Fanimatrix was a fan made short movie that used torrents as the main distribution method.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/oct/07/so-grimy-so-cheap-new-zealand-matrix-fan-film-becomes-oldest-active-torrent-in-the-world

Um, the video in question here?

The channel is not in danger of being deleted, not even close. They received a single copyright strike, which in principle already got reversed by youtube (though still pending a 10 day waiting period for the claimant to reply and file legal action). It takes 3 valid copyright strikes within a 90 day period for a channel to be deleted.

They're not angry because their channel is in danger of being deleted, they're angry because they got hit in the moneys, losing ad revenue on a video that probably cost quite a bit of money to produce. Because of how the algorithm works, they'll probably not recoup the lost views on that particular video, even when it's reinstated.

It's also not like abusive and frivolous copyright strikes are a new thing. They've been a byproduct of the safe harbor provisions (aka OCILLA ) in the DMCA for almost 3 decades now (DMCA was introduced in 1998), and the chilling effects on online speech and liberties have been well documented and covered to death by various publications over the years, but somehow GamersNexus only discovers it and starts to care when their bottom line is affected by it. I get that it's not cool, but I don't get why people should care about this particular instance of DMCA abuse, especially as it seems to be going as well for GamersNexus as a copyright strike can possibly go, given that Youtube already ruled in their favor.

To me it comes across as a hastily put together video to spring on their audience to whip up outrage and compensate for lost ad revenue. It's a tried and true tactic, if you don't have news, make the news. It seems to be working too: after one day this video already has more views than anything else they put out in the last 6 months, so it will probably make them more money than the taken down video would ever make. Good for them, but that doesn't mean that you can't see it for the sensationalist click bait non-story that it is.

willing to say that a $4T market cap company is full of shit.

I'm willing to say that too, but you have to admit that it's a lot easier to say such things on a Youtube video that gets you 900k views in a day.

Also: careful to censor those middle fingers so you don't get ... gasp... demonetized

Because they do actually do it for the money. It's a job, and if they put the same content on a non monetized platform, they would drive they're own viewers away from their own monetized platform = less money.

Initial setup is the only real time investment. Once you have the final edited video exported, uploading it to multiple platforms doesn't take much more time. It does take away ad impressions from YouTube, though.

That's why I never made a career out of it. I just never like the idea of putting my whole life in YouTube's hands. I do have a small channel that I post to whenever I feel like and never really cared for it much. Sometimes, I don't post for a couple of years.

. My apologies, my apostles.

I certainly didn't downvote you.

It's definitely not a bad idea to look. Rumble is probably the second best option which is why he's there. But spend about 2 minutes looking around on rumble and it's like taking your dinner in the sewer. Anti-woke, anti-DEI, crypto, people praising armed military flooding into the streets of peaceful cities. The second most popular channel on there is newsmax which is literally propaganda. His will be able to resonate with the people that are there, But the rest of the content on the site is so edgy that it pushes away the vast majority.

One of the biggest complaints about the platform is the lack of traffic. The ease of use is there, the monetization is there, but the discovery isn't.

I initially uploaded it on March 30th, 2021. YouTube still shows that as the upload date for the video, and I'm stuck on my phone at the moment, so I'll look to see if I can find a date for the claim updates later to sate my own curiosity, but that's recent enough that I trust my memory of it being months, plural. I got an email about the claim that day, disputed it, got a copyright strike the next day, disputed THAT... And was eventually approved. I don't have another email about that video saying it was approved or dropped or anything, until there was another claim (after apparently a manual review) on February 9th of 2023, resulting in a regional block.

So maybe it was because I disputed the actual strike and not just the initial claim?

Not that I'm complaining at you. I'm just surprised. I thought this was typical. Though I was annoyed at YouTube. I thought the video could've done a little better on YouTube than it did in Vimeo if I pointed people there instead, you know? (100-ish on YouTube now vs 30k on Vimeo those months earlier. But it was a timely video.)

But thanks for the insight. I appreciate it.

Undeniably he gets more clicks for this. However, would you deny somebody their own soapbox when they're getting fucked by the system? He is using his leverage to call out the bullshit DMCA system that YouTube has in place which allows anybody to fuck with anybody. And in this case he's bringing to light a giant Goliath of a company Bloomberg for fucking with his few person team, and for YouTube for making it the default.

That isn't true though, plenty of people engage in creative endevours just for the pleasure of it.

Maybe this channel wouldn't but as soon as it started relying on other people and platforms there was always the risk those wouldn't align with the creative message and something would have to give.

I fucking hate this!

I have a lynx spider I’ve been watching go from a tiny little green thing that was missing 2 legs to a 2inch gorgeous ambush predator that catches honeybees. I checked YT to see videos of what it looks like when these spiders actually catch their meals. It was all AI slop; either fake AI voiceovers or fake AI generated videos that of spiders that don’t actually exist.

It’s so fucking stupid!

Bloomberg is that you ?

The actual title of the video is:

Our GPU Black Market Documentary Has Been Taken Down by Bloomberg

Way less Click Bait sounding. And while a shitty thing for Bloomberg to do it is not any different than what tons of channels have been dealing with for years. So the Youtube sky is not falling any faster now than it was last week.

I’m actually on your side. I was bringing up those questions to question why they would get upset with be gently applying clickbait label.

Usually fans of these channels fall in line with the rhetoric.

But once again, I tried a conversation style that failed when I didn’t get a response from who I was talking to, and I got downvotes.

Sure, then post it on peertube.

SEO used to be a fulltime job.

A copyright strike is a little bit more serious than a content id match, fwiw.

Understand copyright strikes - Computer - YouTube Help

Copyright strikes are different from Community Guideline strikes and Content ID claims. If you get a

(support.google.com)

Well I didn't mean not publishing on YouTube completely because we know that's not possible at this point in time, I meant like having an archive of their own videos accesible via Torrent... Kinda like how some let's players are doing by putting their uncensored versions on Patreon (with swearing and stuff) or early access to their content, but in this case, putting the YouTube version in a torrent in case some shit like this happens so the access is not lost forever.

Like, not choosing only one way of publishing or another, just casting a wider net.

Oh, gotcha.
I'm pretty sure they have a patreon.
They ran a Kickstarter to fund the production of this specific 3h episode, and all levels of backers got a USB key with a copy of the video on it.

The issue isn't it being deleted. It won't disappear.

The issue is the contents potentially not reaching as many new viewers unaware of Nvidias shady behaviour and how the black market of GPUs actual works because Bloomberg (who have sponsorship from Nvidia) DMCAd the video.
Either because their articles were used as a source and the text of those articles were shown on screen (potentially reducing views those articles would have received if they were linked? Or something? No idea how you would provide a snapshot of the information as it was at the time of publishing the video, tho. Cause the article could be edited after GNs video was published, making any soft references meaningless).
Or because they used some of Bloombergs video of POTUS, which (in my understanding) cannot be copyrighted.

So to me, it seems like GNs video was frivolously DMCAd to reduce its impact on Nvidia.
The impact of that DMCA is that: as it was starting to trend it gets taken offline for ~10 days. After which, YouTube's algorithm will be unlikely to promote it via its algorithm because it hasn't had any new views for 10 days.
Effectively killing the video.
Gamers Nexus gets a "strike" against their channel (of which they get 3).
Bloomberg has 0 repercussions.

Unless we all kick up enough fuss to cause some repercussions, and support GN enough to get the exposé trending again.