Rational Squad deleted from YouTube

OdwinOddball
Silver Member
Posts: 4
Joined: 2007-03-12
User is offlineOffline
Rational Squad deleted from YouTube

Was browsing through the RRS videos on YouTube a bit ago, when I started getting " This account is suspended." messages when trying to views the video list. And it looks like all the Gisburne related clips have been removed...

 

Youtube on the assault again?


Ophios
Ophios's picture
Posts: 909
Joined: 2006-09-19
User is offlineOffline
anti_xmas07 wrote: Some

anti_xmas07 wrote:
Some Fundi probably paid Youtube some $$$ to suspend the account. Not surprised.

 

Dear youtube,

   WAH WAH WAH, I HATE FREEDOM!!!
 

AImboden wrote:
I'm not going to PM my agreement just because one tucan has pms.


HealingBlight
HealingBlight's picture
Posts: 256
Joined: 2006-04-13
User is offlineOffline
Is there any way to make

Is there any way to make sure that mass flagging will simply result in a video being auto removed?

I am willing to post on my pseudonym account, a video with no copyright infringement or things that offend, and have everyone flag it, see how many it takes for a takedown.

Maybe its just 20 people, nobody will check the content of the video and it can be examined what the violation report tells us....

This would lend itself to the theroy that a horde of digital jihadists are going around, taking down all that offends thee.

-----------------------
I'll get back to you when I think of something worthwhile to say.


Iruka Naminori
atheist
Iruka Naminori's picture
Posts: 1955
Joined: 2006-11-21
User is offlineOffline
I hope you get to the bottom

I hope you get to the bottom of this soon.  Until YouTube gives reasons I'll assume it's a mistake that can be rectified.  I certainly hope it's a mistake that can be rectified.

Books on atheism, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7522
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Yesterday I had 3

Yesterday I had 3 correspondences with youtube within a 1 hour period in reference to a Uri Geller video that was removed imporperly.  After the third notice I can safely state that my paperwork was filled out correctly, and the only action left for them was to reinstate our account.  Since that point I've had no correspondence with them over the 24 hour period except for resending my email three times.

I figure they're now at a point where they realize they can't keep my account down for copyright infringement which was the excuse they fell back on for Gisburne.  In the battle of public opinion if they claim copyright infringement for us rather than content, they'll win the minds of onlookers.  I feel we're now at a point where they either must reinstate the account or I can state that the account was removed for content.  If it was in fact removed for content, as I said before... the games will begin.

 

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Pikachu
Pikachu's picture
Posts: 181
Joined: 2006-08-19
User is offlineOffline
Im not sure if this is an

Im not sure if this is an internet conspiracy/propaganda to gain popularity to this site but if this continues, i think the best solution is to make your internet atheist followers do a crusade against Youtube is to do the same way as Nick Gisburne. To make videos spread like a virus. Make your videos downloadable to everyone so they can post them on youtube or anywhere on the net.

Maybe that way more people will be more interested to take the Blasphemy Challenge. I understand very well the business of the internet is all about money. Your only purpose is to create a never ending stream of links back to you site.

If you give youtube a bad name, then Youtube will give you a bad name. Therefore this will create a circular debate that will lead to endless popularity for you guys.

 As for me, i dont follow any group of people. So im outside of this. I use other techniques to gain popularity to sell my products. (Script kiddie)

 Since you dont have enough followers, i think suing them would be a very bad idea. If you do, i can tell you right now that you will loose. So just give them a taste of their own medicine.

There are two things you need to know about your videos.


#1. People love them!
#2. Once you release one, it can spread like a virus!


That's really all a good marketer needs to hear to understand their real marketing power on the Internet. A good, free video can be your best salesman 24 hours a day non-stop.


Plus, your best salesman will duplicate himself automatically as other web sites host it or link to it for their own visitors.


It's hard to ask for a more powerful marketing tool than that.


