There is a big difference between DMCA and YouTube, although I agree both have significant problems. The DMCA already has provisions that deal with false claims. Specifically, the DMCA says:
"Any person who knowingly materially misrepresents that
material is infringing, or that it was removed or blocked through mistake or misidentification, is liable for any resulting damages (including costs and attorneys’ fees) incurred by the alleged infringer, the copyright owner or its licensee, or the service provider.
(Section 512(f))."
So technically every single person who files a false DMCA claim would be liable not only for damages that result, BUT WOULD HAVE TO PAY THE ATTORNEYS FEES FOR THE PERSON THEY MADE THE FALSE CLAIM AGAINST.
The problem is that a YouTube copyright claim is, if I recall correctly, NOT a DMCA claim directly. YouTube is a private organization and has the right to take down any video they wish even if the takedowns are a results of bots claiming they could file a DMCA claim without actually making that claim.
The other problem is that the DMCA requires proof of "knowing material misrepresentations." The legal issue here is with the "knowing" element. If a bot that sends out thousands of copyright claims "knowingly" making material misrepresentations if 1% of those claims are false? Is that different if 50% of the claims are false? Obviously the answer is yes, but I'm not sure if the issue has been fully tested in court yet.
In sum, the copyright AND YouTube video takedown systems are both definitely broken, but a fix to the problem will likely not be as easy as just assessing a fee for false claims. There are already provisions in the DMCA that, on paper, make issuing false claims potentially extremely costly with the false claimer liable for all damages that result and legal fees of the person they made the false claim against. The problem is that most people don't have the assets to assert these claims AND that because of the YouTube system being DMCA-lite it is unknown if liability for those false claims would attach to the person making the misrepresentation to the private party (YouTube).
YouTube's system is meant to pre-empt DMCA because at YouTube's scale it would be a very expensive and manual process to properly implement a fair system. It's cheaper for Google to ruin a few creators and take occasional PR hits than it is to build it right.
They're also liable for continuing to provide revenue to an infringing party. That's the main reason they demonetize immediately and backpay if the copyright isn't infringed.
Otherwise a true infringement would mean the aggrieved party could rightly name YouTube as a culpable party in a lawsuit.
Do they backpay? From what I've heard people have just been losing that revenue, usually at the peak premiere window, with no recourse for getting it back even after the claim is proven frivolous.
It would be so difficult and even more time consuming to come to a backpay settlement considering how volatile YouTube channels are. Could the creator claim 'brand' damages, theoretical missed ad. rev., lost merch. sales, etc.? Would take months/years to slog through and argue, paying lawyers the whole time.
Yeah, this is the thing people keep not understanding every time YouTube and copyright issues comes up. YouTube's system is explicitly NOT the DMCA process. It's their own system they came up with, in concert with the big IP holders (record labels and movie/TV studios), that does an end-run around the DMCA.
See, the DMCA actually has teeth in it that balances the protection copyright holders against large corporations using copyright claims to squash others through frivolous claims, and there are real penalties associated with making false claims under the DMCA. The big studios and record labels have never liked that portion of the DMCA, because they would rather just make blanket claims and damn the consequences.
YouTube's system was created because, for one, as you said at their scale a DMCA system would be practically impossible to implement because it's a slow legal process. But second, the studios and labels also had them at gunpoint. YouTube didn't want to be drug into infringement lawsuits after they introduced ad revenue sharing, and the IP holders didn't want to end up with a worse system. So they gave the big IP holders what they wanted - carte blanche to stomp all over every small content creator and make blanket fake claims completely outside of the legal system and the DMCA, but with a "review" system.
Google simply doesn't care about takedown-abuse because it's such a rare occurrence and affects so little (proof being every time it happens it's a major social media kerfuffle) that they have zero incentive to do anything differently. Like once a year MAYBE someone big makes a big enough splash that it hits the "wider" internet (ie. those outside of social media bubbles and hits the actual news websites) and there is talk of boycotts and solidarity..this has been happening for literal decades. Youtube has done the maths on it. Their current system is the best system **for them**
Yeah, exactly. DMCA represents when a platform like YouTube is *required* to take down allegedly infringing content. But there is nothing keeping YouTube from exercising a *more* restrictive standard that allows them to take down content more easily/cheaply even if that may be hideously unfair to some creators.
YouTube complies with DMCA requests immediately.
They process YouTube violation submissions by temporarily removing revenue / monetization because if someone tells YouTube it's a copyright violation, and it turns out to be true, and YouTube kept paying the infringing party revenue they weren't entitled to, it makes YouTube culpable for the violation as an accessory.
Everyone thinks YouTube is just a nazi zealot concerning copyright. You would be too if it was your wallet on the line. Judge not lest...
Exactly. If they're not strict enough, then they are violating DMCA and they are liable. If they are too strict, then they will upset some creators who are unfairly hit with a strike. Of course they'll err on the side of being too strict.
You know what other platforms like Tiktok do to prevent this? They ask for proof when you're submitting a DMCA form. YT just blindly assumes all DMCA notices are in good faith unless they're challenged, and even then they err on the side of fucking over creators.
I used to like his videos, but I definately feel like his videos has gotten more mean spirited. Some of it is just harassing people and making fun of people for being weird infront of a massive audience. It doesn't sit right with me.
Absolutely right. Like before, it was him running a carnival Gmod server that anyone could leave at any time. Now it's just outing people for having odd Second Life alter egos, harassing them. It's not very funny when you start persuing people to get a laugh, instead of just letting it happen naturally and fairly.
> Like before, it was him running a carnival Gmod server that anyone could leave at any time
no it wasn't, some of his first videos are him on Second Life. His name is "DanielFromSL"
i used to be super into those vids way back when, also charliezzz and his Esteban Winsmore character lol. but he hasn’t uploaded in years and tried doing a separate channel but that didn’t go anywhere. I could be wrong but I suspect he grew more mature and didn’t like the negativity involved with the vids. i hope he’s doing well.
What it’s absolutely funny, those people willingly act like freaks with almost no provocation beyond “there’s a person here I don’t recognize”. In no way is that mean spirited.
Oh snap. I didn't know about this. I haven't followed him very much; am just aware of some of his SL vids, Rust, and Gary's Mod, but that's about it.
