You're Wrong About COPPA (Real Law Review)

[@LegalEagle]

⚖️What do you think about COPPA? ✏️Make copyright work for you with CopyrightCourse bit.ly/2Yt5p6M

[@alex_ad111]

Love your videos 😄

[@thispersonhere7538]

I feel like COPPA won't affect all of us like people think it will.

[@FreeminderXIII]

Dude , what about the Elon Musk's case?

[@Animefan127-z2v]

Can someone send u fan mail?

[@DCMarvelMultiverse]

Would you take a case on the behalf of creators if this is challenged? There are too many maybes and ifs here. I don't want a kid audiences. i don't know who sees my channel. I wish I could select the ads i want to prove that.

[@LegalEagle]

Apologies for typos. And there are fewer graphics than usual because this monster turned out to be 50 minutes long. I really wanted to get this out by December 9th so there was still time to comment with the FTC. Please make your voice heard!

[@user-ei9ns9hq6b]

OK boomer

[@simonkimberly6956]

We forgive you.

[@chrisedwards3866]

One technical part that you didn't cover: if KZbin can't make a cookie identifying a computer user as a child, how do they remember that the user is a child? They would need to age-gate every visit to the website and app. They would need to make non-unique cookies, which they could do. Those would still need age and nationality info.

[@daltonio6001]

Anthropogenic Climate Change is a BOOMER Fairytale that doesn’t even make sense with his comment

[@taotuhao5969]

@@user-ei9ns9hq6b When you are one of the progenitors of the "Ok Boomer" comment, then it's use is possibly funny. Otherwise, you are just jumping on the bandwagon of mediocrity. The phrase is lazy.

[@prim16]

Can we all just take a moment to thank LegalEagle for making a full-length video explaining this? 49 minutes is a pain in the butt to watch, but it's sure of a lot better than reading the entire COPPA document, interpreting it like a lawyer, and gathering real-world context to draw inferences.

[@Samanosuke1138]

Primaski sustained.

[@robbiewalker2831]

Primaski Thankfully, FTC took this into account.

[@aikifox85]

Agreed! Thank You!!!!

[@melissagrenier2200]

@@TechnoGeek18023 That's true but it's nice to have it explained. I read through the whole thing but there were some things I misinterpreted. I read "actual knowledge" as "knowledge of the possibility that there might be children watching" for some reason. As opposed to "knowledge of the fact that there are children watching". So this video helped clear that up.

[@Lionheartwolf135]

I actually liked the length. If this was a pain in the butt to watch maybe your watching the wrong channel...

[@morningcoffee3121]

"I'm 10 and I want to be a lowyer like you" LegalEagle: *sweat intensifies*

[@Navarp]

I came to the comments just to post this.

[@Firegen1]

Why would he panic? He's work is not inappropriate by and large and is not intended to engage children in the first place. This is a weird joke.

[@mikeharris1987]

@@Firegen1 because then LegalEagle would have "actual knowledge" that children are watching its videos

[@Firegen1]

@@mikeharris1987 Even then as he says KZbin may well suspend the account. He could he take active steps to avoid such a situation by ignoring the comments which he tends to do unless they state the term objection. He could make it policy in his content. If he did and someone went "Objection! I'm 10" there may still be actions he could take to show he is being actively trolled by those who wish to put his work into disrepute. If I remember rightly he's done this before with someone who was a jackass and copyright claimed his videos.

[@codrinmoisa4290]

I mean... Legal Eagle kinda uses some complicated language and terms, and even when transformed into actual human words from that legal gibberish, I don't think a child could stop and think about what he's/she's hearing since they just won't understand anything.

[@ojtheaviator1795]

When I was around 12, I remember watching educational content on KZbin. Think stuff in the style of Cody's Lab or Nile Red. If all this applied back then, I doubt that would have happened. Imagine if all libraries had a system in place that kept kids inside the children section, and didn't allow them to use library cards. No kid could check out a book, and no kid would be able to look up a fact in a book from the "adult" section of the library if curious about something. Now, also assume that adults cannot check out kids books, even if they have a library card. No kid could bring a kids book home, regardless of adult endorsement. This is effectively what KZbin is doing. KZbin is such a diverse platform. Lumping the educational channels in with "Peppa Pig" and "Call of Duty" disregards the intelligence of many children, and keeps them from accessing content that allows them to grow in their knowledge.