The video can multiply upon itself without restriction and in all directions at once.

God had no time to create time.


darth_josh
High Level DonorHigh Level ModeratorGold Member
darth_josh's picture
Posts: 2650
Joined: 2006-02-27
User is offlineOffline
https://online.wamu.com/messa

https://online.wamu.com/messagecenter/general/SendMessage.aspx


Dear Friends at Washington Mutual.

I know that in your very busy days that you probably have more pressing concerns than our American heritage to worry about. However, I felt compelled to tell you about a recent chain of events on www.youtube.com(a site where I happened upon one of your advertisements).
There are literally millions of videos on that site, but I am concerned about just a few that I felt you should know about.
The Rational Response Squad held an account there that showcased some of its events and history. This is an activity that many people engage in for the betterment of society by communication and free speech. Their account was suspended seemingly without warrant. There were no indications that any wrongdoing was made by the RRS.
It is understood that it is the site owners prerogative to disallow any videos that they deem unfit to carry. However, their pusillanimous judgments concerning what should stay bespeaks of the ethical character of the editors at youtube in my opinion.
One half of one hour's perusal of the videos on the site would reveal that the inmates are running the asylum.
I would urge you not to continue your advertising campaign with youtube on the grounds that I would not want your firm to be besmirched by their apparent image of dishonesty.
Past examples of their dishonesty include allowing such hoaxes as 'lonelygirl15', 'WeHoGirls', and 'NoHoGirls'. Yet while those accounts remain untouched, real people are being banned perhaps because their viewpoints are against that of the youtube editors. or perhaps because of poor judgment on the part of the editors. In either case, I ask one question: Should Washington Mutual weather the inevitable PR storm when youtube bans enough people to garner the attention of the investors that begin asking questions as to why you advertise with seemingly dishonest individuals?
I would certainly hope that you would take a stand for freedom of thought, speech, and progress on this issue.
The RRS is dedicated to freethought in our everchanging world much as your investors are. The RRS is dedicated to the progression of society, the preservation of the American way, and most importantly the TRUTH.
Thank you.


Thank you for submitting your message.   Your reference number is  K201957864609471C.

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.


Castaa
Posts: 8
Joined: 2006-03-03
User is offlineOffline
Sapient wrote: Yesterday I

Sapient wrote:

Yesterday I had 3 correspondences with youtube within a 1 hour period in reference to a Uri Geller video that was removed imporperly. After the third notice I can safely state that my paperwork was filled out correctly, and the only action left for them was to reinstate our account. Since that point I've had no correspondence with them over the 24 hour period except for resending my email three times.

I figure they're now at a point where they realize they can't keep my account down for copyright infringement which was the excuse they fell back on for Gisburne. In the battle of public opinion if they claim copyright infringement for us rather than content, they'll win the minds of onlookers. I feel we're now at a point where they either must reinstate the account or I can state that the account was removed for content. If it was in fact removed for content, as I said before... the games will begin.

 

Good news that they responded and you had at least a chance to explain your side of the argument.  Let's hope they reinstate the account.  I think they will.

 

I think every YouTube account is vulerable to this tactic because nearly everyone uses some type of content in their videos that violate copyright.  It's chilling. 


Ophios
Ophios's picture
Posts: 909
Joined: 2006-09-19
User is offlineOffline
Castaa wrote: I think every

Castaa wrote:
I think every YouTube account is vulerable to this tactic because nearly everyone uses some type of content in their videos that violate copyright. It's chilling.

If youtube had nothing but videos of completly origonal stuff, I wouldn't give a damn about it. 

AImboden wrote:
I'm not going to PM my agreement just because one tucan has pms.


Castaa
Posts: 8
Joined: 2006-03-03
User is offlineOffline
Ophios wrote: Castaa

Ophios wrote:

Castaa wrote:
I think every YouTube account is vulerable to this tactic because nearly everyone uses some type of content in their videos that violate copyright. It's chilling.