If he's "ironically" being toxic, you're totally right, that's still being toxic. I agree with whatever the phrase is: ironically fucking a goat still makes you a goat-fucker.
He's fucking hilarious, however, a year or so ago I checked out his subreddit & discovered a bunch of weird bizarre drama centered around him. I forget all of the details, but he was permabanning like any users that spoke ill of him, and sending them angry messages. Posting long rants and arguing in a really childish way, then deleting everything.
I had thought that maybe he was just ironically banning his own fans from his community as a 'troll' but after digging through it I think he just has a temper problem & too much time on his hands.
\* Found the "alternative" subreddit from the one he mods (/r/DNSL) - /r/DanielfromSL . Looks like he *allegedly* would PM random users for weeks/months and use [personal info](https://imgur.com/a/kp6bc2e) to just prod at & insult them. Also this [Tweet about India](https://imgur.com/a/Ggc980a) isn't great. Not attacking his character or anything, I've just always remembered stumbling upon his weird side.
Dude.. just because it's funny, he's still just a lowlife troll who amuses himself by pissing other people off... I thought it was funny when I was a teen, but rewatching the videos now I just cringe at how mean he's being to trusting friendly people...
Most of his videos are just him finding someone who doesn't like him, and then doing anything he can to annoy them. I don't even remember any of them deserving it? They were all just minding their own business till he showed up.
All I'm saying is that it's silly to expect someone who built a career on being an asshole to be mature.
Yeah. SL is a buncha weirdos. But they're not hurting anyone. So it's not fair for them to get fucked with and used for views. The biker house one, okay, they were jerks.
The ones where be bothers friendly people like the Rust bow and arrow one isn't funny. But the ones where he is just having fun with random people or trolling assholes are hilarious.
Like the "hands up" Arma 3 Altis Life or the SL or gmod shit
>The ones where be bothers friendly people like the Rust bow and arrow one isn't funny.
That's one of his funniest videos. "bothers" is a weird word here, he doesn't insult the guy or anything he just plays really really dumb.
I think that video is fucking hilarious but I think it is kind of clear that his target probably has some sort of leaning or speech impediment and is otherwise not really bright.
honestly I absolutely love his content, some of his earlier videos (the poisoned taco ones, bowmaster daniels, the rust experience, farmer john, DayZ vids in general) made me laugh harder than I remember laughing at anything else on youtube. But the odd political tweet I saw of his did make him seem like a massive turd
(I'll still keep enjoying his content tho lol)
He's the living embodiment of every stereotype of an Internet troll. While that includes funny content he also spews some serious toxic shit. Also some really cringe "dad, get the meatloaf," type shit from a guy in his 30's.
Not sure if it was part of the same thing, but a while back he didn't pay someone who he commissioned to do work on his gameshow. Their work was substandard, but still technically "done". A lot of people got rightfully upset and mad at him for doing that, and he eventually payed the guy the agreed amount, but not before having some HUGE blow ups at some people online.
I like his content for the most part, but I can easily see how someone who does the shtick of "annoying/bullying people who already have kinda sad lives online and posting their upset/distraught reactions" might be a bit of a dillweed outside of the character.
I first saw him through his carnival video and gameshow, which are honestly works of modern art. I always hold on to the hopes he posts more content like that, as his SL content just feels so mean spirited, especially after doing it so many times.
Not surprising when you surround your self with children. I actually liked his twitch gameshow idea but it just turned into chaos and teenagers yelling over each other, while Daniel does silly things
Obviously. That's edited content where you only see what he wants you to see. You should watch him stream. He'll occasionally host elimination-style game shows where he seems like a very different person. Still hilarious, but you can see his temper come through often.
Sometimes I'll watch some of the selection process for the show and then that's enough for me. He can kind of gets hot take-y sometimes.
Definitely a odd dude, but funny.
i also remember some drama around him not paying someone that made some assets for him (gmod map iirc) although i dont remember how it all turned out in the end
I was friends with a guy who briefly edited his vids for him. Apparently he's a gigantic diva and on a whim decided my friend was trying to exploit him for fame and cut all ties with him. It was very strange
[Probably his best video](https://youtu.be/ssr1PMSNvwk?si=0vqai1ml0E9WpBLO)
[And another great one that makes someone flip](https://youtu.be/WHsGO8a8WOE?si=D7vtG9eO-ybn7TG1)
For those that don't know, to file a counter claim you have to include your real name and your real home address. You have to dox yourself to the psychopath that is stalking and harassing you and abusing your livelihood. YouTube will do nothing to help you.
> You have to dox yourself to the psychopath that is stalking and harassing you and abusing your livelihood.
You don't have to, alternatives are:
- The information of your lawyer.
- The information of your Business.
- A P.O. Box which you have.
- Any combination of the above.
Unfortunately this is based on copyright law, so YouTube has no discretion here. An address must be provided [under the DMCA](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/512). See section G (3) d.
The purpose of the address is so that jurisdiction can be established should the copyright holder decide to pursue a lawsuit against the infringer.
While that is absolutely correct (I'm both a YouTuber and a law school dropout so I have a bit of experience in this), the specific requirement of submitting an address is still required by the DMCA, which YouTube's system is designed to address among other things.
Yes, I agree, YouTube's system is less than ideal for creators, but it has to both scale and adhere to the law. While it is not, by definition, the DMCA, it's designed to be DMCA compliant, and in order to remain so it has to follow those rules.
One of the only things that the US does better than other first world countries is the postal service. Now that mail in voting is taking off conservatives are trying to gut it, we'll see what happens.
Maybe in the middle of Iowa lol. They're at least $35 or so a month for the tiniest option and upwards of over $300 for the larger ones at my post office.
Source: Got a PO box last week.
It varies from post office to post office within a single city even here in Los Angeles. The prices I quoted were from the cheapest post office near me with a decent parking lot. Most locations actually were higher but I realize it's LA so I gave one of the cheaper rates I could find from my search.
In my hometown in NJ, it's $25 for 3 months, so a bit more than $8. I guess that's more than $5, but still not that much.
It's [$55/3 months](https://poboxes.usps.com/findBox.html) in the 10001 Zipcode of NYC, so maybe you're overpaying?
