Skip to content

Self-hosting your own media considered harmful - I just received my second community guidelines violation for my video demonstrating the use of LibreELEC on a Raspberry Pi 5, for 4K video playback

Technology
96 68 32
  • YouTube pulled a popular tutorial video from tech creator Jeff Geerling this week, claiming his guide to installing LibreELEC on a Raspberry Pi 5 violated policies against "harmful content." The video, which showed viewers how to set up their own home media servers, had been live for over a year and racked up more than 500,000 views. YouTube's automated systems flagged the content for allegedly teaching people "how to get unauthorized or free access to audio or audiovisual content."

    Geerling says his tutorial covered only legal self-hosting of media people already own -- no piracy tools or copyright workarounds. He said he goes out of his way to avoid mentioning popular piracy software in his videos. It's the second time YouTube has pulled a self-hosting content video from Geerling. Last October, YouTube removed his Jellyfin tutorial, though that decision was quickly reversed after appeal. This time, his appeal was denied.

    “how to get unauthorized or free access to audio or audiovisual content.”

    In the future, public domain media will be banned for harming corporate profits.

  • I will flat out shut down any Brave user simply because it tried to push crypto.
    No thanks 🙂

    Not just crypto, they were diverting ad revenue from websites to themselves, collecting unsolicited donations for content creators without their consent, suggesting affiliate links in the address bar and installing a paid VPN service without the user's consent. Don’t forget they had a “bug” in Tor which sent all DNS queries to your ISP instead of routing it through tor and also weak fingerprint protection. Not to mention the political affiliation of the CEO. But it IS open source.

  • Not just crypto, they were diverting ad revenue from websites to themselves, collecting unsolicited donations for content creators without their consent, suggesting affiliate links in the address bar and installing a paid VPN service without the user's consent. Don’t forget they had a “bug” in Tor which sent all DNS queries to your ISP instead of routing it through tor and also weak fingerprint protection. Not to mention the political affiliation of the CEO. But it IS open source.

    Still fuck them (openly). From the source of my heart 🙂

  • I think ripping DVDs is still technically illegal, even though CSS has long since been broken. It is still illegal to circumvent encryption in a copy protection scheme, even if it's for your own personal use and the encryption scheme has been pwned.

    I bet if he didn't mention that his videos were ripped from DVD, they might have left it up.

  • YouTube pulled a popular tutorial video from tech creator Jeff Geerling this week, claiming his guide to installing LibreELEC on a Raspberry Pi 5 violated policies against "harmful content." The video, which showed viewers how to set up their own home media servers, had been live for over a year and racked up more than 500,000 views. YouTube's automated systems flagged the content for allegedly teaching people "how to get unauthorized or free access to audio or audiovisual content."

    Geerling says his tutorial covered only legal self-hosting of media people already own -- no piracy tools or copyright workarounds. He said he goes out of his way to avoid mentioning popular piracy software in his videos. It's the second time YouTube has pulled a self-hosting content video from Geerling. Last October, YouTube removed his Jellyfin tutorial, though that decision was quickly reversed after appeal. This time, his appeal was denied.

    They are so pissed that we dare own anything. Fuck corpos.

  • “how to get unauthorized or free access to audio or audiovisual content.”

    In the future, public domain media will be banned for harming corporate profits.

    Yeah, people who thought Google wasn't openly strangling the free (as in libre) stuff because they weren't that evil - these people just have bad memory. In year 2012 it clearly felt that corps, Google and Facebook and MS and Apple and everyone, are on the move to capture it all without a way out. They kinda made the illusion of being softer later.

    So the question is - how do we even advertise legal but unpleasant for them things, avoiding their censorship.

    The devices are sold together with the operating system (often unchangeable) and packaged applications and means of installing software, right from the markets.

    I mean, I have a solution. It's counterintuitive and seems unconnected, and too direct, but I guarantee you it'll work.

    Forbidding companies to do moderation or refuse to accept content without technical problems, or banned content (CP and such), and similar good justifications. As in - if your service is up, and there's user content served from it, it shouldn't be removed without legal substantiation. It doesn't matter it's free, that doesn't mean you can do all you like. You are not a media outlet, you are a platform for many media, that's how you work in fact, so yes, your actions do constitute censorship if you do moderation. If you can't afford to keep it free with such rules, then start charging money for hosting, as it normally should have been.

    And, of course, this should include public offering status, the prices should be the same for all users.

    I mean, if we had this from the beginning, we'd probably still have the Web like in year 2003.

  • The use of "self-hosting" is a little confusing here. To be clear, he wasn't self-hosting his video. It was published on YouTube, and the guidelines and procedures in question are Google's.

    Edit: I'm not defending Google's actions. It's just that the title gave the impression that a video he had self-hosted was somehow subject to "community guidelines", which didn't make sense.