If youtube had nothing but videos of completly origonal stuff, I wouldn't give a damn about it.

 

The problem is that if one is doing anything that upsets enough religious people, those upset people almost have a kind of senorship ability for most channels because of the massive amount of copyright violations on YouTube.  Especially those channels that have a library of old videos created before all this copyright enforcement started on YouTube.  Ultimately it's an oversight of the makers but it's a huge liability for those of us that make controversial religious themed videos.


eam07
Posts: 3
Joined: 2007-03-03
User is offlineOffline
youtubesucks

This is a bunch of bullshit! There was NO reason given for your suspended account?! What can we do to protest?


eam07
Posts: 3
Joined: 2007-03-03
User is offlineOffline
"Atheism is a religion in

"Atheism is a religion in much the same way "off" is a TV channel."

Oh I love that! Who said it? Can I use it? (Don't want to be slapped with a copyright infringement penalty)


healthy.addictions
Bronze Member
Posts: 69
Joined: 2007-01-16
User is offlineOffline
I too, am not happy about

I too, am not happy about this shit...


Edger
Posts: 104
Joined: 2007-01-14
User is offlineOffline
youtube censorship

So how do we combat this? Should we just hit up every god freak on youtube and "flag" their posts?


magilum
Posts: 2410
Joined: 2007-03-07
User is offlineOffline
So how do we combat this?

So how do we combat this? Should we just hit up every god freak on youtube and "flag" their posts?
And sink to their level? Ignorance helps their case, not ours. We need a way of keeping books on the shelves, not burning them in kind--if you get my meaning.


kinerry
Posts: 6
Joined: 2007-03-17
User is offlineOffline
magilum wrote: So how do we

magilum wrote:
So how do we combat this? Should we just hit up every god freak on youtube and "flag" their posts?
And sink to their level? Ignorance helps their case, not ours. We need a way of keeping books on the shelves, not burning them in kind--if you get my meaning.

 

Don't let pride get in the way of your better judgement.  If it works for them, why not fight fire with fire?


CrimsonSun99
CrimsonSun99's picture
Posts: 18
Joined: 2006-12-08
User is offlineOffline
Keep me posted

Right when anything official goes down I want you all to contact me asap... I will spread the word faster than religion spreads. My website is gaining alot of power lately and I've got a lot of Atheist webmasters in my contact list which can get this moved to the public quickly.

 

Behind the RRS and all of my other atheist brothers 100%. 


thingy
SuperfanGold Member
thingy's picture
Posts: 1022
Joined: 2007-02-07
User is offlineOffline
healthy.addictions wrote: I

healthy.addictions wrote:
I too, am not happy about this shit...

 I think the profanity probably did you a disservice, especialy with the "holier than thou" attitude theists often have and excessive stands on anything that may be not-so-nice (unless it's something or someone they disagree with in which case anything goes as god is on their side.

 That being said, I'm quite dissapointed I've got such an old phone 'cause I'd love to turn that you're a bunch of cock fucking cum guzzling anal probing cunt licking tape(?) sniffing bitch ass motherfuckers" in to a ring tone. Smiling

Organised religion is the ultimate form of blasphemy.
Censored and blacked out for internet access in ANZ!
AU: http://nocleanfeed.com/ | NZ: http://nzblackout.org/


mindspread
mindspread's picture
Posts: 360
Joined: 2007-02-18
User is offlineOffline
Quote:

Quote:
That being said, I'm quite dissapointed I've got such an old phone 'cause I'd love to turn that you're a bunch of cock fucking cum guzzling anal probing cunt licking tape(?) sniffing bitch ass motherfuckers" in to a ring tone. Smiling

She said "taint"

Taint is a term used to refer to the perineum.

"It ain't your balls (or pussy) and it ain't your ass."


LunarShadow
Posts: 77
Joined: 2006-02-18
User is offlineOffline
healthy.addictions wrote: I

healthy.addictions wrote:
I too, am not happy about this shit...