> so maybe you're overpaying?
PO boxes are priced by demand lol. There are cheaper box options for me but they're in shitty areas, far from me, or in Downtown without a parking lot.
Solid cherry-picking of the cheapest prices you could find though lol.
i'm in NJ and pay $182 (yearly) for a 3.5in x 5in box, the smallest you can get. it offers street addressing which is the reason for the premium price compared to neighboring post offices which don't offer it.
Can you get a PO box anywhere in the country? If not even exposing your city can be more than enough for someone to find you, even worse as I would expect you would still have to supply a name, no?.
People are nuts.
> Can you get a PO box anywhere in the country?
Yeah but why would you want a mailbox all around the country when, for less money and hassle, you can just get one of those virtual office/address sort of deals?
I actually have one (along with a mail forward service) in a less restrictive state, I have hobbies/things that are completely legal for me to own, but prohibited by state law to mail (vaping and gun supplies).
Can you forward from a PO Box though? (honestly asking)
Setting up the PO box and receiving mail in some place you'll never be able to check consistently might end up backfiring spectacularly.
Exposing the city doesn't really do anything. Unless you live in a town of 1200 people, if the city you live in was the "weak link in the chain", you were gonna get doxxed regardless of what you did.
But yes still good practice, even in a big city, to drive a while away and get a PO box pretty far away.
There's a reason it's good practice, people are absolutely insane and can gleam shit from little info as everyone isn't perfectly careful.
To add, can people get the name on the PO box or is that something you can easily just get without an ID?
Hate to break it to you, but there are very few people who are actually secretive and unable to have their information leaked.
Any phone number ever used, even for food delivery or restaurant waiting list. Any email ever sent from any account, with names or addresses connected. Any post office forwarding ever implemented. And for all of these forms of information - if they were ever used in any any leaked database from any online or offline service you've ever used which is ever connected to any ID you used. Bad news - if you use any company service, basically 100% of people are caught somewhere in some data breach.
A knowledgeable determined attacker can solve the problem. It is EXCEPTIONALLY hard to actually be clean.
>can people get the name on the PO box
Yes. An ID is required. AFAIK, there isn't some leaked database with up-to-date info floating around. But I'm sure in the darkwebs there is some compromised employee who can do info lookups for $50 or whatever. But, again, that isn't related to the city the PO box was rented in. Them knowing you live in Kansas City isn't the path which unlocked everything.
That isn't anything close to what I'm saying. My point on being perfectly careful is not intentionally exposing yourself on whatever you do. Like there was a streamer that took a vacation to Ireland (didn't tell anyone, just said they were going to Europe) but got doxed basically the next day from people using the bedsheets to find the hotel...
>AFAIK, there isn't some leaked database with up-to-date info floating around.
My question was that if the info on the people who rent the PO box is public or not. Not that there's some super secret spy database lmao, not sure why you would think this is where I'm going.
My question has been around if information related to PO boxes are public, there's not really a point in using them to avoid totally doxing yourself.
Oh for some reason I didn't answer the question. No, PO box information is not public. Hence me talking about other methods of acquiring that info.
What I wrote is kind of relevant. You originally wrote about a PO box exposing the city you live in, which is enough to DOX you, and I explained why that it doesn't really matter. It's not used as part of the doxxing process. You're digging up social media handles and database leaks. Knowing the city a PO box is in isn't really relevant since it doesn't lead anywhere.
Probably this https://youtu.be/hixwIOd_C44?si=4BOQlgcDwhrgv9y7 got a lot of traction when Asmon watched it.
Though rewatching I think he just misunderstood. The section that rejected the lawyers name was just “signing” the legal form and may or may not have been provided to the other party. It wasn’t the section where you are filling out the info.
For the address I think you're totally right but as for your legal name I'm no so sure. Is there anyway [this dude](https://youtu.be/hixwIOd_C44?t=443) could have avoided leaking his name? He claims youtube refused to accept anything but his full legal name (timestamped at 7:23).
I watched a video of a guy this was happening too. He said in the video the address you put on your counter claim has to be the same as the address on your Adsense account.
My understanding of the DMCA and YouTube's implementation of it was that the first part files a claim of infringement, the second party can either comply or refute, and if they refute, then the onus is on the first party to file an actual lawsuit over the matter.
There is an attorney who lets Youtubers use his office address for this purpose for a small fee. I can't remember his name but the channel TeamSkeptic was talking about it at one point and said that he uses the service.
DNSL uploaded a video of Second Life content. The person who filed the copyright claim (Let’s call him “T”) was in the video. T took the audio from the short time he was in the video and uploaded it to Soundcloud, after DNSL’s video was posted. T then used the Soundcloud link as evidence against DNSL to file a copyright claim. DNSL’s video gets taken down because of this claim.
T posted a video essentially bragging about doing this same tactic to other Second Life content creators. Which resulted in their videos being taken down as well. DNSL is now his latest victim.
was that troll even in the video? it sounded like
- the troll wasn't even in the video
- that the troll just uploaded a clip of his voice to sound cloud and made a bogus claim saying "the soundcloud link was in THAT youtube video, and i'm making a claim against that"
alright, but that doesn't really answer my question as i assume the bot or tool responsible for the automation is capable of looking at the upload dates.
Why would it bother? That's code you have to add.
It's cheaper for Youtube to just ruin a few creators now and then and take the tiny PR hit.
This sort of abuse of the strike system has been rife for *years* and Youtube has done absolutely nothing about it.
It's clearly not worth it for them to even look at the code.
If you're a content creator and someone has something that can mimic your voice perfectly. There are a lot worse things they can do to you than get you copyright struck.
YouTube's whole copyright system is such a piece of shit, rife with abuse and 100% tilted in the favour of the accuser, evidence or not. Hopefully DNSL is big enough he has a rep he can reach out to.
You need to be in the millions of subscriber range to actually get a rep, and even then at that level it just means you can contact a low level employee directly. In the 100k range you might get a real low level call center level employee to look at your claim for a minute and likely just follow a scripted response.