[@literallyanangrymoose7717]

That's actually massively well thought out.

[@TheDawnofVanlife]

I don’t think this is 100% true. Take into account R rated movies. Or even PG 13. A supervisory adult can decide to allow the ´child’ to access said content. It’s more legal parental controls then anything. That being said, COPPA is certainly complicated when it comes to something like KZbin. It’s pretty easy to content sort things in a library. Harder with videos.

[@Atlasworkinprogress]

This seems to have a chilling similarity to the PMRC hearings in the 80s. Using the guise of protecting children to punish creators. PMRC resulted in the Parental Advisory sticker that ended up making music much more risque and less child friendly than it was before because once creators knew they were going to get the sticker on their albums, the chains were off. Of course this resulted in higher explicit album sales to children anyways, so the content that was trying to be walled off was just made more accessible. The same thing is going to happen here. Children are going to watch adult oriented videos, plain and simple, now all they will see on their feed is adult oriented videos. Frank Zappa said it right. This is akin to treating Dandruff with Decapitation.

[@futuza]

Yep, by trying to curb content creators who make content for children and punish them (by not allowing decent financial compensation), they will just turn toward making more adult content. This will result in an over saturation in more adult oriented videos and making the end results worse.

[@danielbutters3129]

Darth Futuza Exactly. When that grey area is no longer safe, you gotta either go black or white, and many will take the black side since you at least have freedom there.

[@rastavolt]

@@danielbutters3129 you not only have more freedom you also have financial solvency. If you go down the other path your ad revenue essentially evaporates as KZbin has been pushing targeted advertising as it has far better financial returns for them. KZbin is effectively saying that if you have a channel that is directed towards children you must now rely on sponsorships to stay solvent.

[@PhillyphilC3]

I remember using parental advisory labels in the 90s to determine the music that was "cool". No label? Don't want the album then. Completely agree with you. "Will Smith Doesn't have to cuss in his raps to sell records, but I do." - Eminem

[@manicmarauder]

@@rastavolt Also don't forget, KZbin at the same time stated they reserve the right to shut down channels that aren't financially viable *to them*. So even as a content creator if you're perfectly fine with your income from sponsors that's still not a safe position to be in. Since KZbin isn't getting any cut of that money themselves they may still cut you off.

[@LexieAssassin]

So, lemme get this straight... > Channel run by an actual lawyer > Rando: *Files bogus copyright claim against channel* Sounds like the legal equivalent of stepping out in front of a bus or something.

[@rajaamsyhar1120]

Legal Eagle: It appears that you have chosen death

[@musicmaster417]

Wait? What happend?

[@Nerazmus]

Yep, legal equivalent of invading Russia during winter.

[@HovektheArtist]

Thats like going to a fight and giving your gun to the other gun

[@giantmastersword]

And yet, under the current system, they can very easily get away with it

[@MrMcBlamEntertainment]

So if we're considered site operators, then there are responsibilities that we have in order to be COPPA compliant. KZbin as a platform does not supply the tools or information we need in order to for us to adhere to these responsibilities. We don't have access to any of the information collected, so we can't even do what would be required of a site operator to be COPPA compliant. We can't modify KZbin's site in any way shape or form. What have unreliable age analytics information (mine in particular has been stuck on the 34-44 all year and that can't be right) and even then, the analytics do not go below the age of 13. So without proper factual black and white information and without the ability to perform the responsibilities required by COPPA to be complaint if we come across viewers under 13, how is it just to sue a content creator? The "fish in a barrel" statement could be true under this lens because the FTC could potentially be going after people who can't defend themselves. Isn't this the equivalent of suing a grocery store employee because the grocery store facility does not adhere to some building code when the employee didn't know about the issue, nor does the employee have the means to fix it ? Are not content creators in the same boat? Lack of information and lack of a means to rectify the situation? Now I understand that KZbin will still terminate channels and mark videos as children's content (resulting in the actions you've specified) at their leisure. KZbin reserves that right and that has been made clear to content creators. Whether we like it or not, it's "their" platform (kudos if you see what I was getting at there). However I'm failing to see how suing content creators is just. I'm not going to say they won't, because anyone can sue anyone (doesn't mean they'll win), but how is this just? How is this not a content creation deterrent? If I'm missing something or oversimplifying something, please correct me.