 

 

 

 


darth_josh
High Level DonorHigh Level ModeratorGold Member
darth_josh's picture
Posts: 2650
Joined: 2006-02-27
User is offlineOffline
thingy

thingy wrote:

healthy.addictions wrote:
I too, am not happy about this shit...

I think the profanity probably did you a disservice, especialy with the "holier than thou" attitude theists often have and excessive stands on anything that may be not-so-nice (unless it's something or someone they disagree with in which case anything goes as god is on their side.

That being said, I'm quite dissapointed I've got such an old phone 'cause I'd love to turn that you're a bunch of cock fucking cum guzzling anal probing cunt licking tape(?) sniffing bitch ass motherfuckers" in to a ring tone. Smiling

 

That wasn't profanity.

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.


OdwinOddball
Silver Member
Posts: 4
Joined: 2007-03-12
User is offlineOffline
Some of you are taking this

Some of you are taking this the wrong way.


Think about it. If the theists on YT are working so dilligently to get the vocal Atheists banned, this means something. This means that they are scared of the message. Knowledge is the antithesis of faith. By spreading knowledge the atheist community has commited the greatest sin of all, and is encouraging others to do the same. The sin of thinking.

Take pride in the work that has been done. Take pride in the fact that the message you present is so frightening that it must be removed lest it cause some viewers brain to start working. So some videos on YT get removed. This will not stop the knowledge from spreading. Once information is brought to light, it will always find a way to banish the darkness. It's just a matter of time.

 

I for one welcome the bannings. Bring it on. Controversy breeds interest. All their actions will do is bring the RRS to the attention of even more people.


Cruci Fiction
Posts: 43
Joined: 2007-02-01
User is offlineOffline
WARNING: Before viewing

WARNING: Before viewing videos in this thread, please put down all food and beverages, and move them safely to the side. Failing to heed this warning may result in an undesirable launching of said material through nasal passageways.


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7522
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Ok, I had another email

Ok, I had another email exchange from youtube today.  They didn't confirm or deny what we were removed for.  However a person working in copyright said "If you prevail in your counter-notification, we will be able to reactivate your account and restore your videos."

 Again, keep in mind we can't be sure it was copyright or censorship or flagging.  They are like politicians over at youtube, and rightly so.  I'm hoping that the girl who made the above quoted statement had full knowledge of my account, and that her claims were accurate.

 

 

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7522
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
I left out a big point!

I left out a big point! The copyright notification process will now take 10-14 days. I have a feeling Geller will lie again (they give him a chance to respond), so I hope they have a system in place to force him to prove he has copyright, which he wont be able to do. 

 

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


transhumanist
Posts: 1
Joined: 2007-03-29
User is offlineOffline
Not sure if you noticed, but

Not sure if you noticed, but I posted this thread on reddit (just your happy liberal atheist intellectual social bookarmking service) and they seemed to resound in a collective WTF, even given the scant amount of information available at this time. It's sad to see that in the Internet age a scoundrel like Uri Geller can still get away with perpetrating bullshit. My secular atheist prayers to the eternal uncaring nothingness go out to you.


DUG853
Posts: 40
Joined: 2007-01-28
User is offlineOffline
Re: Rational Squad deleted from YouTube

Thanks for the link: Fuckin' YouTube and the Christo-Fascists-!

I have also signed-up for LiveVideo and subbed. 

Sapient wrote:

AnointedHeathen wrote:
What's the channel name on LiveVid? I deleted my old account there heh.

http://www.livevideo.com/RationalResponders.com


darth_josh
High Level DonorHigh Level ModeratorGold Member
darth_josh's picture
Posts: 2650
Joined: 2006-02-27
User is offlineOffline
I don't have that kind of

I don't have that kind of patience. In 10 - 14 days, I'll have uploaded at least 50 - 70 videos or more.