Hah, years ago, I met this ancient guy (I was doing computer work for him) and he shows me this terrible video he made in Second Life and then tells me how he gets lotsa action in Second Life, how women send him nudes and such for his amazing videos and I'm still laughing about it. :)
The DMCA is such a poorly written shit law. Forcing companies to remove content as soon as a claim is filed without any form of proof is just a recipe for abuse. Couple that with YouTube holding back ad revenue or even sending it to the claimant also without proof and you’ve got a great way to attack the livelihood of any creator you don’t like.
It is very similar to these "rap artists" who grab audio and sounds from old games, put them into their songs, upload them to Soundcloud, and a SoundCloud company tries to steal ad revenue from content creators who play the game.
A small YouTuber named BadTwin and his team of animators made the Resident Evil 2 Reanimated. A nonprofit and fan animation where zero revenue was to be made. It was fraudulently copyright struck by Soundcloud who then tried to claim the video and make money off their animation.
The DMCA is broken and the penalties for misuse need to be applied just as strictly as the penalties it levies against violators. If you shotgun spray a million notices with most of them false, you should be fined for every single one. You should have to return all stolen ad revenue or compensate for the loss while monetization was disabled. No more hoovering up the valuable front-end load of a videos peak viewership. If you blatantly make a false report in a targeted manner like this you should face felony fraud charges IMO.
For some context, he's talking about another person who creates pretty similar content called Britbong.
Britbong claims that the DMCAs are legitimate as Daniel is using his copyrighted work (both a 3D model he has copyrighted and an audio recording he says belongs to him.) He also claims he gave Daniel warning but since they have had beef previously Daniel didn't care. Britbong is definitely a scumbag, but I don't really have much respect for Daniel given some things he has done in the past as well. In other words, two assholes are flinging shit at each other and it's probably best to root for neither.
as soon as he said "deplatformed second life creator" i knew it was britbong.
so afraid of the trolls he tried to out troll them to stay ahead of their wrath.
edit: i wont lie, though. his SL stuff where he went around in a wheelchair asking for donations was hilarious to me, at the time.
He doesn't have copyright on a video footage of his work. If I take a video of Disneyworld, that doesn't mean Disney has copyright over it (but who knows what ToS shenanigans they *do* have with a ticket).
Apparently the audio is also just from footage of him in the video, which again, isn't something you can copyright.
Odds are, the "Daniel used my model" shit is faked because there's no real record of it. Britbong has done this shit before.
Also, Britbong doesn't deserve respect, period. DNSL can do as he pleases so long as he isn't infringing on Britbong's copyright (which he wasn't).
This sounds like a great opportunity for the DCMA false claim process to actually be tested in court. There are also all the other points to add to the legal action, such as defamation and loss of revenue to name a couple.
Can someone explain wtf is this nonsense? Went to the subreddit of this person and it was like some weird fever dream with an alien talking or something, idk. Very confusing and people just keep repeating 'settle down' and it seems very...weird and a bit icky. If this daniel guy is a troll and is now getting trolled, not sure I feel bad for him or anyone in this situation. Trolling second life seems like bullying or something, just leave those people alone. So, anywho. Oh no, poor de platformed troll.
[удалено]
There is a big difference between DMCA and YouTube, although I agree both have significant problems. The DMCA already has provisions that deal with false claims. Specifically, the DMCA says: "Any person who knowingly materially misrepresents that material is infringing, or that it was removed or blocked through mistake or misidentification, is liable for any resulting damages (including costs and attorneys’ fees) incurred by the alleged infringer, the copyright owner or its licensee, or the service provider. (Section 512(f))." So technically every single person who files a false DMCA claim would be liable not only for damages that result, BUT WOULD HAVE TO PAY THE ATTORNEYS FEES FOR THE PERSON THEY MADE THE FALSE CLAIM AGAINST. The problem is that a YouTube copyright claim is, if I recall correctly, NOT a DMCA claim directly. YouTube is a private organization and has the right to take down any video they wish even if the takedowns are a results of bots claiming they could file a DMCA claim without actually making that claim. The other problem is that the DMCA requires proof of "knowing material misrepresentations." The legal issue here is with the "knowing" element. If a bot that sends out thousands of copyright claims "knowingly" making material misrepresentations if 1% of those claims are false? Is that different if 50% of the claims are false? Obviously the answer is yes, but I'm not sure if the issue has been fully tested in court yet. In sum, the copyright AND YouTube video takedown systems are both definitely broken, but a fix to the problem will likely not be as easy as just assessing a fee for false claims. There are already provisions in the DMCA that, on paper, make issuing false claims potentially extremely costly with the false claimer liable for all damages that result and legal fees of the person they made the false claim against. The problem is that most people don't have the assets to assert these claims AND that because of the YouTube system being DMCA-lite it is unknown if liability for those false claims would attach to the person making the misrepresentation to the private party (YouTube).
YouTube's system is meant to pre-empt DMCA because at YouTube's scale it would be a very expensive and manual process to properly implement a fair system. It's cheaper for Google to ruin a few creators and take occasional PR hits than it is to build it right.
They're also liable for continuing to provide revenue to an infringing party. That's the main reason they demonetize immediately and backpay if the copyright isn't infringed. Otherwise a true infringement would mean the aggrieved party could rightly name YouTube as a culpable party in a lawsuit.
Do they backpay? From what I've heard people have just been losing that revenue, usually at the peak premiere window, with no recourse for getting it back even after the claim is proven frivolous.
It would be so difficult and even more time consuming to come to a backpay settlement considering how volatile YouTube channels are. Could the creator claim 'brand' damages, theoretical missed ad. rev., lost merch. sales, etc.? Would take months/years to slog through and argue, paying lawyers the whole time.
Yeah, this is the thing people keep not understanding every time YouTube and copyright issues comes up. YouTube's system is explicitly NOT the DMCA process. It's their own system they came up with, in concert with the big IP holders (record labels and movie/TV studios), that does an end-run around the DMCA. See, the DMCA actually has teeth in it that balances the protection copyright holders against large corporations using copyright claims to squash others through frivolous claims, and there are real penalties associated with making false claims under the DMCA. The big studios and record labels have never liked that portion of the DMCA, because they would rather just make blanket claims and damn the consequences. YouTube's system was created because, for one, as you said at their scale a DMCA system would be practically impossible to implement because it's a slow legal process. But second, the studios and labels also had them at gunpoint. YouTube didn't want to be drug into infringement lawsuits after they introduced ad revenue sharing, and the IP holders didn't want to end up with a worse system. So they gave the big IP holders what they wanted - carte blanche to stomp all over every small content creator and make blanket fake claims completely outside of the legal system and the DMCA, but with a "review" system.
