Hello! Thanks for posting on this thread.
I want to address each point in the order that you posted.
1. When I posted, I didn't actually structure my post well. I didn't mean to say that the promotion issue was the most serious, I think that the fraud issue is the most serious. Thanks for congratulating me!
2. I'm glad that you don't find that right.
3. This feature was in beta. It currently isn't activated because they are making amendments to it. They switched it off at the beginning of June, I think. I get your point about using it or not. Yes, I used the feature. I used it because I trusted that the network would not break any of the terms and conditions imposed by YouTube. I thought that they were responsible enough to check everything before releasing functionality on their dashboard but alas, they aren't. I think that the distinction between drugs and features is quite big. Both the person offering the drugs and Maker knew that what they were doing was wrong and violated some sort of rule. They both decided to do it anyway. I think that the difference there is that the drug user was completely aware of what they were doing. I wasn't aware of this issue until I began reading the terms and conditions of the YouTube service two weeks ago to check for changes in regards to monetization because when my contract with Maker lapsed, I had no intention to continue because of the issue with support. I was really waiting for the contract to end, but then I found this stuff about fraud that immediately clicked with the exchange feature's description. I felt that they violated my trust and broke rules to be in a better position without being transparent and honest with me. Nowhere on the beta information they stated that this was against any rules imposed by YouTube. It was not my fault that I used the feature, when you walk into a restaurant for instance, you don't take the dish and take it to a lab and test it for salmonella or some other issue, you trust that the chef cooked your meal properly. This is the case here too. I trusted that what is currently the biggest network wouldn't do something illegal according to the ToS. I also believe that when they implement features that go against the ToS, they should come to you and say "hey, we're doing this thing, it is against the ToS, so if you don't agree with us, you have XX days to reply and say that you want out of the contract". They never did that.
4. I beg to differ. It improves their standing because you start getting all these videos on your subscription box and then you click on them and bang, all of a sudden Maker is earning money from the ads that are over the videos. If you click on like and subscribe, it messes up with the site's algorithms and places these highly-ranked videos on top of the search results, suddenly Maker Studios partners are being watched more and in return Maker is making more money via ads. But they aren't making money honestly, they manipulated the system so that the stats of their videos were artificially inflated. Those likes and subscriptions are manipulated by Maker. Remember that I mentioned that when you clicked these things, you were never taken to the video page to actually watch any of the video! Everything was done via Maker's Dashboard interface. How can you like and sub to someone without even watching their videos? This is clear manipulation and is clearly something that YouTube does not allow. Maker Studios are basically using their own clients to do the dirty work for them. They are using "human bots" instead of electronic bots. There is no distinction. It is fraudulent, it is not allowed. If you visit a website that installs software on your computer without letting you know and this software is part of a botnet that does the same thing, would you still tell me that it was the user's fault? If the user isn't informed of the implications of the feature, then the user is being defrauded. YouTube clearly states that this is not allowed. When I talk about ToS, I mean the general ToS of the site, it has nothing to do with being a partner or not. Everyone is bound by these terms. Nowhere on the page it states that MCNs have special privileges and it never mentions anything about Maker Studios. If Maker Studios has a special contract with YouTube, then they should be transparent and make this available to their clients.
5. I can understand why you think they don't sound deceptive, but I think that they do. If they don't clearly state that this goes against YouTube's rules, then they are being deceptive. Say for instance that a bank is offering you to do money laundering... Just because they didn't come and say "money laundering is against the law" does not justify their actions. The onus is on the network to disclose everything before they offer the service. It is unreasonable to expect the user to check every ToS imaginable. The networks is taking a cut of the revenue, so they have to work. Part of their work is to make sure that they are following rules and acting within the law. I am not paying them 40% of my earnings to do research for them! We had this horsemeat scandal in Europe a couple of months ago, supermarkets were selling what was marked as beef but which in fact was horse meat. The government didn't come and say "consumers shoud have taken it to a lab for a DNA test before consumption". They blamed the supermarkets for not carrying out tests. This is just an example to show that Maker Studios should not be offering something that is illegal and expecting people to go ask questions. They should be making sure that what they are offering is within the law and not breaking any rules. To say that it is my fault for using the service is unreasonable, the same way that saying that the people who ate the horse meat that was supposed to be beef were wrong, when the supplier had a duty to make sure that the product was legal.