 

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.


darth_josh
High Level DonorHigh Level ModeratorGold Member
darth_josh's picture
Posts: 2650
Joined: 2006-02-27
User is offlineOffline

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.


Cory T
Theist
Cory T's picture
Posts: 130
Joined: 2007-03-16
User is offlineOffline
Unlucky13 wrote: those...

Unlucky13 wrote:

those... mother... fuckers....

 If this had been a Christian organization then they would never had touched it. I'm so fucking sick of Christians doing this shit. Sapient, you should get in touch with the Secular Coalition (if you haven't already) and let them know about the site attacks and this YouTube thing. This has got to be grounds for discrimination.

I disagree... they wouldn't have touched Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, etc. Christians are always fair game for stuff like this.

Before I get flamed, I actually agree with you guys. This amounts to censorship, and infringes on your rights to free speech. You should complain. I don't know that you have a discrimination suit, but I'm no lawyer.

I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use. --Galileo Galilei


Cory T
Theist
Cory T's picture
Posts: 130
Joined: 2007-03-16
User is offlineOffline
OdwinOddball wrote: Think

OdwinOddball wrote:

Think about it. If the theists on YT are working so dilligently to get the vocal Atheists banned, this means something. This means that they are scared of the message. Knowledge is the antithesis of faith. By spreading knowledge the atheist community has commited the greatest sin of all, and is encouraging others to do the same. The sin of thinking

I hate to admit that you have a point, but... you have a point.

When we stoop to low measures like this, it only makes us look like we're running scared. And that's never a good thing.

I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use. --Galileo Galilei


darth_josh
High Level DonorHigh Level ModeratorGold Member
darth_josh's picture
Posts: 2650
Joined: 2006-02-27
User is offlineOffline
Opinions so noted. If you

Opinions so noted.

If you think for one moment that atheists should NOT feel as if all christendom, islam, etc. is upset by our very existence then I would encourage you to read your own words from your blog in a different perspective, Cory.

Ultimately, the problem isn't JUST the theists. Youtube itself must bear the responsibilty for its actions or lack thereof.

 

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.


Cory T
Theist
Cory T's picture
Posts: 130
Joined: 2007-03-16
User is offlineOffline
darth_josh wrote: Opinions

darth_josh wrote:

Opinions so noted.

If you think for one moment that atheists should NOT feel as if all christendom, islam, etc. is upset by our very existence then I would encourage you to read your own words from your blog in a different perspective, Cory.

Did you think I felt threatened when I wrote this:

A while back, I blogged on the Blasphemy Challenge, which is a disservice being done to the community by the oxymoronic Rational Response Squad. The challenge is to declare, on a YouTube video, that you deny the existence of the Holy Spirit. I’ve covered this in the past, but it bears repeating: the Unforgivable Sin is a sin of action, not of words. In committing this sin, you are continuously denying God by your lifestyle, thoughts, choices, actions, and condition of heart; not by making a one-time verbal declaration. Obviously, this isn’t what the folks who have taken the so-called challenge are actually doing–they are making the declaration, but we don’t know what they really believe or how they live their lives. [source]

The Blasphemy Challenged amused me.  I thought that it should have been used as an opportunity to educate Christians and seekers as to what the Unforgivable Sin really was (living a life of unbelief).  This website creates opportunities for Theist vs. Atheist dialogue and apologists and pastors alike should use it as such.

I didn't mean to come off threatened.  I meant to come off as happy that the folks I linked to below that entry took the Blasphemy Challenge the right way: as an opportunity to shephard the lost.

I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use. --Galileo Galilei


darth_josh
High Level DonorHigh Level ModeratorGold Member
darth_josh's picture
Posts: 2650
Joined: 2006-02-27
User is offlineOffline
Ummm. I think you turned

Ummm. I think you turned that into being about you and your kind right there.

Perhpas I might need to re-word it.

Both sides should probably feel threatened because of that one little piece called 'belief'.

