% of the time. So no, I don't really see it as a problem.

Aunche 5y ago

They're deleting a digital copy of evidence of war crimes. It's not like you can prank someone into being a war criminal filling up their storage with war crime videos, so that they're forced to delete it.

pessimizer 5y ago
If I leave a gun I used to kill someone at your house (and you're aware that it is a murder weapon), can you just destroy it without being an accessory? Also, lol at Youtube getting filled with war crime videos. Youtube has plenty of space.