|
On June 19, 2007, Google CEO Eric Schmidt was in Paris to launch the new localization system.[115] The interface of the website is available with localized versions in 74 countries, one territory (Hong Kong) and a worldwide version.[116] Country Language Launch date USA (and worldwide launch) English February 15, 2005[115] Brazil Portuguese June 19, 2007[115] France French and Basque June 19, 2007[115] Ireland English June 19, 2007[115] Italy Italian June 19, 2007[115] Japan Japanese June 19, 2007[115] Netherlands Dutch June 19, 2007[115] Poland Polish June 19, 2007[115] Spain Spanish, Galician, Catalan and Basque June 19, 2007[115] United Kingdom English June 19, 2007[115] Mexico Spanish October 11, 2007[117] Hong Kong English and Chinese October 17, 2007[118] Taiwan Chinese October 18, 2007[119] Australia English October 22, 2007[120] New Zealand English October 22, 2007[120] Canada English and French November 6, 2007[121] Germany German November 8, 2007[122] Russia Russian November 13, 2007[123] South Korea Korean January 23, 2008[124] India English, Bengali, Gujarati, Hindi, Kannada, Malayalam, Marathi, Tamil, Telugu and Urdu May 7, 2008[125] Israel Hebrew and English September 16, 2008 Czech Republic Czech October 9, 2008[126] Sweden Swedish October 22, 2008[127] South Africa English and Afrikaans May 17, 2010[115] Argentina Spanish September 8, 2010[128] Algeria Arabic and French March 9, 2011[129] Egypt Arabic March 9, 2011[129] Jordan Arabic March 9, 2011[129] Morocco Arabic and French March 9, 2011[129] Saudi Arabia Arabic March 9, 2011[129] Tunisia Arabic and French March 9, 2011[129] Yemen Arabic March 9, 2011[129] Kenya English and Swahili September 1, 2011[130] Philippines English and Filipino October 13, 2011[131] Singapore English October 20, 2011[132] Belgium Dutch and French November 16, 2011[115] Colombia Spanish November 30, 2011[133] Uganda English December 2, 2011[134] Nigeria English December 7, 2011[135] Chile Spanish January 20, 2012[136] Hungary Hungarian February 29, 2012[137] Malaysia English and Malay March 22, 2012[138] Peru Spanish March 25, 2012[139] United Arab Emirates Arabic and English April 1, 2012[140] Greece Greek May 1, 2012 Indonesia English and Indonesian June 14, 2012[141] Ghana English June 21, 2012[142] Senegal English and French July 12, 2012[143] ^ [3] itag 120 is for live streaming and has metadata referring to "Elemental Technologies Live".ly 16, 2012. Retrieved July 25, 2012. Turkey Turkish October 1, 2012[144] Ukraine Ukrainian December 13, 2012[145] Denmark Danish February 7, 2013[146] Finland Finnish February 7, 2013[147] Norway Norwegian February 7, 2013[148] Switzerland German, French and Italian April 9, 2013[149] Austria German April 11, 2013[150] Romania Romanian April 25, 2013[151] Portugal Portuguese May 7, 2013[152] Slovakia Slovak May 21, 2013[153] Bahrain Arabic September 16, 2013[154] Kuwait Arabic September 16, 2013[154] Oman Arabic September 16, 2013[154] Qatar Arabic September 16, 2013[154] Bosnia and Herzegovina Croatian and Serbian March 18, 2014 Bulgaria Bulgarian March 18, 2014[155] Croatia Croatian March 18, 2014[156] Estonia Estonian March 18, 2014[157] Latvia Latvian March 18, 2014[158] Lithuania Lithuanian March 18, 2014 Macedonia Serbian and Turkish March 18, 2014 Montenegro Croatian and Serbian March 18, 2014 Serbia Serbian March 18, 2014 Slovenia Slovenian March 18, 2014[159] Thailand Thai April 1, 2014[160] Lebanon Arabic May 9, 2014 Puerto Rico Spanish and English August 29, 2014 Vietnam Vietnamese October 12, 2014 The YouTube interface suggests which local version should be chosen on the basis of the IP address of the user. In some cases, the message "This video is not available in your country" may appear because of copyright restrictions or inappropriate content.[161] The interface of the YouTube website is available in 61 language versions, including Amharic, Bengali, Persian and Urdu, which do not have local channel versions.[3] Access to YouTube was blocked in Turkey between 2008 and 2010, following controversy over the posting of videos deemed insulting to Mustafa Kemal Atatürk and some material offensive to Muslims.[162][163] In October 2012, a local version of YouTube was launched in Turkey, with the domain youtube.com.tr. The local version is subject to the content regulations found in Turkish law.[164] In March 2009, a dispute between YouTube and the British royalty collection agency PRS for Music led to premium music videos being blocked for YouTube users in the United Kingdom. The removal of videos posted by the major record companies occurred after failure to reach agreement on a licensing deal. The dispute was resolved in September 2009.[165] In April 2009, a similar dispute led to the removal of premium music videos for users in Germany.