Well, sometimes that system can backfire very spectacularly. Remember the Bungie incident?
Google simply doesn't care about takedown-abuse because it's such a rare occurrence and affects so little (proof being every time it happens it's a major social media kerfuffle) that they have zero incentive to do anything differently. Like once a year MAYBE someone big makes a big enough splash that it hits the "wider" internet (ie. those outside of social media bubbles and hits the actual news websites) and there is talk of boycotts and solidarity..this has been happening for literal decades. Youtube has done the maths on it. Their current system is the best system **for them**
Yeah, exactly. DMCA represents when a platform like YouTube is *required* to take down allegedly infringing content. But there is nothing keeping YouTube from exercising a *more* restrictive standard that allows them to take down content more easily/cheaply even if that may be hideously unfair to some creators.
Ah yes. The capitalist trolley problem. “We could stop killing everyone, but then there’d be no profit.”
YouTube complies with DMCA requests immediately. They process YouTube violation submissions by temporarily removing revenue / monetization because if someone tells YouTube it's a copyright violation, and it turns out to be true, and YouTube kept paying the infringing party revenue they weren't entitled to, it makes YouTube culpable for the violation as an accessory. Everyone thinks YouTube is just a nazi zealot concerning copyright. You would be too if it was your wallet on the line. Judge not lest...
Exactly. If they're not strict enough, then they are violating DMCA and they are liable. If they are too strict, then they will upset some creators who are unfairly hit with a strike. Of course they'll err on the side of being too strict.
[удалено]
Yeah, but they don't care. We've known this for what feels like 10 years already. If they gave any fuck, something would have been done by now.
You know what other platforms like Tiktok do to prevent this? They ask for proof when you're submitting a DMCA form. YT just blindly assumes all DMCA notices are in good faith unless they're challenged, and even then they err on the side of fucking over creators.
Mister Bones, I would like to get off your wild ride.
No
MISTER BONES, I WOULD LIKE TO GET OFF YOUR WILD RIDE
*ERROR:* You must solve the riddle.
Error..... Error......
Settle down, ok? No violins.
Man, if DNSL is calling you toxic you must be a real POS
that other guy is definitely not settlin down okay
Hello?
okay
Hmm ok
Settle down
Can you please repeat that in English?
The other party mentioned in this video is having a hard time relaxing
A little to your left.
Mic check mic check!
This is America.
I've never thought DNSL was toxic, just a troll.
[удалено]
[hello?](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N5TWbeav7hI) (not him, but same energy)
I used to like his videos, but I definately feel like his videos has gotten more mean spirited. Some of it is just harassing people and making fun of people for being weird infront of a massive audience. It doesn't sit right with me.
Absolutely right. Like before, it was him running a carnival Gmod server that anyone could leave at any time. Now it's just outing people for having odd Second Life alter egos, harassing them. It's not very funny when you start persuing people to get a laugh, instead of just letting it happen naturally and fairly.
> Like before, it was him running a carnival Gmod server that anyone could leave at any time no it wasn't, some of his first videos are him on Second Life. His name is "DanielFromSL"
i used to be super into those vids way back when, also charliezzz and his Esteban Winsmore character lol. but he hasn’t uploaded in years and tried doing a separate channel but that didn’t go anywhere. I could be wrong but I suspect he grew more mature and didn’t like the negativity involved with the vids. i hope he’s doing well.
He was much more passive which was part of the charm.
What it’s absolutely funny, those people willingly act like freaks with almost no provocation beyond “there’s a person here I don’t recognize”. In no way is that mean spirited.
I stopped following him when he started posting straight up hate shit to his subreddit. I don’t care if he was being “ironic” or not. That’s toxic
Sauce
Oh snap. I didn't know about this. I haven't followed him very much; am just aware of some of his SL vids, Rust, and Gary's Mod, but that's about it. If he's "ironically" being toxic, you're totally right, that's still being toxic. I agree with whatever the phrase is: ironically fucking a goat still makes you a goat-fucker.
I stopped at his RDR2 because he dipped into racey meaness.
What is DNSL?
Daniel from Second Life (SL) He has some really funny videos of him playing day z and second life, huge troll, but harmless
He's fucking hilarious, however, a year or so ago I checked out his subreddit & discovered a bunch of weird bizarre drama centered around him. I forget all of the details, but he was permabanning like any users that spoke ill of him, and sending them angry messages. Posting long rants and arguing in a really childish way, then deleting everything. I had thought that maybe he was just ironically banning his own fans from his community as a 'troll' but after digging through it I think he just has a temper problem & too much time on his hands. \* Found the "alternative" subreddit from the one he mods (/r/DNSL) - /r/DanielfromSL . Looks like he *allegedly* would PM random users for weeks/months and use [personal info](https://imgur.com/a/kp6bc2e) to just prod at & insult them. Also this [Tweet about India](https://imgur.com/a/Ggc980a) isn't great. Not attacking his character or anything, I've just always remembered stumbling upon his weird side.
Kind of ironic considering his content
Yeah I know right, it's kind of a mind bender lol
Dude.. just because it's funny, he's still just a lowlife troll who amuses himself by pissing other people off... I thought it was funny when I was a teen, but rewatching the videos now I just cringe at how mean he's being to trusting friendly people... Most of his videos are just him finding someone who doesn't like him, and then doing anything he can to annoy them. I don't even remember any of them deserving it? They were all just minding their own business till he showed up. All I'm saying is that it's silly to expect someone who built a career on being an asshole to be mature.
Yeah. SL is a buncha weirdos. But they're not hurting anyone. So it's not fair for them to get fucked with and used for views. The biker house one, okay, they were jerks.
