Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
An action that received severe criticism from other YouTubers because it would mean – if successful – that similarly named videos could be removed according to YouTube's copyright system. [29] In 2016, the Fine Brothers launched React World. This was a program where people could use Fine Brothers' icons to make their own videos for free.
The vast majority of videos on YouTube are free to view and supported by advertising. [64] In May 2013, YouTube introduced a trial scheme of 53 subscription channels with prices ranging from $0.99 to $6.99 a month. [314]
Name Discipline(s) Description Access cost License Provider(s) 60second Recap: Literature Educational videos Free ? 60secondcap Academic Earth: Multidisciplinary
YouTube's own practice is to issue a "YouTube copyright strike" on the user accused of copyright infringement. [1] When a YouTube user gets hit with a copyright strike, they are required to watch a warning video about the rules of copyright and take trivia questions about the danger of copyright. [2] A copyright strike will expire after 90 days.
The video was disliked by many YouTube users since it was a non-violent video containing characters from Happy Tree Friends, which is known for its graphic violence, resulting in it becoming YouTube's most hated video at the time. [3] [4] [5]
[1] [34] Google has countered these assertions by stating that (as of 2016) Content ID detected over 98% of known copyright infringement on YouTube and humans filing removal notices only 2%. [1] In January 2018, a YouTube uploader who created a white noise generator received copyright notices about a video he uploaded which contained only white ...
YouTube Kids has faced criticism from advocacy groups, particularly the Fairplay Organization, for concerns surrounding the app's use of commercial advertising, as well as algorithmic suggestions of videos that may be inappropriate for the app's target audience, as the app has been associated with a controversy surrounding disturbing or violent ...
Viacom International, Inc. v. YouTube, Inc., 676 F.3d 19 (2nd Cir., 2012), was a United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit decision regarding liability for copyright infringement committed by the users of an online video hosting platform.