    Edit 2: Ten downvotes in less than an hour, on a clarification comment? Wow. I'm disappointed to see that level of targeted negativity here. What rotten behavior. 😞

    You're being downvoted for being factually wrong about the title. It's not targeted negativity.

  • You're being downvoted for being factually wrong about the title. It's not targeted negativity.

    To add on, the video is about self hosting, it was not self hosted itself.

  • YouTube pulled a popular tutorial video from tech creator Jeff Geerling this week, claiming his guide to installing LibreELEC on a Raspberry Pi 5 violated policies against "harmful content." The video, which showed viewers how to set up their own home media servers, had been live for over a year and racked up more than 500,000 views. YouTube's automated systems flagged the content for allegedly teaching people "how to get unauthorized or free access to audio or audiovisual content."

    Geerling says his tutorial covered only legal self-hosting of media people already own -- no piracy tools or copyright workarounds. He said he goes out of his way to avoid mentioning popular piracy software in his videos. It's the second time YouTube has pulled a self-hosting content video from Geerling. Last October, YouTube removed his Jellyfin tutorial, though that decision was quickly reversed after appeal. This time, his appeal was denied.

    Google should have been broken up years ago.

  • And beyond the law it depends also on enforcement

    The US doesn't give a right to break Bluray copy protection and make a personal backup or access it on a device that otherwise couldn't play it. But the only enforcement is on people sharing copies, no one is prosecuted for format shifting their collection to play over their LAN

  • But if I remember from back in the day, the DMCA doesn't have any exception for that. This is why CD ripping was legal, while DVD ripping was not. It had nothing to do with fair use or backups, but rather that DVDs have encryption, and CDs do not. Circumventing that encryption for any reason was illegal.

    I don't think it has changed, but it's been a hot minute since the Cypherpunks all wore DeCSS T-Shirts....

    I believe you're (if you're American) now allowed to rip DVD but not anything newer. DMCA protection was removed from CSS

  • I love Nebula. I go there to watch Nebula Exclusives but it's not great for browsing or discovering new channels...I found everyone I subscribe to on YouTube first

    I managed to find Extra History via Nebula, and it's one of my new favorite channels...but I've found a lot more favorites from YouTube, definitely.

    One thing I do love is finding a new channel I like that has years of backlog.

  • Sue for defamation that Youtube are alleging he is promoting criminal activity of piracy.

    YouTube didn’t publicly make that claim though, so they haven’t done any defamation.

  • YouTube pulled a popular tutorial video from tech creator Jeff Geerling this week, claiming his guide to installing LibreELEC on a Raspberry Pi 5 violated policies against "harmful content." The video, which showed viewers how to set up their own home media servers, had been live for over a year and racked up more than 500,000 views. YouTube's automated systems flagged the content for allegedly teaching people "how to get unauthorized or free access to audio or audiovisual content."

    Geerling says his tutorial covered only legal self-hosting of media people already own -- no piracy tools or copyright workarounds. He said he goes out of his way to avoid mentioning popular piracy software in his videos. It's the second time YouTube has pulled a self-hosting content video from Geerling. Last October, YouTube removed his Jellyfin tutorial, though that decision was quickly reversed after appeal. This time, his appeal was denied.

    Because self hosting is getting cheaper and easier while average internet upload speeds are crazy high for the home user. Of course Google is scared.

  • YouTube pulled a popular tutorial video from tech creator Jeff Geerling this week, claiming his guide to installing LibreELEC on a Raspberry Pi 5 violated policies against "harmful content." The video, which showed viewers how to set up their own home media servers, had been live for over a year and racked up more than 500,000 views. YouTube's automated systems flagged the content for allegedly teaching people "how to get unauthorized or free access to audio or audiovisual content."

    Geerling says his tutorial covered only legal self-hosting of media people already own -- no piracy tools or copyright workarounds. He said he goes out of his way to avoid mentioning popular piracy software in his videos. It's the second time YouTube has pulled a self-hosting content video from Geerling. Last October, YouTube removed his Jellyfin tutorial, though that decision was quickly reversed after appeal. This time, his appeal was denied.

    People are quick to burn Youtube here when its clearly the american copyright reach that causes this.

  • I will flat out shut down any Brave user simply because it tried to push crypto.
    No thanks 🙂

    No one is forcing brave on you lol

  • People are quick to burn Youtube here when its clearly the american copyright reach that causes this.

    I think it's both, a dumb system enforced in a somehow dumber way

  • People are quick to burn Youtube here when its clearly the american copyright reach that causes this.

    YouTube took down the video because of its own policies, not because of copyright law. So we should be blaming YouTube.

    I think it's easy to see exactly why if you consider how YouTube treats small content creators. If I post a video and companies claim copyright on it, the video gets demonetized and I might lose my account. I can respond and contest the claim and maybe I can win but I still lost money in the meantime, and perhaps more significantly, the companies that made their copyright claims will never face a consequence for attempting to burn my channel. In other words, if I get things wrong a few times I'll lose my channel and my income source, but if they get things wrong a million times, they face zero consequence.

