Uploaded May 2009 | Updated September 2026, 3 weeks ago
This is a response to the YourTubeAdvocate (known as 20) who posted a video entitled Why videos were remove.
youtube.com/watch?v=0BDVd3QOgng
My correspondence with the YouTube copyright department. This is the worst example of corporate communication that I have ever seen.
themaskedanalyst.com/Correspondence%20with%20Youtube%20Legal.htm
My account was suspended for four months due to a totally bogus DMCA. I wrote to YouTube asking them to watch the video and this would PROVE that the DMCA was bogus. Watch the video starting around 2 and 35 seconds.
youtube.com/watch?v=ogf1QcbeUlU
Does the following video by YouTube partner Charles Trippy fall within Community Guidelines?
youtube.com/watch?v=KIe4FUVBWIk
Here is what the Guidelines say:
youtube.com/t/community_guidelines
YouTube is not a shock site. Don't post gross-out videos of accidents, dead bodies or similar things intended to shock or disgust.
Here is the video by dprjones exposing VenomFangX that was removed. Exactly why was he suspended for two weeks?
youtube.com/watch?v=FG0V6pZJkVg
Here is YouTubes March 31, 2008 blog entry where they call YouTubes You Choose 08 platform the worlds largest town hall for political speech.
youtube.com/blog?entry=IRNhAzKFz_M
Here are links to the White Houses YouTube channel, as well as links to the main channels for the House and the Senate.
youtube.com/user/whitehouse
youtube.com/user/househub
youtube.com/senatehub
The following video is MUST WATCH material. You will see that members of Congress want their constituents to communicate to them through YouTube. How can you post a video response or comments to them if YouTube has suspended your account? Is this not a form of disenfranchisement?
youtube.com/watch?v=3p83pNZdmhQ
A transcript for this video can be found on my website:
themaskedanalyst.com/YourTubeAdvocate.htm
---------------------------------------------------------------
Off Topic:
Dynacatlovesme posted a comment on this video asking me to back up a claim that there is a right to speak anonymously on the internet. Below are links to two websites—the first is a link to my website where I explain this point in more detail. The second is by a copyright lawyer who happens to agree with me that there is a right to speak anonymously on the internet.
themaskedanalyst.com/The%20First%20Amendment%20Right%20to%20Anonymous%20Speech.htm
copyrightsandcampaigns.blogspot.com/2009/04/who-is-this-masked-anti-dmca-activist.html
See also the Electronic Frontier Foundations FAQ. Scroll down to the question: Do I have a right to blog anonymously?
eff.org/issues/bloggers/legal/liability/overview
This is a response to the YourTubeAdvocate (known as 20) who posted a video entitled Why videos were remove.
youtube.com/watch?v=0BDVd3QOgng
My correspondence with the YouTube copyright department. This is the worst example of corporate communication that I have ever seen.
themaskedanalyst.com/Correspondence%20with%20Youtube%20Legal.htm
My account was suspended for four months due to a totally bogus DMCA. I wrote to YouTube asking them to watch the video and this would PROVE that the DMCA was bogus. Watch the video starting around 2 and 35 seconds.
youtube.com/watch?v=ogf1QcbeUlU
Does the following video by YouTube partner Charles Trippy fall within Community Guidelines?
youtube.com/watch?v=KIe4FUVBWIk
Here is what the Guidelines say:
youtube.com/t/community_guidelines
YouTube is not a shock site. Don't post gross-out videos of accidents, dead bodies or similar things intended to shock or disgust.