[@onijester56]

There's a different between "Just" and "Legal". As you point out, KZbin doesn't provide content-creators the information or tools needed to ensure that their created content complies with COPPA. However, when KZbin got hit with the charge they came to an agreement that allows them to say THEY are compliant in what THEY do...which pushes non-compliance onto the people creating the content and not KZbin as the host of the content. ----- In fact, your example of "Suing a grocery store employee because the store doesn't adhere to some building code"... If we keep it, then the specific code violated is an overt risk to integrity...say, exposed wiring or a water-line break or mold and mildew. And then the grocery store employee CAN BE blamed for not notifying anyone to something that reasonably threatens the safety of others. What the grocery store would do is penalize the employee, up to and including termination, since the grocery store is responsible for fixing the issue. But what KZbin will do is say "We followed the agreement. We are not liable." and even if the FTC charges KZbin as a whole, KZbin will just hand the charges off to the creators that incited the charges. KZbin already fixed the issue and paid the fine, so the only thing left is the 'employee' being penalized for their actions.

[@allenfortenberry653]

@@onijester56 Problem is, the employee had no way of actually knowing about the water-line break. The store can say that it is the employee's responsibility to deal with it all they like, but if they do not provide the tools needed to access and fix the break, then it is the store's fault. You should not blame the employee for something like that, especially after they have noted their lack of access and requested that the store give them the proper tools to follow the regulation multiple times

[@nnelg8139]

@@onijester56 but content creators aren't employees to KZbin; in fact they're closer to clients. If a leased building has faulty wiring, fixing that is the responsibility of the landlord.

[@samsadowitz1724]

@@nnelg8139 the grocery store argument still stands if the store's general manager doesn't own the space. If faulty wiring (or some other violation) is spotted by a consumer or employee, the store manager must make requests to the landlord for repairs. If repairs arent ordered/made, the store manager is out of options to resolve the issue.

[@MrMcBlamEntertainment]

@@nnelg8139 and Allen have really expanded on the point I'm trying to make. Thank you both, and thank you for your reply Anthony. I understand what KZbin is trying to do and that they're going to try to wipe their hands of it, as I said, they will likely delete a bunch of videos, etc. etc.. However, I don't see how we can be defined as site operators if we don't have the ability to perform site operator functions, specifically to be compliant with said law. I would argue that content creators are users of the platform, not operators. In the same way someone can post a video to Twitter, we can post the videos here but Twitter users aren't considered Twitter site operators. This seems like a mislabeling due to a lack of understanding of how the platform works.

[@JediMasterBaiter]

*Here's* *why* *your* *channel* *wasn't* *approved* *for* *monetisation:* • Content deemed suitable for children

[@frankg2790]

Yeah, KZbin is basically throwing content creators under the bus instead of actually fixing the problem.

[@Christopher_TG]

@@frankg2790 Honestly, based on the language of the law and regulation, I don't know what KZbin is supposed to do other than what they're doing.

[@LarryInNM]

@@Christopher_TG Which is the problem with oppressive laws, the law makes the provider become the enforcer or else.

[@neurofiedyamato8763]

We get demonetized for having mature adult topics and now we going to get demonetized for having safe children content. You just can't win.

[@pokemonlore4959]

Christopher G stop demonetizing stuff for cursing and other stuff for children.

