Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by alanjay 1023 days ago
This the problem with YouTube- they're judge, jury and executioner.

If you dispute the claim its judged by checks notes the person who claimed copyright.

Even if the original work is 120 - yes, 120 - years old!

See first comment on

https://youtu.be/HFq7XpFmYo4
1 comments
beebmam 1023 days ago
Why shouldn't a business get to decide what content they host on their platform? They're paying to keep that data hosted and the services up and maintained! Are you suggesting YouTube shouldn't have the right to refuse hosting someone's content?
link
Kamq 1023 days ago
> Why shouldn't a business get to decide what content they host on their platform?

They should. But that doesn't prevent social consequences, including badmouthing them on their rationale.

Your response would be very relevant if the OP was proposing a law that would force them to carry such content, but that doesn't seem to be the case here.

link
anigbrowl 1023 days ago
It's rude to just ignore the extremely valid point someone made and act as if they had not brought it up in the first place.
link
beebmam 1023 days ago
YouTube should, like any other business, have the right to be judge jury and executioner of all content they host and provide to others on their platform. Period. They should never be coerced by a government to not have the right to not host content.
link