One could question the need for apologetics(big league or otherwise) to practice this 'shepherding the flock'. I believe you answered that question for yourself, but I think you could also realize that your answer fails more than it succeeds. 

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.


aiia
Superfan
aiia's picture
Posts: 1923
Joined: 2006-09-12
User is offlineOffline
Cory T wrote: Did you think

Cory T wrote:
Did you think I felt threatened when I wrote this: A while back, I blogged on the Blasphemy Challenge, which is a disservice being done to the community by the oxymoronic Rational Response Squad.
Explain why "Rational Response Squad" is an oxymoron.
Quote:
The challenge is to declare, on a YouTube video, that you deny the existence of the Holy Spirit. I’ve covered this in the past, but it bears repeating: the Unforgivable Sin is a sin of action, not of words. In committing this sin, you are continuously denying God by your lifestyle, thoughts, choices, actions, and condition of heart; not by making a one-time verbal declaration. Obviously, this isn’t what the folks who have taken the so-called challenge are actually doing–they are making the declaration, but we don’t know what they really believe or how they live their lives. [source]

The Blasphemy Challenged amused me. I thought that it should have been used as an opportunity to educate Christians and seekers as to what the Unforgivable Sin really was (living a life of unbelief). This website creates opportunities for Theist vs. Atheist dialogue and apologists and pastors alike should use it as such.

I didn't mean to come off threatened. I meant to come off as happy that the folks I linked to below that entry took the Blasphemy Challenge the right way: as an opportunity to shephard the lost.

Apologetics? Isn't it that special technique where defenders of the bible take an uneducated and unthinking mind, kneeds it like dough into a roll and then twists it into a pretzel to give the illusion that the bible means an entirely different thing then what was written? Answer: Yes.

It doesn't matter if you think you "covered" it; people believe they will be punished for blasphemeing.

People who think there is something they refer to as god don't ask enough questions.


mindspread
mindspread's picture
Posts: 360
Joined: 2007-02-18
User is offlineOffline
I just read James Randi's

I just read James Randi's SWIFT newsletter for the week and found this entry of interest:

GELLER ON THE ROPES

Well, it appears that Mr. Uri Geller is feeling the heavy pressure of all those "unfortunate" video clips that have been going the rounds on the various Internet services! He’s issued complaints, demands, and generally dissatisfied noises, and in response, an entity known as “Explorologist Limited” has suddenly materialized and demanded that YouTube take down the Israeli-TV video that shows Geller "caught in the act" with the moving-the-compass trick, and the “Nova” excerpt in which he floundered about when he wasn’t allowed to fool with the props before the show. Of course, there are many similar clips available, and they’ve been copied and recopied all over the world, since the moment they first went up on the Internet. The YouTube people apparently were told by “Explorologist Limited” – who advertise that they’re a “Private Company” registered in the UK, dealing with “Radio and Television Activities/Provision of Services to Television, Radio, and Broadcasting” – that these video clips are copyrighted by Mr. Geller, a statement which is quite untrue.

For example, the "Nova" [PBS] show titled, "Secrets of the Psychics," uses the well-known video excerpt of Geller’s 1973 appearance on the Johnny Carson show in which he was unable to do any of his usual tricks, simply because I had been consulted by Johnny in advance and had provided him with the appropriate precautions to take so that Geller would not be able to do any trickery. I personally requested Johnny Carson to provide WGBH/Boston with a copy of that episode, since NBC had wanted a very large amount of money to provide for that usage.

That large fee demanded by NBC was quite understandable, actually. To simply locate and make a copy of that particular program was expensive and time-consuming. At risk of giving you much more detail on this matter than you might want to know, I will tell you that it involved actually taking the original two-inch videotape recording, removing it from its reel, then using a specially-constructed lathe to shave off a millimeter or so from both edge-surfaces of the tightly-wound mylar tape. You see, as we now know, the emulsion adhesive eventually seeps out over the years to form a layer of hardened goo which causes these old tapes to stick as they peel off the supply reel. NBC had to then run the tape on a specially-sized slightly-less-than-two-inch playback machine, one kept especially for that purpose. So, this was a rather expensive procedure, but was generously arranged by Johnny so that WGBH/Boston would be spared that expense.