[166] Music Key Main article: Music Key On November 12, 2014, YouTube announced the launch of Music Key, a subscription music streaming service, providing advertising-free playback of official music videos hosted by YouTube, along with background and offline playback on mobile platforms. Music Key is intended to integrate with and replace the existing Google Play Music "All Access" service.[167][168][169] April Fools YouTube has featured an April Fools prank on the site on April 1 of every year since 2008: 2008: All the links to the videos on the main page were redirected to Rick Astley's music video "Never Gonna Give You Up", a prank known as "Rickrolling".[170][171] 2009: When clicking on a video on the main page, the whole page turned upside down. YouTube claimed that this was a new layout.[172] 2010: YouTube temporarily released a "TEXTp" mode, which translated the colors in the videos to random upper case letters. YouTube claimed in a message that this was done in order to reduce bandwidth costs by $1 per second.[173] 2011: The site celebrated its "100th anniversary" with a "1911 button" and a range of sepia-toned silent, early 1900s-style films, including "Flugelhorn Feline", a parody of Keyboard Cat.[174] 2012: Clicking on the image of a DVD next to the site logo led to a video about "The YouTube Collection", an option to order every YouTube video for home delivery on DVD, videocassette, Laserdisc, or Betamax tapes. The spoof promotional video touted "the complete YouTube experience completely offline."[175] 2013: YouTube teamed up with newspaper satire company The Onion to claim that the video sharing website was launched as a contest which had finally come to an end, and would announce a winner of the contest when the site went back up in 2023. A video of two presenters announcing the nominees streamed live for twelve hours.[176] 2014: YouTube announced that it was responsible for the creation of all viral video trends, and revealed previews of upcoming memes, such as "Clocking", "Kissing Dad", and "Glub Glub Water Dance".[177] Social impact Main article: Social impact of YouTube Both private individuals[178] and large production companies[179] have used YouTube to grow audiences. Independent content creators have built grassroots followings numbering in the thousands at very little cost or effort, while mass retail and radio promotion proved problematic.[178] Concurrently, old media celebrities moved into the website at the invitation of a YouTube management that witnessed early content creators accruing substantial followings, and perceived audience sizes potentially larger than that attainable by television.[179] While YouTube's revenue-sharing "Partner Program" made it possible to earn a substantial living as a video producer—its top five hundred partners each earning more than $100,000 annually[180]—in 2012 CMU business editor characterized YouTube as "a free-to-use... promotional platform for the music labels".[181] In 2013 Forbes' Katheryn Thayer asserted that digital-era artists' work must not only be of high quality, but must elicit reactions on the YouTube platform and social media.[182] In 2013, videos of the 2.5% of artists categorized as "mega", "mainstream" and "mid-sized" received 90.3% of the relevant views on YouTube and Vevo.[183] By early 2013 Billboard had announced that it was factoring YouTube streaming data into calculation of the Billboard Hot 100 and related genre charts.[184] Observing that face-to-face communication of the type that online videos convey has been "fine-tuned by millions of years of evolution", TED curator Chris Anderson referred to several YouTube contributors and asserted that "what Gutenberg did for writing, online video can now do for face-to-face communication".[185] Anderson asserted that it's not far-fetched to say that online video will dramatically accelerate scientific advance, and that video contributors may be about to launch "the biggest learning cycle in human history."[185] In education, for example, the Khan Academy grew from YouTube video tutoring sessions for founder Salman Khan's cousin into what Forbes' Michael Noer called "the largest school in the world", with technology poised to disrupt how people learn.[186] YouTube was awarded a 2008 George Foster Peabody Award, the website being described as a Speakers' Corner that "both embodies and promotes democracy."[187] The Washington Post reported that a disproportionate share of YouTube’s most subscribed channels feature minorities, contrasting with mainstream television in which the stars are largely white.[188] A Pew Research Center study reported the development of "visual journalism", in which citizen eyewitnesses and established news organizations share in content creation.