More bogus copyright claims continue on Youtube, while COPPA Controversy explodes

Bostwiki talks about bogus copyright claims against critics even by tech people (newer video).

One complainant then tried to make a “deal” with the "defendant".  Another, a well-known conservative figure who has been deplatformed, had shown integrity by not issuing anything.  The video stresses you normally can’t copyright your name – you can trademark a company name or book or movie series – but that doesn’t mean others can’t criticize it.  

David Pakman reports now that NBC also issued a takedown of his coverage of the impeachment livestream, and CNN issued a second takedown.  All were reversed after complaints, but revenue was lost.  Pakman says he used the CSPAN feed of the House website, which is public domain.

Michael Moreno, a mathematician who talks about morality and logic (maybe like “Moral Tribes”) says he got a privacy takedown from a professor at his school in Utah, whom he says practices reverse racism. But the name and information was widely public.

Viewers may have heard that the COPPA controversy continues today.  According to many observers, individual channels could be liable for fines if they don’t label channels as “made for kids” when the FTC examiners (who will troll the videos) decide otherwise, after the fact.  The policies go into effect Jan. 1.   There is controversy over how examiners at the FTC would classify videos that incidentally might appeal to kids despite the fact that the content provider intended it for general use, and the way it is accessed might matter. 
  
There is also more talk that the reason for the "commercial viability" clause is let YouTube get rid of "bad actors" whom it can't prove are advocating white supremacy. 

   

COPPA has been law since 1998 and was upgraded in 2013.  Some years ago, Blogger required all blogs (including this one) to include a Privacy Policy (at the bottom of this page) which I believe is related to COPPA.  Blog posts, since they are based on text, are less likely to be a target for COPPA than videos (I presume).  But if they have ads, the possibility of violations would exist. GDPR in Europe is similar.

  

I quickly checked most of my videos.  I have a few incidentals from model train shows (which I view as “stage events” or art work, not toys) but YouTube left my marking of them as NFK.  The problem with my videos is that they are intended to be viewed through blogs, not as a channel on its own, and my descriptions (often entered on phones) are sparse.  A random visitor may notunderstand that.  I will probably go back and add the source blog url on some of them to give context.  The volume and subscription counts are too low for YouTube monetization.  But it seems possible that cookies in YouTube could be used to drive visitors to other similar videos that are monetized.  I also don’t have sponsors for ads on YouTube right now, but if I did, that would also create similar potential for violation setups.