That appearance was a total disaster for Geller, and it's quite understandable why he would not want it to be freely available to be seen! However, any claim by Geller that he has a copyright on that appearance – or on any of the others, for that matter – is a fantasy. What I'm getting at here is that Geller has no copyright on any of that material, and YouTube should not have so easily responded to the demand by “Explorologist Limited” to withdraw those video clips.

Ah, but I hear you saying, “Just who is Explorologist Limited?” Funny you should ask! This, it turns out, is a dummy corporation set up in the UK by the only two shareholders: Shimshon [Shipi] Shtrang – Geller’s brother-in-law, also listed as “Manager” of the corporation, and Uri Geller Freud – also listed as “Director” of the corporation, as well as, “Artist/Writer.” Quel surprise! These two individuals hold the £100 of the total Explorologist Limited funds – 75 shares for Mr. Geller Freud, and 25 for Shipi!

And YouTube saw this as a challenge…?

In any case, these video clips are going right back up again…


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
Uri Gellar is a dishonest

Uri Gellar is a dishonest asshole.


jmm
Theist
jmm's picture
Posts: 837
Joined: 2007-03-03
User is offlineOffline
not to be an asshole, but

not to be an asshole, but doesn't youtube have the right to suspend any account or delete any video for any or no reason, being a free site? 


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
Not sure about that, but

Not sure about that, but only a shitty website that deserves to fail would do that.


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7522
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
http://www.slumdance.com/blo

http://www.slumdance.com/blogs/brian_flemming/archives/002574.html

 

March 30, 2007

Uri Geller abuses DMCA to cover up embarrassing YouTube videos

uri gellerThe latest person to discover how easy it is to abuse U.S. copyright law appears to be Uri Geller, the self-proclaimed "psychic" who has been fooling people about his supernatural powers for decades now. Geller has been exposed as a ridiculous fake time and time again, but he is trying hard to scrub the internet of all that embarrassing evidence so that his current business venture can trick more new suckers.

And United States copyright law is practically eager to aid this huckster in his quest to suppress criticism and victimize the ignorant. Using the Digital Millenium Copyright Act, Geller has managed to get YouTube to delete several videos that show Geller's deceptions being exposed. Before Geller launched his purge, when you searched YouTube for "Uri Geller" you would immediately discover videos that let you know he is a trickster. But as of this moment, that same search yields mainly uncritical videos.

And it was easy for Geller to turn YouTube into his de facto accomplice.

james randiIn fact, in at least one case, Geller's takedown notice caused not only the removal of a piece of criticism, but also the suspension of an entire critic's account. The Rational Response Squad had uploaded a James Randi-hosted video that debunked Geller -- a video whose posting on YouTube had been enthusiastically approved by James Randi. (This is where the video used to be. "Explorologist LTD" is Geller's company. Here is a WMV link to the video.) Despite this fact, YouTube removed the video and punished the RRS by disappearing its entire account of 100 videos, effectively killing this not-for-profit group's successful video outreach efforts in one fell swoop*.

The only bright spot is that Geller's actions to suppress criticism may expose him to legal liability (provided that one of his victims has the resources and will to fight this litigious spoon-bender).

His liability? Geller does not apparently own the copyrights to the videos that he demanded YouTube remove.

The DMCA allows copyright owners to file a "takedown notice" with a service provider such as YouTube, provided that the copyright owner swears under penalty of perjury that he or she owns the copyright in question ("I swear, under penalty of perjury, that the information in the notification is accurate and that I am the copyright owner of an exclusive right that is infringed&quotEye-wink.

