# YouTube got fined by the FTC...



## Ev1l0rd (Dec 17, 2019)

Okay so this happened a couple weeks ago but is kinda like, important to bring up and discuss.

So back in September, YouTube got fined 170 million by the FTC for being caught violaitng COPPA: https://www.theverge.com/2019/9/4/2...rivacy-violations-fine-170-milliion-coppa-ads

COPPA is a law that states that you are not allowed to collect data on anyone under 13 online. The law is old, but occasionally gets revised to account for changes to the internet (if I recall correctly, once a decade). So far, the idea always has been that as long as you don't explicitly state that you're collecting data on children and that you terminate any accounts ran by children you would be fine under COPPA.

YouTube instead bragged about how popular their platform was to children with corporate investors and as a result, they got the aforementioned fine.

--

Now why I bring this up: As a part of this fine, YouTube has to start implementing systems that determine whether content is meant for children or not. Right now, for most content creators on YouTube, they have an option to mark their videos or their complete channel as "for children" and "not for children". If a video is marked as for children, it will disable _every single feature YouTube offers_ for a video aside from watching the video and cuts advertisement revenue (already not great) by around 90%.

On paper? Shit, but hey one could just mark their videos as being not for the kids and be fine right? *Nope.* YouTube is running their own bots and algorithms to determine if a video is for kids, and if it thinks it is, it will mark it as for kids anyway and there's no ability to appeal their decision.

In addition, the FTC has explicitly stated that they plan on fining content creators who are not appropriately marking their videos as being for kids for up to 42000 USD per video when their new policy goes into effect on January 1st, 2020.


Source: https://www.theverge.com/2019/9/4/2...rivacy-violations-fine-170-milliion-coppa-ads and https://www.theverge.com/2019/11/13...coppa-ftc-fine-settlement-youtubers-new-rules


----------



## IncredulousP (Dec 17, 2019)

What a great idea, awesome way to handle it YouTube


----------



## thewannacryguy (Dec 18, 2019)

I can understand the logic behind fining creators who mark NSFW videos as safe for kids, but fining someone for marking a safe for kids video as NSFW seems pretty silly to me. Especially since whether a video is child-friendly can be very subjective. Using algorithms and not allowing any method to appeal makes it worse. I anticipate a few shitstorms among content creators.

How will they enforce this rule on people who live outside the US? Deduct the money from their future payments?


----------



## skawo (Dec 18, 2019)

> YouTube is running their own bots and algorithms to determine if a video is for kids, and if it thinks it is, it will mark it as for kids anyway and there's no ability to appeal their decision.



As far as I know, this isn't actually true? It will mark the video as "for kids", sure, but you can change it if you think otherwise.




> In addition, the FTC has explicitly stated that they plan on fining content creators who are not appropriately marking their videos (so a not for kids video which is for kids and vice versa) for up to 42000 USD per video when their new policy goes into effect on January 1st, 2020.



Yeah, that's not gonna happen. Not only does the FTC not have the workforce to actually check this in any meaningful capacity, it also certainly doesn't have the funding to fine everyone. Not only that, FTC would be fighting an extremely uphill battle in court to actually prove that the content creator in question is violating COPPA. If they do it, it'll be someone big and very blatantly breaking the new Youtube TOS, as a test case, which might nonetheless fail.

Also, FTC has no jurisdiction outside of US. What, are they gonna deport little Timmy from the UK playing Minecraft? Nonsense.



> so a not for kids video which is for kids and vice versa



Um, no; videos marked "for kids" that aren't do not fall under this at all as far as FTC is concerned.


----------



## WD_GASTER2 (Dec 18, 2019)

first post in this section that i have made in a long time.

ooff the collateral damage coppa is going to cause will be nuts. 
youtube will definitely be a weird place starting next year.

I wonder if this will lead to rise in video streaming services on the european end of the pond (then again europe has many weird laws as well)


----------



## Ev1l0rd (Dec 19, 2019)

skawo said:


> As far as I know, this isn't actually true? It will mark the video as "for kids", sure, but you can change it if you think otherwise.





			
				The Verge said:
			
		

> In its video yesterday, YouTube also pledged to use machine learning and flagging algorithms to locate child-directed videos that may have been mislabeled. Creators won’t be able to appeal those decisions, though a YouTube spokesperson said the company will be listening to feedback. If the algorithms aren’t effective, YouTube could stop using them entirely and face no threat from the FTC for doing so, leaving creators solely accountable and open to potentially life-altering fines from the government.





skawo said:


> Yeah, that's not gonna happen. Not only does the FTC not have the workforce to actually check this in any meaningful capacity, it also certainly doesn't have the funding to fine everyone. Not only that, FTC would be fighting an extremely uphill battle in court to actually prove that the content creator in question is violating COPPA. If they do it, it'll be someone big and very blatantly breaking the new Youtube TOS, as a test case, which might nonetheless fail.
> 
> Also, FTC has no jurisdiction outside of US. What, are they gonna deport little Timmy from the UK playing Minecraft? Nonsense.


The problem is that most content creators don't have enough income to be able to get a lawyer, and the 42k$ per video is going to be an issue for many content creators which don't have the income to pay those fines either.