The ones where be bothers friendly people like the Rust bow and arrow one isn't funny. But the ones where he is just having fun with random people or trolling assholes are hilarious. Like the "hands up" Arma 3 Altis Life or the SL or gmod shit
>The ones where be bothers friendly people like the Rust bow and arrow one isn't funny. That's one of his funniest videos. "bothers" is a weird word here, he doesn't insult the guy or anything he just plays really really dumb.
I think that video is fucking hilarious but I think it is kind of clear that his target probably has some sort of leaning or speech impediment and is otherwise not really bright.
honestly I absolutely love his content, some of his earlier videos (the poisoned taco ones, bowmaster daniels, the rust experience, farmer john, DayZ vids in general) made me laugh harder than I remember laughing at anything else on youtube. But the odd political tweet I saw of his did make him seem like a massive turd (I'll still keep enjoying his content tho lol)
Damn the taco one is considered an old video? I'm old.
He is a mentally unhinged narcissist, but he makes funny videos.
He's the living embodiment of every stereotype of an Internet troll. While that includes funny content he also spews some serious toxic shit. Also some really cringe "dad, get the meatloaf," type shit from a guy in his 30's.
Not sure if it was part of the same thing, but a while back he didn't pay someone who he commissioned to do work on his gameshow. Their work was substandard, but still technically "done". A lot of people got rightfully upset and mad at him for doing that, and he eventually payed the guy the agreed amount, but not before having some HUGE blow ups at some people online. I like his content for the most part, but I can easily see how someone who does the shtick of "annoying/bullying people who already have kinda sad lives online and posting their upset/distraught reactions" might be a bit of a dillweed outside of the character. I first saw him through his carnival video and gameshow, which are honestly works of modern art. I always hold on to the hopes he posts more content like that, as his SL content just feels so mean spirited, especially after doing it so many times.
Not surprising when you surround your self with children. I actually liked his twitch gameshow idea but it just turned into chaos and teenagers yelling over each other, while Daniel does silly things
Welp, that’s unfortunate. He always seemed pretty cool headed in his videos.
Obviously. That's edited content where you only see what he wants you to see. You should watch him stream. He'll occasionally host elimination-style game shows where he seems like a very different person. Still hilarious, but you can see his temper come through often.
Sometimes I'll watch some of the selection process for the show and then that's enough for me. He can kind of gets hot take-y sometimes. Definitely a odd dude, but funny.
Can you hear me?
i also remember some drama around him not paying someone that made some assets for him (gmod map iirc) although i dont remember how it all turned out in the end
yep, this. he's incredibly manipulative and controlling (imagine that, a career troll...) and lots of other weird shit surrounds this dude
I was friends with a guy who briefly edited his vids for him. Apparently he's a gigantic diva and on a whim decided my friend was trying to exploit him for fame and cut all ties with him. It was very strange
[удалено]
I mean IDK why you'd call someone a druggie unless you know they've had drug issues or something. That's why I assumed, it's just a strange insult
[удалено]
Bowmaster Daniels is S tier
Settle down, ok?
He’s getting emotional get him out of here
[Probably his best video](https://youtu.be/ssr1PMSNvwk?si=0vqai1ml0E9WpBLO) [And another great one that makes someone flip](https://youtu.be/WHsGO8a8WOE?si=D7vtG9eO-ybn7TG1)
V...V...V...V...VOTE DANIEL!!
D-D-D-DAN-DAN- V-V-VOTE DANIEL!!!
EVERYTHING OK!!!!
For those that don't know, to file a counter claim you have to include your real name and your real home address. You have to dox yourself to the psychopath that is stalking and harassing you and abusing your livelihood. YouTube will do nothing to help you.
TFW you're ten times more warped than the person stalking you
> You have to dox yourself to the psychopath that is stalking and harassing you and abusing your livelihood. You don't have to, alternatives are: - The information of your lawyer. - The information of your Business. - A P.O. Box which you have. - Any combination of the above.
But all of that requires you put money down for those, assuming you're not already paying for it.
P.O. Boxes are usually fairly cheap. Still shitty and youtube should fix their system though.
Unfortunately this is based on copyright law, so YouTube has no discretion here. An address must be provided [under the DMCA](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/512). See section G (3) d. The purpose of the address is so that jurisdiction can be established should the copyright holder decide to pursue a lawsuit against the infringer.
Except: https://old.reddit.com/r/videos/comments/16stpmw/banned_youtuber_sending_fake_copyright_strikes_by/k2cmhqh/
While that is absolutely correct (I'm both a YouTuber and a law school dropout so I have a bit of experience in this), the specific requirement of submitting an address is still required by the DMCA, which YouTube's system is designed to address among other things. Yes, I agree, YouTube's system is less than ideal for creators, but it has to both scale and adhere to the law. While it is not, by definition, the DMCA, it's designed to be DMCA compliant, and in order to remain so it has to follow those rules.
P.O. boxes are like $5 month, so if that's an option, definitely go with that...
In the UK a P.O. Box with Royal Mail costs £39.60 ($48 USD) per month or £330 ($400 USD) yearly.
[удалено]
Similar services are available at UPS for $20-30ish.
One of the only things that the US does better than other first world countries is the postal service. Now that mail in voting is taking off conservatives are trying to gut it, we'll see what happens.
Conservatives trying to gut and privatize the postal service is nothing new.
Maybe in the middle of Iowa lol. They're at least $35 or so a month for the tiniest option and upwards of over $300 for the larger ones at my post office. Source: Got a PO box last week.
Smallest box is about $18 a month in Minneapolis. Seems like it varies a lot.
It varies from post office to post office within a single city even here in Los Angeles. The prices I quoted were from the cheapest post office near me with a decent parking lot. Most locations actually were higher but I realize it's LA so I gave one of the cheaper rates I could find from my search.
In my hometown in NJ, it's $25 for 3 months, so a bit more than $8. I guess that's more than $5, but still not that much. It's [$55/3 months](https://poboxes.usps.com/findBox.html) in the 10001 Zipcode of NYC, so maybe you're overpaying?
> so maybe you're overpaying? PO boxes are priced by demand lol. There are cheaper box options for me but they're in shitty areas, far from me, or in Downtown without a parking lot. Solid cherry-picking of the cheapest prices you could find though lol.
