Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

CannaPLUS t1_iyez3ou wrote

If they don't do anything to break their terms and conditions there is nothing they can really do

9

WeDriftEternal t1_iyeztxw wrote

Terms and conditions here are meaningless. Its just self-imposed rules, as the owner of the platform, they can take any action they choose for any reason, there is no legal reason they cannot do this. They are specifically choosing not to.

5

A_Garbage_Truck t1_iyfejpi wrote

if they go this route then they are openly admitting that their platform is not a neutral playing field for free speech.

no social media platform wants to have that fame(at least ones that want ot last and not get boycotted).

as said above as long as these channels arent breaking youtube ToS, there is no reason to crack down on them.

−1

Skatingraccoon t1_iyezkh9 wrote

Google (well, Alphabet) owns YouTube. They have 100% control over what is allowed to be uploaded and what is removed, because it is on their servers. So they can remove whatever they want. But if the content is not violating the rules they have no reason to remove it.

5

UncontrolableUrge t1_iyf2mbl wrote

Anonymous is a loose movement of people with similar ideals. Anyone can start a channel as Anonymous. So even if you have evidence of an illegal act there is no reason to believe that the people posting videos have ever communicated with a group that is linked to a crime.

4

frustrated_staff t1_iyf5bgp wrote

Google (and Alphabet by extension) can shut down their channel. That's easy enough.

As far as having them arrested, well...that's complicated. YouTube hosts servers all over the world, and not everywhere in the world has the same laws, so while Anonymous might be breaking the Las in Iran, for example, if the original poster is in South Africa, they have no agency to perform the arrest. Of course, Google doesn't have arrest power to begin with, but they couldn't even coordinate with local law enforcement. You can't be arrested for something that isn't a crime.

Next comes tracking. After all, you can't arrest someone you can't find, right? But here's the thing. "Channels" belong to individuals. Anonymous is an organization. And its an extremely dispersed organization, at that. More like a social club in terms of hierarchical organization. So, at best, each "track" leads back to one person. Shut down the channel first and you don't even have that. Then, you have to consider VPNs. If the uploaded is using one, they aren't really trackable at all (AFAIK). And given the hacker nature of the group itself, they're probably using custom-built VPNs, so the VPN provider can't help there, either. Then there's masking (assuming you can through the VPN): masking is another way to disguise your location.

And finally, because Anonymous is a group, not an individual, if you reallybwanted to het them all, the whole tracking and coordination aspects would have to be done in complete secrecy right up until the moment doors get kicked in. Assuming 1000 members in 20 countries (a conservative estimate if ever there was one), there's no way to successfully coordinate that and keep it secret. It's just not logistically or politically feasible.

And, in the end, the ultimate question: Why would they even want to try?

4

WeDriftEternal t1_iyezp84 wrote

They could shut them down if they wanted. They own YouTube. They can do anything they want. There is no barrier for them to act in any manner they choose. They can and do take channels down and need not provide any reason.

Who said they are NOT tracking them? Who said authorities do not know who they are and that google and others are working with them? I don't think we know that so can't make any assumptions.

0