When Vox content creator Carlos Maza (Strikethrough) called out YouTube for allowing commentator Steven Crowder to use racially and sexually provocative language to describe him, it lead to a firestorm of online activity, and some ill-considered reactions from Team YouTube.
What was Team YouTube's initial response to the controversy?
Why was such response almost immediately deemed inappropriate by effectively both sides of the discussion?
How do YouTube's terms of service work, and why does a "plain English" approach often lead to ambiguities like the ones seen here?
How did YouTube almost immediately backtrack in its initial response resulting in national coverage by the likes of the New York Times and others?
And why should all commentators and YouTube content creators, of every political and other persuasion, be wary of ambiguous rules and rulings from a company which itself admits it will punish folks even in the absence of true violations?
Our rules are clear. It's time for Virtual Legality.
#Maza #Crowder #YouTube
Discussed in this episode:
"Thanks again for taking the time to share all of this information with us."
Team YouTube Tweet - June 4, 2019
"Harassment and cyberbullying policy"
YouTube "Help Center"
"Policies and Safety"
YouTube Community Guidelines
"YouTube to Remove Thousands of Videos Pushing Extreme Views"
New York Times - June 5, 2019 - Kevin Roose and Kate Conger
"Our ongoing work to tackle hate"
YouTube Official Blog - June 5, 2019
"Continuing our work to improve recommendations on YouTube"
YouTube Official Blog - January 25, 2019
"Google is facing an imminent antitrust investigation from the US Justice Department"
The Verge - May 31, 2019 - Nick Statt
"Virtual Legality #50 - On the Tyranny of "Guidelines": A PlayStation Story (Hoeg Law)"
PODCAST VERSIONS AVAILABLE AT
Google Play Music:
"Virtual Legality" is a continuing series discussing the law, video games, software, and everything digital, hosted by Richard Hoeg, of the Hoeg Law Business Law Firm (Hoeg Law).
Rick has practiced for more than a decade at some of the country's largest law firms, representing IT, software, video game, and other technology companies, as well as the individuals and institutions which fund them.
DISCUSSION IS PROVIDED FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS LEGAL ADVICE. INDIVIDUALS INTERESTED IN THE LEGAL TOPICS DISCUSSED IN THIS VIDEO SHOULD CONSULT WITH THEIR OWN COUNSEL.
Any and all feedback is appreciated. Let us know what you think!
Blog, "Rules of the Game", at https://hoeglaw.wordpress.com/
On "Help Us Out Hoeg!" a regular segment on the Easy Allies Podcast (formerly GameTrailers)
Biweekly on "Inside the Huddle with Michael Spath" on WTKA 1050
The Hoeg Law Firm is a business law firm with big law experience and a small firm approach focusing on start-ups, technology, financing, and everything else a business might need.