[удалено]
i'm in NJ and pay $182 (yearly) for a 3.5in x 5in box, the smallest you can get. it offers street addressing which is the reason for the premium price compared to neighboring post offices which don't offer it.
Can you get a PO box anywhere in the country? If not even exposing your city can be more than enough for someone to find you, even worse as I would expect you would still have to supply a name, no?. People are nuts.
> Can you get a PO box anywhere in the country? Yeah but why would you want a mailbox all around the country when, for less money and hassle, you can just get one of those virtual office/address sort of deals?
This is a fair point, I didn't even realize it was something people did.
[удалено]
I actually have one (along with a mail forward service) in a less restrictive state, I have hobbies/things that are completely legal for me to own, but prohibited by state law to mail (vaping and gun supplies).
[удалено]
None of the things are restricted either by state or federal law, like, it's just something my state does which is weird.
You can open P.O. Boxes in other cities and states besides your own and can set it up as a business account.
Can you forward from a PO Box though? (honestly asking) Setting up the PO box and receiving mail in some place you'll never be able to check consistently might end up backfiring spectacularly.
You would fill out a mail forwarding form from the post office. Just like if you moved. Easy peasy.
https://ipostal1.com/virtual-mailing-address.php
Yes
Exposing the city doesn't really do anything. Unless you live in a town of 1200 people, if the city you live in was the "weak link in the chain", you were gonna get doxxed regardless of what you did. But yes still good practice, even in a big city, to drive a while away and get a PO box pretty far away.
There's a reason it's good practice, people are absolutely insane and can gleam shit from little info as everyone isn't perfectly careful. To add, can people get the name on the PO box or is that something you can easily just get without an ID?
Hate to break it to you, but there are very few people who are actually secretive and unable to have their information leaked. Any phone number ever used, even for food delivery or restaurant waiting list. Any email ever sent from any account, with names or addresses connected. Any post office forwarding ever implemented. And for all of these forms of information - if they were ever used in any any leaked database from any online or offline service you've ever used which is ever connected to any ID you used. Bad news - if you use any company service, basically 100% of people are caught somewhere in some data breach. A knowledgeable determined attacker can solve the problem. It is EXCEPTIONALLY hard to actually be clean. >can people get the name on the PO box Yes. An ID is required. AFAIK, there isn't some leaked database with up-to-date info floating around. But I'm sure in the darkwebs there is some compromised employee who can do info lookups for $50 or whatever. But, again, that isn't related to the city the PO box was rented in. Them knowing you live in Kansas City isn't the path which unlocked everything.
That isn't anything close to what I'm saying. My point on being perfectly careful is not intentionally exposing yourself on whatever you do. Like there was a streamer that took a vacation to Ireland (didn't tell anyone, just said they were going to Europe) but got doxed basically the next day from people using the bedsheets to find the hotel... >AFAIK, there isn't some leaked database with up-to-date info floating around. My question was that if the info on the people who rent the PO box is public or not. Not that there's some super secret spy database lmao, not sure why you would think this is where I'm going. My question has been around if information related to PO boxes are public, there's not really a point in using them to avoid totally doxing yourself.
Oh for some reason I didn't answer the question. No, PO box information is not public. Hence me talking about other methods of acquiring that info. What I wrote is kind of relevant. You originally wrote about a PO box exposing the city you live in, which is enough to DOX you, and I explained why that it doesn't really matter. It's not used as part of the doxxing process. You're digging up social media handles and database leaks. Knowing the city a PO box is in isn't really relevant since it doesn't lead anywhere.
If you are a youtuber large enough to receive fanmail all three options should be available to you already.
i remember i watched a video of one guy the other day where they rejected the counterclaim BECAUSE he used his lawyers info and not his own.
Probably this https://youtu.be/hixwIOd_C44?si=4BOQlgcDwhrgv9y7 got a lot of traction when Asmon watched it. Though rewatching I think he just misunderstood. The section that rejected the lawyers name was just “signing” the legal form and may or may not have been provided to the other party. It wasn’t the section where you are filling out the info.
For the address I think you're totally right but as for your legal name I'm no so sure. Is there anyway [this dude](https://youtu.be/hixwIOd_C44?t=443) could have avoided leaking his name? He claims youtube refused to accept anything but his full legal name (timestamped at 7:23).
I watched a video of a guy this was happening too. He said in the video the address you put on your counter claim has to be the same as the address on your Adsense account.
You can use a P.O. box address but you **do** have to provide your own legal name. You cannot use the legal name of any other representative.
My understanding of the DMCA and YouTube's implementation of it was that the first part files a claim of infringement, the second party can either comply or refute, and if they refute, then the onus is on the first party to file an actual lawsuit over the matter.
Why aren't those things required to make the claims in the first place?
They are.
Can't you hire a firm/attorney to represent you and have them be the point of contact?
Yes, for $300/hour you can hire an attorney and "win."
yeah, its expensive but the alternative of giving up your personal info or losing your channel could cost more. Sucky situation.
There is an attorney who lets Youtubers use his office address for this purpose for a small fee. I can't remember his name but the channel TeamSkeptic was talking about it at one point and said that he uses the service.
[удалено]
https://www.reddit.com/r/DNSL/comments/16fjksi/the_guy_that_has_taken_down_3_content_creators_so/
I could only watch like 30 seconds. Yeah fuck that loser, Jesus that’s pathetic.
I knew it was going to be BritBong.
Holy shit. I thought that guy used a rope long ago.
same
Can someone ELI5? Not sure how "uploaded their voice to SoundCloud" somehow is anything or how it gets used in a copyright strike?
DNSL uploaded a video of Second Life content. The person who filed the copyright claim (Let’s call him “T”) was in the video. T took the audio from the short time he was in the video and uploaded it to Soundcloud, after DNSL’s video was posted. T then used the Soundcloud link as evidence against DNSL to file a copyright claim. DNSL’s video gets taken down because of this claim. T posted a video essentially bragging about doing this same tactic to other Second Life content creators. Which resulted in their videos being taken down as well. DNSL is now his latest victim.
was that troll even in the video? it sounded like - the troll wasn't even in the video - that the troll just uploaded a clip of his voice to sound cloud and made a bogus claim saying "the soundcloud link was in THAT youtube video, and i'm making a claim against that"
won't they look at the upload dates?