Here is the video by dprjones exposing VenomFangX that was removed. Exactly why was he suspended for two weeks?
youtube.com/watch?v=FG0V6pZJkVg
Here is YouTubes March 31, 2008 blog entry where they call YouTubes You Choose 08 platform the worlds largest town hall for political speech.
youtube.com/blog?entry=IRNhAzKFz_M
Here are links to the White Houses YouTube channel, as well as links to the main channels for the House and the Senate.
youtube.com/user/whitehouse
youtube.com/user/househub
youtube.com/senatehub
The following video is MUST WATCH material. You will see that members of Congress want their constituents to communicate to them through YouTube. How can you post a video response or comments to them if YouTube has suspended your account? Is this not a form of disenfranchisement?
youtube.com/watch?v=3p83pNZdmhQ
A transcript for this video can be found on my website:
themaskedanalyst.com/YourTubeAdvocate.htm
---------------------------------------------------------------
Off Topic:
Dynacatlovesme posted a comment on this video asking me to back up a claim that there is a right to speak anonymously on the internet. Below are links to two websites—the first is a link to my website where I explain this point in more detail. The second is by a copyright lawyer who happens to agree with me that there is a right to speak anonymously on the internet.
themaskedanalyst.com/The%20First%20Amendment%20Right%20to%20Anonymous%20Speech.htm
copyrightsandcampaigns.blogspot.com/2009/04/who-is-this-masked-anti-dmca-activist.html
See also the Electronic Frontier Foundations FAQ. Scroll down to the question: Do I have a right to blog anonymously?
eff.org/issues/bloggers/legal/liability/overview










![Blunty3000, Utubedrama, and Censorship: Part 2
This video provides a detailed response to Blunty3000 and his support of the censorship of haters. The issue is not as simple as Blunty suggests, and legitimate free speech could be the inadvertent casualty of an anti-hater campaign. Such a campaign could also backfire and severely hurt Youtube.
Here is a link to Blunty3000s video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWG-zgaXH40
Bluntys blog where he discusses haters in general and Trevor Rieger in specific:
http://www.bluntmation.com/content/
Utubedramaqueens video, where Trevor describes why he thinks Youtube censored him:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEojLdCxDQo
Information about Richard Nixons enemies list:
http://www.answers.com/topic/nixon-s-enemies-list
Michelle Malkins First They Came video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jOb6Vh3qaAY
New York Times v. Sullivan—The seminal libel law case.
http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/cas/comm/free_speech/nytvsullivan.html
The original passage from NYT v. Sullivan that I bent to fit this situation:
A rule compelling the critic of official conduct to guarantee the truth of all his factual assertions and to do so on pain of libel judgments virtually unlimited in amount leads to a comparable self-censorship. Allowance of the defense of truth, with the burden of proving it on the defendant, does not mean that only false speech will be deterred. [note 19] Even courts accepting this defense as an adequate safeguard have recognized the difficulties of adducing legal proofs that the alleged libel was true in all its factual particulars. See, e.g., Post Publishing Co. v. Hallam, 59 F. 530, 540 (C.A. 6th Cir. 1893); see also Noel, Defamation of Public Officers and Candidates, 49 Col.L.Rev. 875, 892 (1949). Under such a rule, would-be critics of official conduct may be deterred from voicing their criticism, even though it is believed to be true and even though it is, in fact, true, because of doubt whether it can be proved in court or fear of the expense of having to do so. They tend to make only statements which steer far wider of the unlawful zone. Speiser v. Randall, supra, 357 U.S. at 526. The rule thus dampens the vigor and limits the variety of public debate. It is inconsistent with the First and Fourteenth Amendments.
My video discussing the Nick Gisburne affair. Nick was originally told by Youtube that he was being censored for inappropriate content. Youtube later told him that he was being banned forever because of copyright infringement.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=By6aqz_79Uc
Youtubes bungling of the Gisburne affair earned it some really bad press. Watch Michelle Malkins video and pay close attention to the comments underneath it.
http://hotair.com/archives/2007/02/21/banned-by-youtube-iii/
This video by Ron, the Washington, D.C. copyright lawyer, discusses the Tur v. Youtube lawsuit. It is absolutely essential to watch this video for people to understand why Youtube should be careful not to get a reputation for censorship.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rr9SQ4qkMMk
Update: Trevors Utubedramaqueen account has been banished and he is now posting as Utubedramaking.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUUEczUFCsg Blunty3000, Utubedrama, and Censorship: Part 2](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/bjcsNRpa4jY/mqdefault.jpg)