[189] The study also concluded that YouTube was becoming an important platform by which people acquire news.[190] YouTube has enabled people to more directly engage with government, such as in the CNN/YouTube presidential debates (2007) in which ordinary people submitted questions to U.S. presidential candidates via YouTube video, with a techPresident co-founder saying that Internet video was changing the political landscape.[191] Describing the Arab Spring (2010- ), sociologist Philip N. Howard quoted an activist's succinct description that organizing the political unrest involved using "Facebook to schedule the protests, Twitter to coordinate, and YouTube to tell the world.”[192] In 2012, more than a third of the U.S. Senate introduced a resolution condemning Joseph Kony 16 days after the "Kony 2012" video was posted to YouTube, with resolution co-sponsor Senator Lindsey Graham remarking that the video "will do more to lead to (Kony's) demise than all other action combined."[193] Leading YouTube content creators met at the White House with U.S. President Obama to discuss how government could better connect with the "YouTube generation".[194][195] Conversely, YouTube has also allowed government to more easily engage with citizens, the White House's official YouTube channel being the seventh top news organization producer on YouTube in 2012[196] and in 2013 a healthcare exchange commissioned Obama impersonator Iman Crosson's YouTube music video spoof to encourage young Americans to enroll in the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare)-compliant health insurance.[197] In February 2014, U.S. President Obama held a meeting at the White House with leading YouTube content creators to not only promote awareness of Obamacare[198] but more generally to develop ways for government to better connect with the "YouTube Generation".[194] Whereas YouTube's inherent ability to allow presidents to directly connect with average citizens was noted, the YouTube content creators' new media savvy was perceived necessary to better cope with the website's distracting content and fickle audience.[194] Some YouTube videos have themselves had a direct effect on world events, such as Innocence of Muslims (2012) which spurred protests and related anti-American violence internationally.[199] TED curator Chris Anderson described a phenomenon by which geographically distributed individuals in a certain field share their independently developed skills in YouTube videos, thus challenging others to improve their own skills, and spurring invention and evolution in that field.[185] Journalist Virginia Heffernan asserted in The New York Times that such videos have "surprising implications" for the dissemination of culture and even the future of classical music.[200] The Legion of Extraordinary Dancers[201] and the YouTube Symphony Orchestra[202] selected their membership based on individual video performances.[185][202] Further, the cybercollaboration charity video "We Are the World 25 for Haiti (YouTube edition)" was formed by mixing performances of 57 globally distributed singers into a single musical work,[203] with The Tokyo Times noting the "We Pray for You" YouTube cyber-collaboration video as an example of a trend to use crowdsourcing for charitable purposes.[204] The anti-bullying It Gets Better Project expanded from a single YouTube video directed to discouraged or suicidal LGBT teens,[205] that within two months drew video responses from hundreds including U.S. President Barack Obama, Vice President Biden, White House staff, and several cabinet secretaries.[206] Similarly, in response to fifteen year old Amanda Todd's video "My story: Struggling, bullying, suicide, self harm", legislative action was undertaken almost immediately after her suicide to study the prevalence of bullying and form a national anti-bullying strategy.[207] Revenue sources The vast majority of videos on YouTube are free to view and supported by advertising.[49] In May 2007, YouTube launched its Partner Program, a system based on AdSense which allows the uploader of the video to share the revenue produced by advertising on the site.[208] YouTube typically takes 45 percent of the advertising revenue from videos in the Partner Program, with 55 percent going to the uploader.[209] There are over a million members of the YouTube Partner Program.[210] According to TubeMogul, in 2013 a pre-roll advertisement on YouTube (one that is shown before the video starts) cost advertisers on average $7.60 per 1000 views. Usually no more than half of eligible videos have a pre-roll advertisement, due to a lack of interested advertisers.[211] Assuming pre-roll advertisements on half of videos, a YouTube partner would earn 0.5 X $7.60 X 55% = $2.09 per 1000 views in 2013.