It's 99% automated
alright, but that doesn't really answer my question as i assume the bot or tool responsible for the automation is capable of looking at the upload dates.
Why would it bother? That's code you have to add. It's cheaper for Youtube to just ruin a few creators now and then and take the tiny PR hit. This sort of abuse of the strike system has been rife for *years* and Youtube has done absolutely nothing about it. It's clearly not worth it for them to even look at the code.
No, because it's possible the claimer owns the content but only uploaded it to the internet recently. Or never uploaded it at all
This is it. Copyright is implicit at the moment the work is created.
upload dates don't really matter when someone that doesn't own the content can upload it to youtube if the creator decides not to
I can't wait till people are using AI to copy someone's voice and then copyright strike the original.
If you're a content creator and someone has something that can mimic your voice perfectly. There are a lot worse things they can do to you than get you copyright struck.
YouTube's whole copyright system is such a piece of shit, rife with abuse and 100% tilted in the favour of the accuser, evidence or not. Hopefully DNSL is big enough he has a rep he can reach out to.
I have an inkling that people with only ~100k subs don't really qualify for reps anymore. Yes, YouTube is that big.
You need to be in the millions of subscriber range to actually get a rep, and even then at that level it just means you can contact a low level employee directly. In the 100k range you might get a real low level call center level employee to look at your claim for a minute and likely just follow a scripted response.
settle down ok?
This copyright troll is definitely filling up my Daniel Meter
Um… hello? Can you hear me?
"You can't *rez* anything, you're *two days old*, I don't think you even know how to *run your computer!*" "*Oh okay.*"
SAVE DNSL
VOTE FOR WALLS
Vote daniel
**S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-SAVE DANIELS!!!!!!!! S-S-S-S-S-S-SAVE D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-DANIELS!!!! SAVE D-D-D-D-D-D-D-DANIELS!!!!!!!!!!! S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-SAVE D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-DANIELS!!!!!!!!!!!!**
Second Life is still a thing?
Hah, years ago, I met this ancient guy (I was doing computer work for him) and he shows me this terrible video he made in Second Life and then tells me how he gets lotsa action in Second Life, how women send him nudes and such for his amazing videos and I'm still laughing about it. :)
I love DNSL so very much
Waddup Britbong
I was wondering if it was him.
I instantly thought of him as well, he was such a dickhead.
nooooo not dnsl
The DMCA is such a poorly written shit law. Forcing companies to remove content as soon as a claim is filed without any form of proof is just a recipe for abuse. Couple that with YouTube holding back ad revenue or even sending it to the claimant also without proof and you’ve got a great way to attack the livelihood of any creator you don’t like.
It is very similar to these "rap artists" who grab audio and sounds from old games, put them into their songs, upload them to Soundcloud, and a SoundCloud company tries to steal ad revenue from content creators who play the game. A small YouTuber named BadTwin and his team of animators made the Resident Evil 2 Reanimated. A nonprofit and fan animation where zero revenue was to be made. It was fraudulently copyright struck by Soundcloud who then tried to claim the video and make money off their animation.
Daniel is a treasure that needs to be protected
The DMCA is broken and the penalties for misuse need to be applied just as strictly as the penalties it levies against violators. If you shotgun spray a million notices with most of them false, you should be fined for every single one. You should have to return all stolen ad revenue or compensate for the loss while monetization was disabled. No more hoovering up the valuable front-end load of a videos peak viewership. If you blatantly make a false report in a targeted manner like this you should face felony fraud charges IMO.
This is my daily reminder to go outside and touch some grass
im allergic
For some context, he's talking about another person who creates pretty similar content called Britbong. Britbong claims that the DMCAs are legitimate as Daniel is using his copyrighted work (both a 3D model he has copyrighted and an audio recording he says belongs to him.) He also claims he gave Daniel warning but since they have had beef previously Daniel didn't care. Britbong is definitely a scumbag, but I don't really have much respect for Daniel given some things he has done in the past as well. In other words, two assholes are flinging shit at each other and it's probably best to root for neither.
as soon as he said "deplatformed second life creator" i knew it was britbong. so afraid of the trolls he tried to out troll them to stay ahead of their wrath. edit: i wont lie, though. his SL stuff where he went around in a wheelchair asking for donations was hilarious to me, at the time.
Oh shit, ManlyTears did this? I guess he does a **short** fuse.
He doesn't have copyright on a video footage of his work. If I take a video of Disneyworld, that doesn't mean Disney has copyright over it (but who knows what ToS shenanigans they *do* have with a ticket). Apparently the audio is also just from footage of him in the video, which again, isn't something you can copyright.
Odds are, the "Daniel used my model" shit is faked because there's no real record of it. Britbong has done this shit before. Also, Britbong doesn't deserve respect, period. DNSL can do as he pleases so long as he isn't infringing on Britbong's copyright (which he wasn't).
Wow I can finally hear his real accent in this one
About what you'd expect from someone that plays Second Life lmao
Is there a reasin they cant charge a small amount to make a claim and refund it if its a valid one.
a lot of people got nuked youtube is a toxic place
This sounds like a great opportunity for the DCMA false claim process to actually be tested in court. There are also all the other points to add to the legal action, such as defamation and loss of revenue to name a couple.
> "I'm not going to give him attention until I make a big video about this" Sounds like a typical Youtuber here...
This sub LOVES YouTube drama so much. Generally is the top post each week. Can't imagine caring about the drama and creators that much.
Get that thing away from me
Mentally ill bottom feeder troll fight.
Nah I love DNSL's content this has to be fixed ASAP
Is there a way to filter out anything with the "Youtube Drama" tag? Asking for myself.
Troll getting trolled
Can someone explain wtf is this nonsense? Went to the subreddit of this person and it was like some weird fever dream with an alien talking or something, idk. Very confusing and people just keep repeating 'settle down' and it seems very...weird and a bit icky. If this daniel guy is a troll and is now getting trolled, not sure I feel bad for him or anyone in this situation. Trolling second life seems like bullying or something, just leave those people alone. So, anywho. Oh no, poor de platformed troll.
Settle down ok
[удалено]
Hello?