Don't post links from YouTube on this Website!!!!!

[TiCKleMaN87]

I did some investigating and I found this:


"A. YouTube hereby grants you permission to use the Website as set forth in this Terms of Service, provided that: (i) your use of the Website as permitted is solely for your personal, noncommercial use; (ii) you will not copy or distribute any part of the Website in any medium without YouTube's prior written authorization; (iii) you will not alter or modify any part of the Website other than as may be reasonably necessary to use the Website for its intended purpose; and (iv) you will otherwise comply with the terms and conditions of these Terms of Service."

If you notice the higlighted part, by posting links here, we are breaking the terms of use agreement and that is why the clips are being removed. Just give us an idea of what to search for on YouTube and we won't have this problem.

 

[His Divine Shadow]

Impossible. Youtube provides embedded players that allow users to share Youtube clips by placing a little Youtube player in their own website. That ToS entry most probably refers to people who take things from the site like the code that makes it up, images that are used to build its layout or scripts that make it run. If Youtube prohibited people linking to them they would not only be violating the very purpose of the internet (A web of hyperlinks, anyone?) but they would very quickly become obsolete; without people linking to Youtube on their blogs, websites, and forums, no one would visit Youtube. Most sites spread word of themselves with links to themselves from other people. They want you to link to them and view their site.

 

[cabalist]

While I personally hate youtube, for a number of reasons which I won't bother going into here, I have to agree that it would be an absurdly broad interpretation to consider a link TO a website as being a part of its "content". That would be like someone considering your giving someone their home address the equivalent of breaking and entering and stealing their belongings -- a charge I doubt would hold up anywhere.

In fact, in the overwhewlming majority of cases the removal of clips by youtube for "terms of service" violation is based, no doubt, on either the nature of the content of the clip itself (i.e., for violating their probably somewhat arbitrary standards of "decency") or for what they think might represent a copyright violation, nothing more and nothing less than one of these two.

 

[cosquillero1]

My 2 cents...

I agree with HDS, youtube remove some clips, due to their point of view about tickling clips (where the lees are women), they consider those clips as a kind of porn videos. The strange thing is about of the clips where the lees are men, those stay there, aren't removed, why ?, is something that they only know it.

 

[ticklekid1]

The strange thing is about of the clips where the lees are men, those stay there, aren't removed, why ?, is something that they only know it.

Maybe a male tickling fetishist works for youtube, one who has a vendetta against the tickling majority.

 

[brad1701]

Instead of posting YouTube links, perhaps it would be better to extract the FLVs with this site, then attach them here in zip files. I use Riva's player, myself.

 

[cosquillero1]

Maybe a male tickling fetishist works for youtube, one who has a vendetta against the tickling majority.

Yeah, i have thought that idea too, that would explain why they act in that way.

Instead of posting YouTube links, perhaps it would be better to extract the FLVs with this site, then attach them here in zip files. I use Riva's player, myself.

Well, i've done that, but the trouble is when the clip is bigger than 20 MB after transform it into another format (as wmv, mpeg, etc), otherwise that's a good choice.

 

[FalseFigment]

Maybe a male tickling fetishist works for youtube, one who has a vendetta against the tickling majority.

In the fabled words of 4chan: "moar liek teh gays!"

It's likely that YouTube won't delete male material, especially gay material, because they know that in today's "politically correct" society it would only require one greedy lawyer and a few examples of 'keeping the minorities down' before YouTube'd find itself on the backend of a Civil Rights case. Though this isn't any more likely than what was suggested prior.

Otherwise it's possible that groups like, "MyFriendsFeet" pay for spots on YouTube, guaranteeing their survival while opening the venue to a whole slew of brand new advocates. XD LIKE ME!

 

[morgandee]

you're misinterpreting the highlighted part.

 

[FalseFigment]

you're misinterpreting the highlighted part.

Misinterpreting? Nay!

Offering a slightly more likely plausibility? Aye!

This one highly doubts the possibility of some devious conspiracy to remove female tickling from YouTube; though I'm sure that entire statement was tongue-in-cheek to begin with...XD Rather than waste time 'correcting' me for something so insignificant, why not just leave it alone and move on?

 

[cabalist]

Okay,I was reluctant to say anything before for fear that they might come after me, but I suspect it's related to the government's UFO coverup. Anyway, somehow aliens are involved, probably from the planet Sunev (that's Venus spelled backward, but don't tell anyone I told you).

Nyuk nyuk nyuk....

 

[morgandee]

it is probably because of the number 23

how about not telling me what to do because i am pretty rebellious on the internet and i think we're going to have to duke it out on the internet now

 

[Betchass1]

In fact, in the overwhewlming majority of cases the removal of clips by youtube for "terms of service" violation is based, no doubt, on either the nature of the content of the clip itself (i.e., for violating their probably somewhat arbitrary standards of "decency") or for what they think might represent a copyright violation, nothing more and nothing less than one of these two.

I'm 99% certain they only remove anything when told to. They don't give a flying fuck about copyright violation unless the holder is threatening them, which generally only happens when there is some demand for the material in question. The reason you can find all the Jimi Hendrix any person could reasonably need on Youtube is not because there is justice in the world, but because there are less millions of $ to be made on him than some newer acts.

 

[Betchass1]

(ii) you will not copy or distribute any part of the Website in any medium without YouTube's prior written authorization;

Nah, they even have lists of what sites have links to any one video. I bet this site comes up on some. I suspect agreement terms like this are just for the record, in case something comes up. They fully expect people to break the terms, they just want to be able to say they told you so when they're forced to come down on someone.

 

[Nymph]

(ii) you will not copy or distribute any part of the Website in any medium without YouTube's prior written authorization

Jesus, Sherlock Holmes.. You sound like you have just solved biggest riddle on tickletheater! Please think before you submit your elegant theories next time.

Do art websites "Distribute" works of the artists when they host a picture of a painting?
Theres a reason why Youtube HANDS you the embedding link on the video page..

 

[morgandee]

nymph wins, goddamn, nymph