I used to, but only showing their hands, in low res, and bits of their voices. When COPPA nonsense happened a few weeks ago, I began deleting anything like that off YT. I ended up re-uploading 5 of them to my new Bitchute account, because they're part of the historical record at this point. I just don't want them on YT because of the COPPA bullshit in play right now. I hate self-censoring but I have to avoid $42k fines and complete channel deletion, if possible. I have 640 other videos, some of them important, which I'm trying to not lose.
Anyway, @MediKatie and I just had a baby of our own, and we've decided to keep him offline for now. He's not even in any smart devices, or connected PCs. Just physical photos and offline digital images in storage.
It's really hard to know what to do about this stuff. We're in uncharted territory, and the future looks.... interesting. Living in fear aint the way to go, but caution does seem to be warranted, so it's about finding a compromise I guess.
Some lawyers say the fines are to YouTube itself or to Google or to Alphabet because, in the fine print, it is directed to the administrators of YouTube. The users are not administrators because they don't have all the options that admins have. But regardless, COPPA is a big mess.
Value in Privacy
I agree that it is generally safer to keep kids private. And maybe let them choose to publish their video in twenty years from now or to publish some of them when they are off in college or whatever. Yeah, it is uncharted for sure, for all of us.
Kids Encourages Kids
Now, it is possible for some kids to be able to encourage and inspire other kids via videos, etc, online. But it is similar to being like a child actor. Like, being in the public limelight may come with a price.
Fame to Influence Others
People can perhaps use their fame to influence people. But that is risky of course. And possibly rewarding. It may depend to some extent on the kid as different kids are different and some kids do things that are pretty public at a young age.
Kids in Gymnastics
Like if you had a kid perform in gymnastics at the age of 8 for example, the public performance might be uploaded to the Internet. So, if the parents don't publish the performance, others in the audience might.
If It is Already Public
Because it was done in the public. I would say it would benefit the family if they were to publish it as opposed to just letting some random person publish it.
What Happens in Vegas Stays in Vegas
But then, the home videos can remain offline.
Star Wars
It is similar to how Star Wars started publishing movie trailers to YouTube. Otherwise, random YouTubers upload the trailers and get all views. So, around like 2014, Star Wars started doing that on their official channel on YouTube. In doing that, they would get the most amount of views for those trailers. Otherwise, random channels get all the free publicity. So, in other words, parents could choose to publish whatever that is already public. If your children do things in the public, then you might as well publish that. Anything done privately could remain private for the moment if you want.
It Depends I Guess
Again, it depends on the kid, the family, where you might live, whether or not it is safe or not to do this or to do that, etc.
One thing I've seen for certain is the FTC promising to go after content-creators and channel-owners directly, with both fines and lawsuits. They were asked specifically, because as you say, people are confused. The answer is, 100% for sure, they will target YouTubers, not YouTube.
Now, they may be lying about that, I don't know. But they definitely say they intend to sue content-creators directly.
Sounds like a good channel for kids. Too bad all comments will be removed and not allowed, people won't be able to subscribe to the channel, won't be notified of uploads, can't add to playlists, no ratings, and so on. They'll be able to upload, but almost every other aspect of YouTube will be disabled for them starting Jan 1st.
Generally, if you are trying to make money on YouTube, and if they choose to, then they come in to flag your videos which then results in the video being removed or the comment section might get disabled, etc, etc. However, at the same time, generally speaking, if you are not trying to monetize the videos, then that is less likely to happen, well, pre-COPPA at least. In the future, like in 2020, or right now, as soon as the changes take effect, then things can be even tougher for the non-monetized videos as well, perhaps. But already, people are not notified of videos. Millions of people, especially in 2019, have been getting unsubscribed from people they subscribe to. A lot of people talk about this all over the Internet for many months now. But most of the problems are in connection to monetized videos and not so much on the free videos.
Yeah, I've been documenting the issues you're talking about (before COPPA was created of course) since about 2011 on YouTube. Check out my channel (DRutter) sometime for more info :)
You are not liable to COPPA enforcement agencies for any penalties whatsoever. COPPA applies to platforms, not content producers, that collect data. Goolag.
Goolag has lied in order to make palatable to it's market (youtubers) passing the expense of compliance with COPPA on to them. They certainly can ban, delete, or seek monetary compensation from you, but do not do so based on the authority derived from COPPA, which they alone are subect to.
The FTC has said in direct statements that they will come after content-creators and channel owners, regardless of location, with direct fines and lawsuits. You get my point, right? I can't afford to fuck with it, period. Nitpicking my wording is pointless when you know what I meant. Thanks.
If you read COPPA, it deals with data collection. It prohibits the collection of children's data. No matter what anyone says, that's what COPPA is, and you can ascertain this fact by reading it.
I am not nitpicking your words, nor denying that others have threatened you. If they threatened you with enforcement of COPPA, they're liars.
You're not collecting data (I assume). You are therefore not liable under COPPA.