[211] In May 2013, YouTube introduced a trial scheme of 53 subscription channels with prices ranging from $0.99 to $6.99 a month.[212] The move was seen as an attempt to compete with other providers of online subscription services such as Netflix and Hulu.[49] Community policy YouTube has a set of community guidelines aimed to reduce abuse of the site's features. Generally prohibited material includes sexually explicit content, videos of animal abuse, shock videos, content uploaded without the copyright holder's consent, hate speech, spam, and predatory behaviour.[213] Despite the guidelines, YouTube has faced criticism from news sources for content in violation of these guidelines. Copyrighted material At the time of uploading a video, YouTube users are shown a message asking them not to violate copyright laws.[214] Despite this advice, there are still many unauthorized clips of copyrighted material on YouTube. YouTube does not view videos before they are posted online, and it is left to copyright holders to issue a DMCA takedown notice pursuant to the terms of the Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act. Three successful complaints for copyright infringement against a user account will result in the account and all of its uploaded videos being deleted.[215][216] Organizations including Viacom, Mediaset, and the English Premier League have filed lawsuits against YouTube, claiming that it has done too little to prevent the uploading of copyrighted material.[217][218][219] Viacom, demanding $1 billion in damages, said that it had found more than 150,000 unauthorized clips of its material on YouTube that had been viewed "an astounding 1.5 billion times". YouTube responded by stating that it "goes far beyond its legal obligations in assisting content owners to protect their works".[220] During the same court battle, Viacom won a court ruling requiring YouTube to hand over 12 terabytes of data detailing the viewing habits of every user who has watched videos on the site. The decision was criticized by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which called the court ruling "a setback to privacy rights".[221][222] In June 2010, Viacom's lawsuit against Google was rejected in a summary judgment, with U.S. federal Judge Louis L. Stanton stating that Google was protected by provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Viacom announced its intention to appeal the ruling.[223] On April 5, 2012, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reinstated the case, allowing Viacom's lawsuit against Google to be heard in court again.[224] On March 18, 2014, the lawsuit was settled after seven years with an undisclosed agreement.[225] In August 2008, a US court ruled in Lenz v. Universal Music Corp. that copyright holders cannot order the removal of an online file without first determining whether the posting reflected fair use of the material. The case involved Stephanie Lenz from Gallitzin, Pennsylvania, who had made a home video of her 13-month-old son dancing to Prince's song "Let's Go Crazy", and posted the 29-second video on YouTube.[226] In the case of Smith v. Summit Entertainment LLC, professional singer Matt Smith sued Summit Entertainment for the wrongful use of copyright takedown notices on YouTube.[227] He asserted seven causes of action, and four were ruled in Smith's favor.[228] In April 2012, a court in Hamburg ruled that YouTube could be held responsible for copyrighted material posted by its users. The performance rights organization GEMA argued that YouTube had not done enough to prevent the uploading of German copyrighted music. YouTube responded by stating: “ We remain committed to finding a solution to the music licensing issue in Germany that will benefit artists, composers, authors, publishers and record labels, as well as the wider YouTube community.[229] ” As of 2013, YouTube and GEMA have still not reached a licensing agreement. As a result, most videos containing copyrighted music have been blocked in Germany since 2009. In April 2013, it was reported that Universal Music Group and YouTube have a contractual agreement that prevents content blocked on YouTube by a request from UMG from being restored, even if the uploader of the video files a DMCA counter-notice. When a dispute occurs, the uploader of the video has to contact UMG.[230][231] Content ID In June 2007, YouTube began trials of a system for automatic detection of uploaded videos that infringe copyright. The system was regarded by Google CEO Eric Schmidt as necessary for resolving lawsuits such as the one from Viacom, which alleged that YouTube profited from pirated content.[232] The system, which became known as Content ID, creates an ID File for copyrighted audio and video material, and stores it in a database. When a video is uploaded, it is checked against the database, and flags the video as a copyright violation if a match is found.