It appears that on March 23, Geller or his representative filed with YouTube a series of these DMCA takedown notices, which should have included swearing to the stated facts under penalty of perjury. When internet griefer Michael Crook tried this method of critic suppression, it didn't work out too well for him.

I mean, really not well:

In a March 2007 settlement [with the Electronic Frontier Foundation], Crook agreed to withdraw his DMCA complaints, take a copyright law course, and apologize for interfering with the free speech rights of his targets.

Will Uri Geller similarly be brought to his knees?

To be continued...

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7522
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
jmm wrote: not to be an

jmm wrote:
not to be an asshole, but doesn't youtube have the right to suspend any account or delete any video for any or no reason, being a free site?

Yes. Just as people have the right to lambaste them for doing so selectively. 

With that aside, I think the issue is closer to copyright than censorship.  Although as I continue to say, I'M STILL NOT SURE. 

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
It did also say they were

It did also say they were deleted for violating the TOS, not "because we felt like it."


lordmetroid
Posts: 1
Joined: 2007-03-30
User is offlineOffline
YouTube doing there job

YouTube doing there job enforceing laws? I must have missed something, they are in the information business not the police business. I don't like how society is progressing, I see all these snitch programs and laws obligating private businesses and people to enforce laws for the police.

 

This ain't going to end in anything good!


Gizmo
High Level Donor
Gizmo's picture
Posts: 397
Joined: 2007-03-06
User is offlineOffline
lordmetroid wrote: YouTube

lordmetroid wrote:

YouTube doing there job enforceing laws? I must have missed something, they are in the information business not the police business. I don't like how society is progressing, I see all these snitch programs and laws obligating private businesses and people to enforce laws for the police.

 

This ain't going to end in anything good!

 

Unfortunately DMCA is crap but companies have to follow it because its law.  YouTube is too big to just ignore them, tho I know they are under litigation for this but still.  Hopefully we will know in like a week or so on what will end up happening with the situation.   


serotonin_wraith
serotonin_wraith's picture
Posts: 119
Joined: 2007-03-10
User is offlineOffline
mindspread wrote: These

mindspread wrote:
These two individuals hold the £100 of the total Explorologist Limited funds – 75 shares for Mr. Geller Fraud, and 25 for Shipi

Fixed.

 


jmm
Theist
jmm's picture
Posts: 837
Joined: 2007-03-03
User is offlineOffline
Sapient wrote: jmm

Sapient wrote:

jmm wrote:
not to be an asshole, but doesn't youtube have the right to suspend any account or delete any video for any or no reason, being a free site?

Yes. Just as people have the right to lambaste them for doing so selectively. 

With that aside, I think the issue is closer to copyright than censorship.  Although as I continue to say, I'M STILL NOT SURE. 

so you're admitting on the one hand that they have the right to delete any account, and that your deletion could very possibly be due to copyright infringement, yet on the other hand this is being made out to be an attack on atheism by conservative christianity?  doesn't make much sense to me. 


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10484
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Why not? Have you not seen

Why not? Have you not seen theists go on stupid crusades to end things they percieve as bad before?

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


jmm
Theist
jmm's picture
Posts: 837
Joined: 2007-03-03
User is offlineOffline
sure, i've seen theists and

sure, i've seen theists and atheists alike go on stupid crusades.  my point is, i don't think this is about ideology at all, and it's not really fair to assume that this is an attack on atheism until it gets sorted out.


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10484
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Which is why Sapient

Which is why Sapient said:

"I'M STILL NOT SURE. "

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
What I'm wondering is why if

What I'm wondering is why if there's anything "wrong" with a video it doesn't get noticed during the approval process - look how fucking long it takes before a video is available!

Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team


Ophios
Ophios's picture
Posts: 909
Joined: 2006-09-19
User is offlineOffline
69 diggs,

69 diggs, lol

 

sorry

*Slunks back in the gutter*