[@leakingamps2050]

Second question: If the FTC is saying that an "Are you over 13 yes/no" barrier is not good enough, what implications, if any, does this have for "Are you over 18 yes/no" barriers? Is is possible that any sites with adult content would need to institute some form of verifiable check for age (such as credit card, State ID/Drivers license, etc?). This seems like it could make the entire internet less safe by normalizing the request of such documents, ESPECIALLY for those too young to protect themselves, and would be only slightly more effective, as there's nothing stopping an underage user from borrowing their parent's information without consent.

[@MacAndSwiss]

The UK, if I recall correctly, attempted something like that with adult websites. It failed miserably.

[@EmulatorNoob]

@@MacAndSwiss That's because people are way too paranoid. "I don't want government to watch my every step". News flash, they already do

[@boooster101]

@@MacAndSwiss That will always because as Dr. Cox in Scrubs said so eloquently; "I'm fairly sure if they took porn off the internet, there'd only be one website left, and it'd be called Bring back the porn!"

[@endorPK]

Moreso, big sites would be literally unable to make viable check for age. Because of the different countries having different documents. If you make mandatory State ID check you cut users that living not in the States.

[@ZeldagigafanMatthew]

The UK has been trying to implement a similar age-gate and it keeps getting slammed. And if we are forced to put in such a check, I wouldn't be surprised if people do it in the most half-assed way possible, such as simply asking for the ID number but not performing ANY check on validity other than a digit count.

[@zephy64]

The more I hear about this the less I think law makers understand how the internet works.

[@TheItzal11]

They never have

[@atlantahunter4401]

To be fair this law was written in the 90s. The deeper issue is that our legislative system just isn't set up to handle something that changes as fast as the Internet does. A situation not aided by the fact that most lawmakers are in their sixties and, yes, do not understand the internet.

[@GaussianEntity]

It's that and the fact that we have been slow to update the laws to better fit the era.

[@Junosensei]

@@atlantahunter4401 - Laws have been struggling to keep up with capitalism in general. Late stage capitalism is a mess and big business has incentive to influence politics, including against regulation. Loopholes are the game and anyone attempting to close those loopholes can be bought with money. Any loopholes already closed can be open, or alternatives can be found. Capitalism is successful not because it is humane, but because it is so flexible. The internet has grown as a result of capitalism, for better or worse. Thus, it follows that the law has struggled to keep up with it like the rest of the markets.

[@stevethepocket]

Well, how _does_ it work, then? Because from what I can tell, the internet is just total anarchy. It's kind of a big ask for a government to let it stay that way.

[@deathhog]

Considering that the personalized ads are almost never accurate for me, it's amazing that they even try.

[@Woffenhorst]

Considering advertisers are willing to spend up to 10 times as much for personalized ads, I disagree. It may not work for you specifically, but it clearly works well enough to warrant that cost.

[@HollyAndMistletoe]

Exactly. I get a lot of "stop smoking" products and I have never smoked. And "male enhancement" when I am female. And airline ads when I don't fly. And Disneyland/Disney World/Disney Cruise ads showing excited young kids. My kids are 37 and 40. And I have no grandkids. Same with all those goofy toys, games, and clothing for very young kids.

[@goldstandard2039]

@@HollyAndMistletoe for some reason.I constantly get womens underwear advertised at me despite mostly looking up videos like this, or things that are comic book related.

[@magica3526]

@@goldstandard2039 its not just your KZbin activity

[@lostcolonyforge5792]

They think I’m old enough for alcohol

[@onyx8231]

I'm tired if always having to _"Think of the children."_ That's what parents are for. If children are lying about their age, it's the parent's fault.

[@AStageForTheKingdom]

Or it's the fault of the child doing the lying. I know we as a society don't like to acknowledge that though.

