Whole channel demonetised for "spam content"!? Suspended from Partner Program

I'm a bit surprised by the comments suggesting that YouTube has some kind of hidden agenda. I took a look at the poster's channel and the video's are copies of well known copyrighted characters. He's obviously very talented and has worked very hard, but YouTube HAVE to respect copyright laws.

If I am a talented brewer, make some lovely beer, put it in green bottle and write "HEINEKEN" on the label I think shops may be reluctant to sell it for me.

If I am smart enough to make a watch, produce 1000 of them and brand them "ROLEX" I will have the fraud squad breathing down my neck in no time.

What the poster is doing is no different. He needs to use his talent and abilities to create his own characters and draw them instead.
 
Wakanda said:
Why not hit him with copyright strikes instead?

It seems Youtube is hellbent on shrinking monetization to dissuade as many from uploads which are a cost to them
Click to expand...
He isn't being hit with copyright strikes because nothing in his video is a direct match to a Content ID fingerprint; and Disney/Pixar are usually way too busy to hit people with manual claims, is why. For YouTube purposes alone, they would need to hire a whole new department of people if they intended to start something like that.

Look at all of the clones of "Let It Go" from Frozen if you want a good example. Search that title on YouTube and just see how many hits you get.

No: YouTube is not hell bent on shrinking monetization to "save money". Have you forgotten already that every monetized video also makes YouTube itself money, and they take a cut of 55% from every monetized view?

@Wakanda I thought our last "joust" would have taught you that there is no way you can contend with me where knowledge of YouTube is concerned, or with my knowledge of how online media in general is legally presented to the Internet viewer; however, I see you have learned nothing.

YouTube is demonetizing channels which are either reposting material already present on YouTube from other originating channels, channels whose main content is unlicensed third-party copyright media, channels who are flaunting the Terms of Service, and channels who are obviously flaunting the Community Guidelines.

The OP had created derivative works after copyright characters, and YouTube could find no evidence that he had a license which allowed and legalized his derivations.

Sometimes mistakes are being made, and have been made in the past; and the Top Contributors are currently making efforts to assist channels which have no obvious reasons behind their demonetizations.

Would you rather YouTube just terminate and be done with it? I see that happening too, as a matter of fact.
 
Yachts For Sale said:
I'm a bit surprised by the comments suggesting that YouTube has some kind of hidden agenda. I took a look at the poster's channel and the video's are copies of well known copyrighted characters. He's obviously very talented and has worked very hard, but YouTube HAVE to respect copyright laws.

If I am a talented brewer, make some lovely beer, put it in green bottle and write "HEINEKEN" on the label I think shops may be reluctant to sell it for me.

If I am smart enough to make a watch, produce 1000 of them and brand them "ROLEX" I will have the fraud squad breathing down my neck in no time.

What the poster is doing is no different. He needs to use his talent and abilities to create his own characters and draw them instead.
Click to expand...
Agreed, but why not a copyright strike?
Spam connotes repetitive acts such as multiple uploads of the same content. I am not suggesting a hidden agenda but rather being banned for spam instead of copyright infringement is suspect[DOUBLEPOST=1530258201,1530257938][/DOUBLEPOST]
UKHypnotist said:
He isn't being hit with copyright strikes because nothing in his video is a direct match to a Content ID fingerprint; and Disney/Pixar are usually way too busy to hit people with manual claims, is why. For YouTube purposes alone, they would need to hire a whole new department of people if they intended to start something like that.

Look at all of the clones of "Let It Go" from Frozen if you want a good example. Search that title on YouTube and just see how many hits you get.

No: YouTube is not hell bent on shrinking monetization to "save money". Have you forgotten already that every monetized video also makes YouTube itself money, and they take a cut of 55% from every monetized view?

@Wakanda I thought our last "joust" would have taught you that there is no way you can contend with me where knowledge of YouTube is concerned, or with my knowledge of how online media in general is legally presented to the Internet viewer; however, I see you have learned nothing.

YouTube is demonetizing channels which are either reposting material already present on YouTube from other originating channels, channels whose main content is unlicensed third-party copyright media, channels who are flaunting the Terms of Service, and channels who are obviously flaunting the Community Guidelines.

The OP had created derivative works after copyright characters, and YouTube could find no evidence that he had a license which allowed and legalized his derivations.

Sometimes mistakes are being made, and have been made in the past; and the Top Contributors are currently making efforts to assist channels which have no obvious reasons behind their demonetizations.

Would you rather YouTube just terminate and be done with it? I see that happening too, as a matter of fact.
Click to expand...
We are not here to find who is more knowledgeable about YouTube (as if that adds value to your worth)

I find it curious that copyright infringement is not the cause of demonetization but rather spam yet your argument is that his spam is really ‘derrivative’ but still copyright infringement. That’s all.

Youtube makes money through monetization,but also incurs costs especially of hosting those videos. They made it harder to get monetized but still members are meeting the newer stringent rules. Next they shifted review from 2 weeks to end of April,and now to end of June. If monetization is such a money maker why would they waste so much time reviewing?

Have you seen anyone who met the the 4K hours and 1K subs rules monetized?
I have yet to personally nor on any online forum. It tells me that the channels that were first to meet the rules are yet to be monetized over 2 months later. Pray tell me what parameters are they checking that makes them spend over 2 months on a channel?

