Showing posts with label YouTube. Show all posts
Showing posts with label YouTube. Show all posts

Thursday, December 12, 2013

YouTube Bans Teen Homophobe For Life

You might recall teenage Limbaugh wannabe Caiden Cowger, whose virulently anti-gay rants have appeared on JMG in years past. Well, it appears that YouTube has had enough of him. From their email to Cowger:
We’d like to inform you that due to repeated or severe violations of our Community Guidelines, your YouTube account CaidenCowgerShow has been suspended. After review we determined that activity in your account violated our Community Guidelines, which state that hate speech is not acceptable on our site. “Hate speech” means content that promotes hatred or violence against members of a protected group (race or ethnic origin, religion, disability, gender, age, veteran status, and sexual orientation/gender identity). Please be aware that you are prohibited from accessing, possessing or creating any other YouTube accounts.
Bryan Fischer is ever so pissed.

YouTube's Top Videos For 2013

YouTube yesterday issued the lists of their most-watched viral and music videos for 2013. The Washington Post reports:
It turns out we’re all really interested in knowing what the fox says. According to YouTube’s annual list of top-trending videos, Norwegian comedy duo Ylvis had the hottest video of the year with “What Does the Fox Say?” The posting drew 276 million views since it was posted in September. Actually, it was a good year for Norwegians: The Norwegian Army version of the Harlem Shake dance craze came in right behind Ylvis’s video as the most popular of the 1.7 million versions of the dance that got uploaded to the site, YouTube said Wednesday in announcing the statistics. It was also a good year for brands on the site, with three brand videos making the top 10 trending list: “Evian Babies,” “Volvo Trucks” and “Telekinetic Coffee Surprise,” which promoted the new “Carrie “movie.
Ad Age breaks down the dough:
Earlier this year YouTube crossed the billion-user mark, and now it's poised to surpass the five-billion-dollar mark. The Google-owned video service is expected to record $5.6 billion in gross revenue this year, according to estimates from eMarketer. That's up 51% from last year and would equate to 11% of Google's total ad revenues. That figure does not include money YouTube passes on to advertising partners and content creators. This year Google will keep 35% of that total or $1.96 billion, according to eMarketer's estimate. Google generally takes a 45% cut of advertising sold into its content partners, and Google's take is exected to rise in the coming years as it phases out less-favorable revenue-sharing deals with TV networks. After revenue sharing, YouTube will take $850 million this year from video ads served in the U.S., which is up 50% from last year. Including display ads, YouTube will will net $1.08 billion this year in U.S. ad revenues.

Wednesday, December 11, 2013

YouTube: What Does 2013 Say?

YouTube: "To celebrate 2013, we invited some YouTubers to star in a mashup of popular moments this year. Can you spot all the references?"

Saturday, December 7, 2013

Naked Stop-Motion

Monday, May 21, 2012

Your Digital Estate Plan

Do you ever wonder what becomes of a deceased person's Facebook profile?

Increasingly, folks are compiling several digital profiles on the ever-popular social media sites now embedded into the Internet.  Many of us have thoroughly fleshed-out these electronic profiles.

Well, what happens to your digital persona when you die?  How do we assist our family members with the dismantling of these often extensive robust electronic profiles?

Below are examples of typical digital "assets" contained in an average modern person's legacy:
  • Social media profiles such as Facebook, LinkedIn, YouTube and a host of others
  • Professional profiles [I maintain at least a half dozen and counting]
  • Bank accounts, loan accounts, mortgage accounts
  • Investment accounts such as eTrade or Ameritrade
  • Uploaded photos
  • Uploaded articles
  • Education accounts, including alumni account profiles
  • Gaming sites
  • Email profiles and communications [Most people have at least two email accounts these days.]
  • Digital media accounts
  • Cloud computing profiles or accounts
  • On-line store accounts, particularly those with a social media angle such as iTunes and Amazon
There are other examples, to be sure.  Any site that you've had to log-on to, create a profile, and post content, or place orders, is a component of your digital inventory.  That's a lot to keep track of...