[233] When this occurs, the content owner has the choice of blocking the video to make it unviewable, tracking the viewing statistics of the video, or adding advertisements to the video. YouTube describes Content ID as "very accurate in finding uploads that look similar to reference files that are of sufficient length and quality to generate an effective ID File".[233] Content ID accounts for over a third of the monetized views on YouTube.[234] An independent test in 2009 uploaded multiple versions of the same song to YouTube, and concluded that while the system was "surprisingly resilient" in finding copyright violations in the audio tracks of videos, it was not infallible.[235] The use of Content ID to remove material automatically has led to controversy in some cases, as the videos have not been checked by a human for fair use.[236] If a YouTube user disagrees with a decision by Content ID, it is possible to fill in a form disputing the decision.[237] YouTube has cited the effectiveness of Content ID as one of the reasons why the site's rules were modified in December 2010 to allow some users to upload videos of unlimited length.[238] Controversial content Main articles: Criticism of Google § YouTube and Censorship by Google § YouTube YouTube has also faced criticism over the offensive content in some of its videos. The uploading of videos containing defamation, pornography, and material encouraging criminal conduct is prohibited by YouTube's terms of service.[213] Controversial content has included that pertaining to Holocaust denial and the Hillsborough disaster, in which 96 football fans from Liverpool were crushed to death in 1989.[239][240] YouTube relies on its users to flag the content of videos as inappropriate, and a YouTube employee will view a flagged video to determine whether it violates the site's terms of service.[213] In July 2008, the Culture and Media Committee of the House of Commons of the United Kingdom stated that it was "unimpressed" with YouTube's system for policing its videos, and argued that "proactive review of content should be standard practice for sites hosting user-generated content". YouTube responded by stating: “ We have strict rules on what's allowed, and a system that enables anyone who sees inappropriate content to report it to our 24/7 review team and have it dealt with promptly. We educate our community on the rules and include a direct link from every YouTube page to make this process as easy as possible for our users. Given the volume of content uploaded on our site, we think this is by far the most effective way to make sure that the tiny minority of videos that break the rules come down quickly.[241] (July 2008) ” In October 2010, U.S. Congressman Anthony Weiner urged YouTube to remove from its website videos of imam Anwar al-Awlaki, saying that by hosting al-Awlaki's messages, "We are facilitating the recruitment of homegrown terror".[242] British security minister Pauline Neville-Jones commented: "These Web sites would categorically not be allowed in the U.K. They incite cold-blooded murder, and as such are surely contrary to the public good." YouTube pulled some of the videos in November 2010, stating they violated the site's guidelines prohibiting "dangerous or illegal activities such as bomb-making, hate speech and incitement to commit violent acts", or came from accounts "registered by a member of a designated foreign terrorist organization".[243] In December 2010, YouTube added "promotes terrorism" to the list of reasons that users can give when flagging a video as inappropriate.[244] User comments See also: Criticism of Google § YouTube user comments Most videos enable users to leave comments, and these have attracted attention for the negative aspects of both their form and content. In 2006, Time praised Web 2.0 for enabling "community and collaboration on a scale never seen before", and added that YouTube "harnesses the stupidity of crowds as well as its wisdom. Some of the comments on YouTube make you weep for the future of humanity just for the spelling alone, never mind the obscenity and the naked hatred".[245] The Guardian in 2009 described users' comments on YouTube as: “ Juvenile, aggressive, misspelled, sexist, homophobic, swinging from raging at the contents of a video to providing a pointlessly detailed description followed by a LOL, YouTube comments are a hotbed of infantile debate and unashamed ignorance – with the occasional burst of wit shining through.[246] ” In September 2008, The Daily Telegraph commented that YouTube was "notorious" for "some of the most confrontational and ill-formed comment exchanges on the internet", and reported on YouTube Comment Snob, "a new piece of software that blocks rude and illiterate posts".