You might know me as the sponsor of the Avatar Multi-language videos on youtube,
Largest view count was ≈1M but the channel was deleted and account essentially banned, but backed-up by Odysee. Re-uploaded on a new account, ≈1/10th of views, still “large” number and not deleted. Original most likely automatically, other videos were flagged by google as copyright infringement. On youtube, music is uploaded by “artists or representatives” and the same is true for other tv-shows and clips, maybe for the purposes of sampling or streaming. But where is the precise limit and is that definition necessary? Google should(?) want free content uploaded for the purposes of ad revenue/ economic purchase guides but then also wants full ownership of that same content and the establishment of reputation/trust by association...
But why stop at copyright? To maintain the “choice” and also “conflict” between Apple & Google while not admitting their symbiotic relationship...? Or to appear to bend the knee to the US Gov because they were created under it and it’s past priorities? In any case, “big tech” wants selfish control of its users, their user’s data, and none of the consequences/repercussions of doing something evil and getting away with it. Is it really no consequences, or encouragement of bad behavior? and how does “bad/evil” get defined?
Strictly speaking, is the enforcement of copyright google’s job, or apple’s, or tesla’s/amazon’s/microsoft’s, or a French/Korean/German (etc.) company’s or any foreign entity’s? ...or the US Government’s? ...the state of California’s? “You must comply!” otherwise another group of “renegades” tired of “dictators” might find shelter across an ocean to create another “country” founded on “principles” to prevent such a thing from happening again. Which *could* cause another World Conflict, gotta ping Alan Turing to resolve it…
Add more later