    And you might be inclined to blame the media companies. But again, this is YouTube doing what YouTube wants to do of its own volition, and not something that's required by law. If YouTube valued small-scale content creators and end users, it would create different policies.

  • Sue YouTube. They won't change meaningfully until forced to.

    I think what you mean to say is that we should be pressuring public officials to try to bust up Google's monopoly on many things. And we are doing that, and it is showing some progress. But there is much more work to be done.

  • YouTube pulled a popular tutorial video from tech creator Jeff Geerling this week, claiming his guide to installing LibreELEC on a Raspberry Pi 5 violated policies against "harmful content." The video, which showed viewers how to set up their own home media servers, had been live for over a year and racked up more than 500,000 views. YouTube's automated systems flagged the content for allegedly teaching people "how to get unauthorized or free access to audio or audiovisual content."

    Geerling says his tutorial covered only legal self-hosting of media people already own -- no piracy tools or copyright workarounds. He said he goes out of his way to avoid mentioning popular piracy software in his videos. It's the second time YouTube has pulled a self-hosting content video from Geerling. Last October, YouTube removed his Jellyfin tutorial, though that decision was quickly reversed after appeal. This time, his appeal was denied.

    you say in the video that you use this setup to watch YouTube. I love watching YouTube with Kodi as it shows no ads. I guess they don't love that.

    I'm not saying that justifies the strike, but it might be connected

  • 40 Stimmen
    8 Beiträge
    10 Aufrufe
    N
    That they didn't have enough technicians trained in this to be able to ensure that one was always available during working hours, or at least when it was glaringly obvious that one was going to be needed that day, is . . . both extremely and obviously stupid, and par for the course for a corp whose sole purpose is maximizing profit for the next quarter.
  • 93 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    7 Aufrufe
    S
    I wouldn't call it unprecedented, just more obvious
  • 3 Stimmen
    14 Beiträge
    20 Aufrufe
    W
    it would be interesting to hear your opinion, @Pro@programming.dev, why did you think you want to post this here
  • 254 Stimmen
    41 Beiträge
    30 Aufrufe
    W
    Did you, by any chance, ever wonder, why people deal with hunger instead of just eating cake?
  • 26 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    3 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 77 Stimmen
    5 Beiträge
    6 Aufrufe
    U
    I don't see Yarvin on here... this needs expansion.
  • 11 Stimmen
    19 Beiträge
    24 Aufrufe
    E
    No, just laminated ones. Closed at one end. Easy enough to make or buy. You can even improvise the propellant.
  • 0 Stimmen
    4 Beiträge
    2 Aufrufe
    K
    Only way I'll want a different phone brand is if it comes with ZERO bloatware and has an excellent internal memory/storage cleanse that has nothing to do with Google's Files or a random app I'm not sure I can trust without paying or rooting. So far my A series phones do what I need mostly and in my opinion is superior to the Motorola's my fiancé prefers minus the phone-phone charge ability his has, everything else I'm just glad I have enough control to tweak things to my liking, however these days Samsungs seem to be infested with Google bloatware and apps that insist on opening themselves back up regardless of the widespread battery restrictions I've assigned (even was sent a "Stop Closing my Apps" notif that sent me to an article ) short of Disabling many unnecessary apps bc fully rooting my devices is something I rarely do anymore. I have a random Chinese brand tablet where I actually have more control over the apps than either of my A series phones whee Force Stopping STAYS that way when I tell them to! I hate being listened to for ads and the unwanted draining my battery life and data (I live off-grid and pay data rates because "Unlimited" is some throttled BS) so my ability to control what's going on in the background matters a lot to me, enough that I'm anti Meta-apps and avoid all non-essential Google apps. I can't afford topline phones and the largest data plan, so I work with what I can afford and I'm sad refurbished A lines seem to be getting more expensive while giving away my control to companies. Last A line I bought that was supposed to be my first 5G phone was network locked, so I got ripped off, but it still serves me well in off-grid life. Only app that actually regularly malfunctions when I Force Stop it's background presence is Roku, which I find to have very an almost insidious presence in our lives. Google Play, Chrome, and Spotify never acts incompetent in any way no matter how I have to open the setting every single time I turn Airplane Mode off. Don't need Gmail with Chrome and DuckDuckGo has been awesome at intercepting self-loading ads. I hope one day DDG gets better bc Google seems to be terrible lately and I even caught their AI contradicting itself when asking about if Homo Florensis is considered Human (yes) and then asked the oldest age of human remains, and was fed the outdated narrative of 300,000 years versus 700,000+ years bipedal pre-humans have been carbon dated outside of the Cradle of Humanity in South Africa. SO sorry to go off-topic, but I've got a big gripe with Samsung's partnership with Google, especially considering the launch of Quantum Computed AI that is still being fine-tuned with company-approved censorships.