Based on the current information we have, Youtube is scaling down monetization probably because monetization is the greatest incentive for uploading content. This is by slowing the growth of monetization by delaying and making it difficult to enlist,as well as aggressive demonetization of accounts. Maybe it has something to do with reports last year of major companies pulling out of online advertising or slashing emarketing budget. Whatever income Youtube makes from the monetized channels went down. YouTube responds by attempting to reduce monetized channels and realizes it can still maintain the same revenues as before,but with the benefit of lower hosting costs as fewer uploads are coming.

I am speculating and you are free to dispute or question my reasoning with your Einstein grade Youtube and online marketing genius
 
Last edited:
No one here has asked the originator of this thread exactly what the email he got from YouTube said. I suspect that it said "Duplication" rather than "Spam". I now ask the OP to tell us just what information YouTube supplied him with regarding the demonetization of his channel.

@Wakanda Why is it you absolutely love being snarky? It doesn't add to your value one bit; in fact, it shows you as instantly embarking on an empty defensive campaign the moment you are confronted with a challenge. I see you are already attempting another response. Let me just have a look at that and I will get back to you here.

Ok done with your reply to the other thread; so let us continue on with great vigor.

I am speculating and you are free to dispute or question my reasoning with your Einstein grade Youtube and online marketing genius
Click to expand...

Ah! I see you have noticed that the channel attached to my profile here is a tiny one of only 6 subscribers. Did it ever occur to you that it might not be my main channel? I linked it here to give it a bit of exposure, and only yesterday I was considering changing it back to my main. I believe I will indeed do that today.

How many channels do you own, @Wakanda? On the account holding both the tiny one and my current main, there are 12, each themed slightly differently. I am working toward a certain number of uploads posted to the main; when I've reached that, I will turn my attention back to the smaller channels in order to get them to the review threshold level. The large channel will at that point have enough fresh content to keep people busy while I work on the others.

I'm not just a multi-channel owner; I'm also a multi-account owner. I know my worth, and feel no need to add to same.
 
Last edited:
UKHypnotist said:
No one here has asked the originator of this thread exactly what the email he got from YouTube said. I suspect that it said "Duplication" rather than "Spam". I now ask the OP to tell us just what information YouTube supplied him with regarding the demonetization of his channel.

@Wakanda Why is it you absolutely love being snarky? It doesn't add to your value one bit; in fact, it shows you as instantly embarking on an empty defensive campaign the moment you are confronted with a challenge. I see you are already attempting another response. Let me just have a look at that and I will get back to you here.

Ok done with your reply to the other thread; so let us continue on with great vigor.



Ah! I see you have noticed that the channel attached to my profile here is a tiny one of only 6 subscribers. Did it ever occur to you that it might not be my main channel? I linked it here to give it a bit of exposure, and only yesterday I was considering changing it back to my main. I believe I will indeed do that today.

How many channels do you own, @Wakanda? On the account holding both the tiny one and my current main, there are 12, each themed slightly differently. I am working toward a certain number of uploads posted to the main; when I've reached that, I will turn my attention back to the smaller channels in order to get them to the review threshold level. The large channel will at that point have enough fresh content to keep people busy while I work on the others.

I'm not just a multi-channel owner; I'm also a multi-account owner. I know my worth, and feel no need to add to same.
Click to expand...
I have never bothered to check out your or anyone else’s channels. Never had any reason to. It matters not how much knowledgeable you imagine you are,what matters is how much sense you make on this forum
 
If I understand correctly, @UKHypnotist is saying that the use of Pixar's characters is breach of copyright. Pixar do not have time to pursue every possible copyright violation, but YouTube do not want to be used as a platform to host such copyright breaches, and certainly not to make money from them.
This makes perfect sense to me.

@Wakanda on the other hand...once again if I understand correctly, is saying that the demonetisation of the Poster's channel is actually just another way to discourage people from posting videos and monetising them. This is because the YouTube servers cannot cope with the amount of content being created and they are a loss making company.
This makes no sense to me whatsoever.
 
Yachts For Sale said:
If I understand correctly, @UKHypnotist is saying that the use of Pixar's characters is breach of copyright. Pixar do not have time to pursue every possible copyright violation, but YouTube do not want to be used as a platform to host such copyright breaches, and certainly not to make money from them.
This makes perfect sense to me.

@Wakanda on the other hand...once again if I understand correctly, is saying that the demonetisation of the Poster's channel is actually just another way to discourage people from posting videos and monetising them. This is because the YouTube servers cannot cope with the amount of content being created and they are a loss making company.
This makes no sense to me whatsoever.
Click to expand...
YouTube has different reasons for disabling channels. Spam and copyright infringement are two distinct reasons. While the subject channel had Disney characters, and using them is copyright infringement,the OP was demonetized for spam. Maybe my understanding of YouTube’s scope of spam is wrong and I am open to correction but I think copyright infringement alleged in this case does not amount to spam.

My point on youtube monetization is, Youtube is scaling down on monetization. I speculated that this is a means to an end; discouraging uploads. If the biggest motivation for uploading is monetization,then you can easily slow down uploading by killing the incentive
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top