[247] The Huffington Post noted in April 2012 that finding comments on YouTube that appear "offensive, stupid and crass" to the "vast majority" of the people is hardly difficult.[248] On November 6, 2013, Google implemented a new comment system that requires all YouTube users to use a Google+ account in order to comment on videos and making the comment system Google+ oriented. The changes are in large part an attempt to address the frequent criticisms of the quality and tone of YouTube comments. They give creators more power to moderate and block comments, and add new sorting mechanisms to ensure better, more relevant discussions appear at the top.[249] The new system restored the ability to include URLs in comments, which had previously been removed due to problems with abuse.[250][251] YouTube co-founder Jawed Karim posted the question, "why the fuck do I need a google+ account to comment on a video?" on his YouTube channel to express his negative opinion of the change.[252] The official YouTube announcement[253] received 20,097 “thumbs down” votes and generated more than 32,000 comments in two days.[254] Writing in the Newsday blog Silicon Island, Chase Melvin noted that "Google+ is nowhere near as popular a social media network as Facebook, but it’s essentially being forced upon millions of YouTube users who don’t want to lose their ability to comment on videos" and "Discussion forums across the Internet are already bursting with outcry against the new comment system". In the same article Melvin goes on to say:[255] “ Perhaps user complaints are justified, but the idea of revamping the old system isn’t so bad. Think of the crude, misogynistic and racially-charged mudslinging that has transpired over the last eight years on YouTube without any discernible moderation. Isn’t any attempt to curb unidentified libelers worth a shot? The system is far from perfect, but Google should be lauded for trying to alleviate some of the damage caused by irate YouTubers hiding behind animosity and anonymity. ” View counts In December 2012, two billion views were removed from the view counts of Universal and Sony music videos on YouTube, prompting a claim by The Daily Dot that the views had been deleted due to a violation of the site's terms of service, which ban the use of automated processes to inflate view counts. This was disputed by Billboard, which said that the two billion views had been moved to Vevo, since the videos were no longer active on YouTube.[256][257] Censorship and filtering Main article: Censorship of YouTube As of September 2012, countries with standing national bans on YouTube include China, Iran, Pakistan, and Turkmenistan. YouTube is blocked for a variety of reasons, including:[258] limiting public exposure to content that may ignite social or political unrest; preventing criticism of a ruler, government, government officials, religion, or religious leaders; violations of national laws, including: copyright and intellectual property protection laws; violations of hate speech, ethics, or morality-based laws; and national security legislation. preventing access to videos judged to be inappropriate for youth; reducing distractions at work or school; and reducing the amount of network bandwidth used. In some countries, YouTube is completely blocked, either through a long term standing ban or for more limited periods of time such as during periods of unrest, the run-up to an election, or in response to upcoming political anniversaries. In other countries access to the website as a whole remains open, but access to specific videos is blocked. In cases where the entire site is banned due to one particular video, YouTube will often agree to remove or limit access to that video in order to restore service.[258] Businesses, schools, government agencies, and other private institutions often block social media sites, including YouTube, due to bandwidth limitations and the site’s inevitable potential for distraction.[258] Several countries have blocked access to YouTube: Iran temporarily blocked access on December 3, 2006, to YouTube and several other sites, after declaring them as violating social and moral codes of conduct. The YouTube block came after a video was posted online that appeared to show an Iranian soap opera star having sex.[259] The block was later lifted and then reinstated after Iran's 2009 presidential election.[260] In 2012, Iran reblocked access, along with access to Google, after the controversial film Innocence of Muslims' trailer was released on YouTube.[261] Thailand blocked access between 2006 and 2007 due to offensive videos relating to King Bhumibol Adulyadej.[262][263] Some Australian state education departments block YouTube citing an inability to determine what sort of video material might be accessed.