MediExcalibur2012
kiwifarms.net
The following may not be an actual update upon Chris himself; yet thinking of a possible outcome to the YouTube channel that archives his videos, and Chris's personal views on "taking it off the internet NOW NOW NOW NOW NOW" from videos that he personally doesn't wish to keep online, theirs one thing that seems to slip my mind in the terms of him.
Why doesn't he attempt to flag them down (in the terms of the videos upon his accounts that he has access to and can remember the password to)?
Youtube being Jewtube; they have this main thing that is very noticable within the videos that exist and the ones that get taken down. Videos based upon the "community strikes" mainly being related to porn, violence, bullying, etc; they wont give two fucks about it but when a strike is being in place about "copyright", they will be doing backflips in getting that video taken down. In most cases, these Copyright strike flaggings (if successful) can take a video down in under 12hrs; no matter if the account and/or video is partnered with ads or not. Youtube accounts will always have the 3 strike penalty put upon them so if 3 videos get taken down at once, that will taken in terms in being 3 copyright strikes; resulting in the termination of the Youtube account itself.
With the current videos that exist upon his accounts and the ones that exist on the archiving account AND his knowledge that the account exists with his own playlist with videos that he wants to be online to the video that he wants to be removed.
Then why dosent he just attempt in flagging the videos he has that the archiving account/s have?
Consider the following
Chris wants them videos taken down; but his channels containing the original videos are gone meaning that the archiving account (or any ones other account that has reuploaded the video first) now gains the rights in having the "rights" to the video as its "original owner". The same YouTube page has got his recent new videos on the account as well.
So, if Chris went smart about this; he could've by now flag all the videos and within that same day (or till tomorrow) the account would be taken down from "multiple copyright" strikes; resulting in all the videos to be taken down, the copyright ownership to be reestablished and for any video that hasn't been saved to be lost.
Even know the people behind the youtube account does have his videos archived (godbear knows where); this should be something to be considered if Chris and any of his white knights start establishing this idea to him. Its quite sad to see that he hasnt tried of this idea at all to avoid the videos being taken down.
Eh, thats autism for you
Why doesn't he attempt to flag them down (in the terms of the videos upon his accounts that he has access to and can remember the password to)?
Youtube being Jewtube; they have this main thing that is very noticable within the videos that exist and the ones that get taken down. Videos based upon the "community strikes" mainly being related to porn, violence, bullying, etc; they wont give two fucks about it but when a strike is being in place about "copyright", they will be doing backflips in getting that video taken down. In most cases, these Copyright strike flaggings (if successful) can take a video down in under 12hrs; no matter if the account and/or video is partnered with ads or not. Youtube accounts will always have the 3 strike penalty put upon them so if 3 videos get taken down at once, that will taken in terms in being 3 copyright strikes; resulting in the termination of the Youtube account itself.
With the current videos that exist upon his accounts and the ones that exist on the archiving account AND his knowledge that the account exists with his own playlist with videos that he wants to be online to the video that he wants to be removed.
Consider the following
Chris wants them videos taken down; but his channels containing the original videos are gone meaning that the archiving account (or any ones other account that has reuploaded the video first) now gains the rights in having the "rights" to the video as its "original owner". The same YouTube page has got his recent new videos on the account as well.
So, if Chris went smart about this; he could've by now flag all the videos and within that same day (or till tomorrow) the account would be taken down from "multiple copyright" strikes; resulting in all the videos to be taken down, the copyright ownership to be reestablished and for any video that hasn't been saved to be lost.
Even know the people behind the youtube account does have his videos archived (godbear knows where); this should be something to be considered if Chris and any of his white knights start establishing this idea to him. Its quite sad to see that he hasnt tried of this idea at all to avoid the videos being taken down.
Eh, thats autism for you