If your situation is typical, you have some similar passwords, or a theme running through your accounts, but due to the specifications of the particular site, most of your usernames and passwords are different.  Also, you probably maintain a list of your names and passwords somewhere; perhaps on your computer.

There are, of course, some web-based products and services that assist with the management of your digital profile:
The first step in managing your digital legacy is to list all of your on-line "assets" and list the usernames and passwords associated with those accounts.  You will be saving a family member or friend untold hours on the phone, or on the computer, when they try to figure it out in your absence.

Once you have compiled your all-important digital inventory, the next step is to reference this list and attach it to a power of attorney document.  This will allow your attorney-in-fact to manage your accounts in the event of your temporary absence or incapacity.

Ditto to your will; include an instructional paragraph referencing and attaching your digital inventory.

If no instructions are provided, Michigan does not yet have laws governing the posthumous management of a person's on-line "assets".  So far, only Oklahoma and Idaho have such laws, with Nebraska not far behind.  [Where is California in all this?]

Therefore, if you die "digitally intestate", what happens to your digital profile is up to the particular service provider.  For example, Facebook has long taken the position, based on its robust operating agreement that you agreed to when creating your account, that FB owns all of your posts and content.  When you die on Facebook's watch, they memorialize your account; restricting views and posts to friends and family.  Also, the account is closed if requested by your next-of-kin.

Some folks, however, do not have any next-of-kin.  What then?

Here are some options for the proactive among our readers.  Some posthumous services will send an email composed by you, or by your designated personal representative, to a designated list of contacts.  Here is a sample list of such services:
Call it another characteristic of our modern life; once we are gone, our digital profile lives on for a time.  In this fast-paced era, however, it's amazing how fast such a profile will become outdated.

Taking the right steps will allow you to manage that profile from the grave...







Saturday, March 3, 2012

Google's Privacy Policy Gets Look From Attorneys General

By now we've all been shocked by how much information the major search engines collect and store about each of us. The reach now extends into our cell phones and possibly even into our contacts.

On March 1st, Google implemented a new, single privacy policy, replacing it's patchwork of more than 50 separate policies spread across its product line and services. In the wake of Google's new privacy policy, the Attorneys General in a majority of states are calling foul.

Speaking for at least 35 state attorneys general, the National Association of Attorneys General complains that the new policy violates consumers' privacy by sharing personal information across Google's services without providing an explicit "opt in" or a meaningful "opt out" option.  NAAG sent a letter to Google's Chief Executive Officer, Larry Paige, requesting a sit down.  The NAAG letter states, in part:
Google’s new privacy policy is troubling for a number of reasons. On a fundamental level, the policy appears to invade consumer privacy by automatically sharing personal information consumers input into one Google product with all Google products. Consumers have diverse interests and concerns, and may want the information in their Web History to be kept separate from the information they exchange via Gmail. Likewise, consumers may be comfortable with Google knowing their Search queries but not with it knowing their whereabouts, yet the new privacy policy appears to give them no choice in the matter, further invading their privacy. It rings hollow to call their ability to exit the Google products ecosystem a “choice” in an Internet economy where the clear majority of all Internet users use – and frequently rely on – at least one Google product on a regular basis. 
For its part, Google claims the new policy will be easier for all to understand.  For our part, this Blog adheres to a simple basic principle: when conducting search and post activities on line, we keep in mind that we are creating a searchable and reviewable record.

Everyone seems to know the difference between posting content on sites like Google+ and YouTube and having their deepest darkest searches tracked.  In the former context, the user usually intends for the content to be discovered.  For example, we here at this blog wish our Clarkston Legal video on YouTube had more than 45 views in two years; my son thinks that's lame.

In the latter context, on the other hand, folks are sometimes embarrassed by what pops-up in the form of advertisements that the mighty and all-powerful web spider has determined to be relevant to a particular individual.  Such ads are displayed based on the aggregated content and personal information collected by the service provider.

This chapter just lets us know that privacy law is a fast-growing area of law that will take on increasing significance.  Stay tuned for the flow of developments as the lawsuits start to pile-up.

www.clarkstonlegal.com

info@clarkstonlegal.com

Categories