[264] China blocked access from October 15, 2007 to March 22, 2008 and again starting on March 24, 2009. Access remains blocked.[265][266][267][268] Morocco blocked access in May 2007, possibly as a result of videos critical of Morocco's actions in Western Sahara.[269] YouTube became accessible again on May 30, 2007, after Maroc Telecom unofficially announced that the denied access to the website was a mere "technical glitch".[270] Turkey blocked access between 2008 and 2010 after controversy over videos deemed insulting to Mustafa Kemal Atatürk.[271][272][273] In November 2010, a video of the Turkish politician Deniz Baykal caused the site to be blocked again briefly, and the site was threatened with a new shutdown if it did not remove the video.[274] During the two and a half year block of YouTube, the video-sharing website remained the eighth most-accessed site in Turkey.[275][276] In 2014, Turkey blocked the access for the second time, after "a high-level intelligence leak."[277][278][279] Pakistan blocked access on February 23, 2008, because of "offensive material" towards the Islamic faith, including display of the Danish cartoons of the prophet Muhammad.[280] This led to a near global blackout of the YouTube site for around two hours, as the Pakistani block was inadvertently transferred to other countries. On February 26, 2008, the ban was lifted after the website had removed the objectionable content from its servers at the request of the government.[281][282] Many Pakistanis circumvented the three-day block by using virtual private network software.[283] In May 2010, following the Everybody Draw Mohammed Day, Pakistan again blocked access to YouTube, citing "growing sacrilegious content".[284] The ban was lifted on May 27, 2010, after the website removed the objectionable content from its servers at the request of the government. However, individual videos deemed offensive to Muslims posted on YouTube will continue to be blocked.[285][286] Pakistan again placed a ban on YouTube in September 2012, after the site refused to remove the film Innocence of Muslims, with the ban still in operation as of September 2013.[287] Turkmenistan blocked access on December 25, 2009, for unknown reasons. Other websites, such as LiveJournal were also blocked.[288] Libya blocked access on January 24, 2010 because of videos that featured demonstrations in the city of Benghazi by families of detainees who were killed in Abu Salim prison in 1996, and videos of family members of Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi at parties. The blocking was criticized by Human Rights Watch.[289] In November 2011, after the Libyan Civil War, YouTube was once again allowed in Libya.[290] Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Russia, and Sudan blocked access in September 2012 following controversy over a 14 minute trailer for the film Innocence of Muslims which had been posted on the site.[291][292][293][294][295][296] In Libya and Egypt, the Innocence of Muslims trailer was blamed for violent protests in September 2012. YouTube stated that "This video – which is widely available on the Web – is clearly within our guidelines and so will stay on YouTube. However, given the very difficult situation in Libya and Egypt we have temporarily restricted access in both countries."[297][298] Music Key licensing In May 2014, prior to the launch of YouTube's subscription-based Music Key service, the independent music trade organization Worldwide Independent Network alleged that YouTube was using non-negotiable contracts with independent labels that were "undervalued" in comparison to other streaming services, and that YouTube would block all music content from labels who do not reach a deal to be included on the paid service. In a statement to the Financial Times in June 2014, Robert Kyncl confirmed that YouTube would block the content of labels who do not negotiate deals to be included in the paid service "to ensure that all content on the platform is governed by its new contractual terms." Stating that 90% of labels had reached deals, he went on to say that "while we wish that we had [a] 100% success rate, we understand that is not likely an achievable goal and therefore it is our responsibility to our users and the industry to launch the enhanced music experience."[299][300][301][302] The Financial Times later reported that YouTube had reached an aggregate deal with Merlin Network—a trade group representing over 20,000 independent labels, for their inclusion in the service. However, YouTube itself has not confirmed the deal.[169] |
About us|Jobs|Help|Disclaimer|Advertising services|Contact us|Sign in|Website map|Search|
GMT+8, 2015-9-11 20:35 , Processed in 0.156666 second(s), 16 queries .