[@Canadian_Zac]

Children will always lie about their age online. Unless the parent makes the account for them, and the kid does not know how to make an account themselves (which is bassically no-one now), the child can make an account saying they're older. Which, every kid does. I always set my age to be 18 when I was younger. Because I knew that there was stuff that I liked that wasn't allowed to be seen if my account was under 16 or 18, so I just lied and watched them. Frankly, people need to stop freaking out about 'Think of the Children' Call of Duty is a 16/18+ game (depending on several things), but play any of them online, and you'll hear 10 year olds playing it. Kids are messed up, and are quite happy to run around shooting people in the face in a game, hearing swears, etc. And its not something that messes kids up forever. Frankly, with the amount of access to information, children are going to see shit that parents might prefer they don't. People get internet-savvy very young, and it's not hard to change safe search settings

[@5678sothourn]

Parents can be idiot, which is why CPS exists. This is CPS for the internet

[@lilkaicrazo6386]

Same

[@bitset3741]

@@Canadian_Zac The problem is when personally identifiable, and physically identifiable information is acquired by people or companies will use that info to steal identities, sign kids up for credit cards, predators going and finding kids to attack etc. Coppa isn't just about KZbin, and what kids might see online.

[@Treblaine]

KZbin has entered the special kind of hell where all content must be simultaneously kid friendly (no swearing, nothing sexy, nothing dangerous, etc) yet despite sanitizing it for small kids it also cannot be of any appeal to them. AAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!

[@Gooberpatrol66]

Cool, maybe the internet will return to being stuffy and academic like it was in the beginning.

[@orange_sauce5951]

@@Gooberpatrol66 wait, what? The internet was never NOT a den of villainy, sure it took us a while to get one pornographic gif, but we did it anyways.

[@esyphillis101]

Nathan Dehnel You should be careful what you wish for.

[@Fauxassassin]

Even if they made it 18+ so you could swear and have sexual content kids would still lie and still get there data collected

[@Gooberpatrol66]

@@orange_sauce5951 I'm sure they posted CP on arpanet and told each other to kill themselves.

[@Wouldyoukindly4545]

Legal Eagle: "Obviously this channel is not child directed" ...Bold of you to assume that.

[@thejohnlocke]

And guess who determines what is child directed and what is not.....?

[@danielfay8963]

Children these days are studying law at earlier and earlier ages

[@operationlockout5774]

How would even children who are not yet Stock Brokers or Lawyers yet can comprehend this? Lots of schooling made for them while they go to the next grade level.

[@nuttypotatoe1210]

@@danielfay8963 in these days Kids are capable of learning anything they are interested in.

[@seanbyrne5313]

lol. it's a fact that teachers use this channel in middle school. I wonder what % of this video is watched by children.

[@klikkolee]

26:40 "Children can simply lie" I don't understand how any aspect of COPPA can work if lying children puts the site in the hot seat. I also don't understand how the FTC can forbid the age gate given the wording of the mixed-audience exception criteria

[@thevioletskull8158]

The ftc have a general aduince option.

[@NsanityGamez]

@@thevioletskull8158 KZbin does not add that option though unless that falls under not for kids.

[@ScooterinAB]

It takes two to tango. Kids lied about their ages. That's on the kids. KZbin knew they were lying, collected their data anyways, and then bragged about it. That's KZbin's fault. That's why they were fined.

[@jonasstrzyz2469]

@@ScooterinAB Oh, I agree, but based on my understanding of COPPA a content creator could be fined regardless of their knowledge or lack thereof that the are collecting data from children. Though I could be wrong.

[@ScooterinAB]

@@jonasstrzyz2469 That is definitely a concern. There are channels that are going to have to pump the brakes on community engagement, but there is a concern about creators being unaware of children in their audience. When I wrote to the FTC, I explained that KZbin needs to be the "operator," not the creators because it is KZbin and collects and controls that data. A creator should not be penalized for something they are unaware of and have no control over. It's unlikely to happen, as the FTC has said that can't and won't be going after minor offenses, and they have only acted on COPPA a few times and for major offenses, but that line dies need to be drawn and made clear.

[@jacquelinemackie4395]

Children can lie about their age and anyone can lie about the following; "I have read and accepted the terms of conditions"...

[@tommyt7555]

As someone who has worked in protocol bureaucracy hell, I can promise you the incentive is not the children. It’s not really money either. It’s just covering their ass and “doing their job.” So much of this crap is just “I’m doing something.” That’s why the implementation of so many of these initiatives is so trash. The idea comes from someone trying to appease the masses, then is implemented by people who could not care less other than appeasing their higher up’s. It doesn’t have to be good. Just good enough to convince their boss come review time.