I used to, but only showing their hands, in low res, and bits of their voices. When COPPA nonsense happened a few weeks ago, I began deleting anything like that off YT. I ended up re-uploading 5 of them to my new Bitchute account, because they're part of the historical record at this point. I just don't want them on YT because of the COPPA bullshit in play right now. I hate self-censoring but I have to avoid $42k fines and complete channel deletion, if possible. I have 640 other videos, some of them important, which I'm trying to not lose.
Anyway, @MediKatie and I just had a baby of our own, and we've decided to keep him offline for now. He's not even in any smart devices, or connected PCs. Just physical photos and offline digital images in storage.
It's really hard to know what to do about this stuff. We're in uncharted territory, and the future looks.... interesting. Living in fear aint the way to go, but caution does seem to be warranted, so it's about finding a compromise I guess.
Can COPPA fine you?
Some lawyers say the fines are to YouTube itself or to Google or to Alphabet because, in the fine print, it is directed to the administrators of YouTube. The users are not administrators because they don't have all the options that admins have. But regardless, COPPA is a big mess.
Value in Privacy
I agree that it is generally safer to keep kids private. And maybe let them choose to publish their video in twenty years from now or to publish some of them when they are off in college or whatever. Yeah, it is uncharted for sure, for all of us.
Kids Encourages Kids
Now, it is possible for some kids to be able to encourage and inspire other kids via videos, etc, online. But it is similar to being like a child actor. Like, being in the public limelight may come with a price.
Fame to Influence Others
People can perhaps use their fame to influence people. But that is risky of course. And possibly rewarding. It may depend to some extent on the kid as different kids are different and some kids do things that are pretty public at a young age.
Kids in Gymnastics
Like if you had a kid perform in gymnastics at the age of 8 for example, the public performance might be uploaded to the Internet. So, if the parents don't publish the performance, others in the audience might.
If It is Already Public
Because it was done in the public. I would say it would benefit the family if they were to publish it as opposed to just letting some random person publish it.
What Happens in Vegas Stays in Vegas
But then, the home videos can remain offline.
Star Wars
It is similar to how Star Wars started publishing movie trailers to YouTube. Otherwise, random YouTubers upload the trailers and get all views. So, around like 2014, Star Wars started doing that on their official channel on YouTube. In doing that, they would get the most amount of views for those trailers. Otherwise, random channels get all the free publicity. So, in other words, parents could choose to publish whatever that is already public. If your children do things in the public, then you might as well publish that. Anything done privately could remain private for the moment if you want.
It Depends I Guess
Again, it depends on the kid, the family, where you might live, whether or not it is safe or not to do this or to do that, etc.
One thing I've seen for certain is the FTC promising to go after content-creators and channel-owners directly, with both fines and lawsuits. They were asked specifically, because as you say, people are confused. The answer is, 100% for sure, they will target YouTubers, not YouTube.
Now, they may be lying about that, I don't know. But they definitely say they intend to sue content-creators directly.
This kid uploads these news videos to YouTube:
Sounds like a good channel for kids. Too bad all comments will be removed and not allowed, people won't be able to subscribe to the channel, won't be notified of uploads, can't add to playlists, no ratings, and so on. They'll be able to upload, but almost every other aspect of YouTube will be disabled for them starting Jan 1st.
Generally, if you are trying to make money on YouTube, and if they choose to, then they come in to flag your videos which then results in the video being removed or the comment section might get disabled, etc, etc. However, at the same time, generally speaking, if you are not trying to monetize the videos, then that is less likely to happen, well, pre-COPPA at least. In the future, like in 2020, or right now, as soon as the changes take effect, then things can be even tougher for the non-monetized videos as well, perhaps. But already, people are not notified of videos. Millions of people, especially in 2019, have been getting unsubscribed from people they subscribe to. A lot of people talk about this all over the Internet for many months now. But most of the problems are in connection to monetized videos and not so much on the free videos.
Yeah, I've been documenting the issues you're talking about (before COPPA was created of course) since about 2011 on YouTube. Check out my channel (DRutter) sometime for more info :)
You are not liable to COPPA enforcement agencies for any penalties whatsoever. COPPA applies to platforms, not content producers, that collect data. Goolag.
Goolag has lied in order to make palatable to it's market (youtubers) passing the expense of compliance with COPPA on to them. They certainly can ban, delete, or seek monetary compensation from you, but do not do so based on the authority derived from COPPA, which they alone are subect to.
The FTC has said in direct statements that they will come after content-creators and channel owners, regardless of location, with direct fines and lawsuits. You get my point, right? I can't afford to fuck with it, period. Nitpicking my wording is pointless when you know what I meant. Thanks.
If you read COPPA, it deals with data collection. It prohibits the collection of children's data. No matter what anyone says, that's what COPPA is, and you can ascertain this fact by reading it.
I am not nitpicking your words, nor denying that others have threatened you. If they threatened you with enforcement of COPPA, they're liars.
You're not collecting data (I assume). You are therefore not liable under COPPA.