As to your second part, the problem is that YouTube has shifted the onus on the content creator to handle any perceived COPPA violations by having it become a choice for the content creator. The issue here is that the FTC only has to prove that the creator is providing "child aimed content", since YouTube will disable any data collection that is not essential to running their service if the creator marks their videos as containing child aimed content.

Furthermore, the workforce isn't going to be an issue since the FTC is going to run their own algorithms to do it, which will probably be capable of cutting that workload _massively_ for them and will probably end up including a ridiculous amount of false positives which not every content creator has the legal power to fight.

Finally, within regards to your jurisdiction claim, the problem is that Google is hosted in the US and as a result has to follow US law. This means that the FTC is completely capable of fining individual content creators, even if they don't fall under US jurisdiction (and that goes in combination with the concept of extradition treaties, which the US has with many countries, meaning that even if they're fined in the US, they still end up having to pay it).



skawo said:


> Um, no; videos marked "for kids" that aren't do not fall under this at all as far as FTC is concerned.


Ah yeah, my mistake. Changed that.


----------



## skawo (Dec 20, 2019)

> The problem is that most content creators don't have enough income to be able to get a lawyer, and the 42k$ per video is going to be an issue for many content creators which don't have the income to pay those fines either.



The FTC will definitely not go to court with random Joes, especially if they cannot pay the fine, and they will almost certainly send a notice first.



> As to your second part, the problem is that YouTube has shifted the onus on the content creator to handle any perceived COPPA violations by having it become a choice for the content creator. The issue here is that the FTC only has to prove that the creator is providing "child aimed content", since YouTube will disable any data collection that is not essential to running their service if the creator marks their videos as containing child aimed content.



No, not at all. The issue is way more complex than you portray. The FTC would still only be suing you on the grounds that you're breaching COPPA. COPPA does not state at any point that you have to mark your content accordingly - this is just in the Youtube settlement. All it says is that you're required to ask for parental consent if you want to collect minor data, like cookies, names, etc.

FTC would have to prove before a court that you're violating COPPA - in other words, that you're collecting minor data. In the settlement, they "decided" that YouTube channels are "operators" as understood by the law and that the fact Youtube collects data on your behalf counts as you collecting the data. This is a very shaky ground for FTC to stand on and they would struggle to prove this in court, since you do not make any decisions as to how the data is collected, what data is collected, you don't get to SEE the data collected, you don't get to store it, you don't get to directly use it and you also can't even ask for the parental consent as the law dictates.



> Furthermore, the workforce isn't going to be an issue since the FTC is going to run their own algorithms to do it, which will probably be capable of cutting that workload _massively_ for them and will probably end up including a ridiculous amount of false positives which not every content creator has the legal power to fight.



Even if the algorithm cut the videos to 0.1% of what is there on Youtube, FTC would still have to file THOUSANDS of lawsuits. The FTC will NOT file lawsuits blindly because of an algorithm. They will almost certainly have a human deciding in the end.



> Finally, within regards to your jurisdiction claim, the problem is that Google is hosted in the US and as a result has to follow US law. This means that the FTC is completely capable of fining individual content creators, even if they don't fall under US jurisdiction (and that goes in combination with the concept of extradition treaties, which the US has with many countries, meaning that even if they're fined in the US, they still end up having to pay it).



No, no, and triple no. Using a website does NOT make you personally liable under the law of the country the website operates in. That's absolutely ridiculous. YouTube ITSELF has to follow this ruling, and thus force everyone to comply so that THEY are able to comply. That's all. Check the Youtube ruling itself. One of the questions directed at it specifically mentions what FTC is going to do if there are creators outside of US. The reply is basically a shrug off, stating "well, we sent out notices in the past". And these notices were sent to multi-million companies, not random Joes making doodles on Youtube.


----------



## Deleted User (Jan 2, 2020)

So basically, content creators who started being family friendly to avoid demonetization are now going to be demonetized for being family friendly.

They were already dead the moment they decided to be a YouTuber for a career.


----------



## AsPika2219 (Jan 10, 2020)

And now... For kids video... Youtube comments was TURNED OFF automatically! No ads! No LIVE videos! No notifications! No anything... That's meanings you can watching cartoons with comments was turned off. Watch anyting live was removed...


----------



## IncredulousP (Jan 13, 2020)

AsPika2219 said:


> And now... For kids video... Youtube comments was TURNED OFF automatically! No ads! No LIVE videos! No notifications! No anything... That's meanings you can watching cartoons with comments was turned off. Watch anyting live was removed...


Honestly, it's probably for the best.


----------



## Ryccardo (Jan 18, 2020)

First and foremost, I see this as yet another lame Chrome pushing stunt - the "for kids" option can only be set from the "new" Youtube Studio interface, which I never used before, and had to user agent spoof to get it to work on my uncommon browser (with of course no further modification required) 

I welcome the change, certainly not as a matter of principle or ideology behind it, but rather from a pragmatic one - it allows me to remove undesirable features from my videos (most of said features being directly linked with the rampant commercialization that has been ruining Youtube throughout the decade)

"Broadcast Yourself", not "Shill Yourself Via Clickbait & Sponsors In An ePenis Size Contest"!


----------