6. As you said, what it all comes down to is money. If they changed the channel look, I would be very upset indeed, but I agree, what it comes down to is the revenue and they still hold full control over that. Nothing stops them from actually keeping 100% if they want. Nothing stops them from continuing to take 40% every month from my account after the contract is over. Nothing stops them from taking my money even though they violated and broke the contract. It is all about the money, and they do hold full control until they release my account. The other features like uploading, thumbnailing, making graphics, etc is all controlled by me, but I do all of that in order to get money at the end of the month so I can reinvest on the channel to make it better, so if they break the rules and keep my money, it's obviously an issue.
7. Yep, I am aware of the AdSense. The problem is that lack of control. I cannot view the exact earnings except on YouTube analytics. I can't break the link between my monetization and their CMS. I don't fully understand what would happen if Google banned their account, this is what worries me. Regardless, this is just one more thing, it's not what everything boils down to. There are several micro-issues that make up the macro-issue, if I can put it that way.
8. I didn't understand what you meant by understanding your rights and responsibilities... I don't know how this links to my post to be honest. I don't know if you meant to question if I do as well... if that was the case, I can tell you that I understood my rights and responsibilities, otherwise I would not have signed the contract with Maker Studios. In terms of understanding the YouTube ToS, as explained previously, I believed that the network would never release something that went against the ToS. This does not mean that I did not understand my rights and responsibilities in the scope of the ToS, I simply had a normal expectation that the network would always act responsibly when it came to someone else's money/account.
Unless you had some special clause in your contract, most networks do not offer promotion, they offer tools which you can use to help promote yourself. Congratulations on getting 10,000 subs in 12 months though.. In all honesty it doesn't seem like you needed them to help promote you.
I would like to start from here by saying I do not feel Maker was right with adding the feature you described and quite frankly sub4sub techniques never help channel growth anyway.
I have never heard of Makers "Exchange" feature (even searching on google right now I'm not finding anything), but usually a feature like that would come with some sort of terms you would have to accept. Even so, you have the free will to use the feature or not. The only one putting your channel in harms way would be yourself. Let me put it this way. If someone is offering meth to people walking by they might not be doing something right, but they haven't done anything to harm you. They've just offered you tools which you can use to harm yourself. Should the person offering meth be stopped? Probably... but ultimately you are the one responsible for your own actions. The feature seems like an opportunity for promotion that you are not required to participate in.
... Technically they did not.. they are incentivizing other people to like or favorite other peoples videos which does not improve Makers standing at all.. Networks are also NOT partners and thus would not fall under the partner program policy. I do not know the contracts Networks have with Youtube, so I would not know what could be violating the contract or terms they have or not.
It doesn't sound to me like they were being deceptive about what the Exchange feature offered. They also do not receive any financial or personal gain from this unless one of the features was for views that contained ads. This sounds more like negligence for not informing you of the potential consequences of such a feature. To be honest participating in the feature would not mean you were directly incentivizing or influencing people to like your videos either to improve your own standing. Seems like one big loophole to me.
They control the ad placement and revenue of the channel which was relinquished by you to their CMS, not the content or branding or anything else of the sort. What everything comes down to is money, which is the one thing people give networks control over when they sign the contract.
Your AdSense is more or less hibernating right now.. It was put on pause while your channel was connected to the networks CMS account, they don't control your AdSense. When they release you from their CMS your AdSense should be reinstated.
I do not agree with how Maker goes about their business sometimes, but I make sure to understand my rights and what my responsibilities are in every situation.