[@TheDawnofVanlife]

Playing devil’s advocate, I think there is a difference between a 5 year old and a 12 year old. A five year old that just wants to watch thing with bright colors is likely not lying about there age and there may be targeted ads at kids based on very true profile issue. Like family vlogging appeals to kids cause kids are often in them. This often corrupted targeting has nothing to do with necessarily swearing or what we would consider ‘adult’ or ´naughty’ content that a kid (usually on the older end) lies to access.

[@xxGreenRoblox]

Do not forget this "I accept the terms of service."

[@xileets]

As someone who studied constitutional law, before steering away from law-school, my initial response was "IS this even constitutional?" Glad you brought up that point. =)

[@Robocline]

Critical Hit my gut says no. It has already had a chilling effect on the 1st amendment. People have already quit KZbin in fear of what may happen to them when their constitutionally protected content gets on the radar of the FTC.

[@aarongoddard2642]

It is absolutely unconstitutional

[@sandylief3024]

@@aarongoddard2642 THAT DDONT STOP TRUMP

[@Hhhhhh-sz9ud]

The having data collected on your behalf part is very sketchy.

[@IkeOkerekeNews]

@@Robocline It is constitutional.

[@lyssam100]

So I'm getting the strong impression that this is KZbin's fault, honestly. Bragging that they have a sizeable child audience to advertise to, jesus, no wonder they got smacked down. Furthermore, if they know that, and can target those users, then presumably they know who they are and can just shut off algorithm access to them.

[@Moleoflands]

I don't think they can directly. I think they knew that because the usage of parental accounts and probably surveys

[@KLT-id9nm]

They could certainly suspend or ban accounts suspected to be children until given proof otherwise.

[@blitzofchaosgaming6737]

How about Pewdiepie labeling his audience "The 9 year old Army"?

[@Hhhhhh-sz9ud]

The main issues with that are that they have to track them to find that out and that they're never completely sure, they just highly suspect it. Additionally, what about the accounts of parents?

[@citrusblast4372]

@@blitzofchaosgaming6737 that title was thrust upon him, he simply embraced it. He first used to call them bros.

[@bobstevenson3130]

"KZbin is also going to develop an AI to determine if content is child directed or not" *oh no*

[@lars1228]

I cant wait for a repeat of the demonetization thing wherein they would sometimes (and way too often) wrongly flag videos for demonetization.

[@yodoodler5951]

Big uh oh

[@DCNRS90YT]

That's a horrible idea, considering how dumb the Ai is for KZbin's site.

[@sayvionwashington1939]

Keep in mind that the AI and bots were what got them in this position in the first place

[@MohdTaufiq91]

Seriously, why can't KZbin just hire humans?

[@Kay_213_]

The people with authority who think animation automatically means it’s directed towards children have clearly never been on the internet

[@mennograafmans1595]

Indeed. Animation is not a genre or something like that. It's a style like live-action. What is portrayed is importent, not how it's made. Sadly the 80ties cartoons have ruined the image of animation in the west. But things are turning around with the rise of geek-culture. Shows like Southpark have kept it from falling to far, but Rick & Morty, Bojack horseman and the rise of anime are bringing animation back. Sadly Disney is throwing it away with their remakes. Maybe we should make a #makehentaigreatagain or something to show those older folks animation is not only for kids ;)

[@superbeltman6197]

Law makers are affecting people they don't understand 85% of the time

[@superbeltman6197]

@@mennograafmans1595 I enjoy corrections in title association but I'm really not feeling M.H.G.A.

[@catsatemycookies8988]

Nani!!!

[@ghostfacegirl180]

Or heard of South Park.

[@jincyquones]

Objection! 8:05 Cookies don't "watch your activity over time." They allow websites to store small amounts of information and retrieve it later, even if you've started a new browsing session. It's up to a website's back-end systems to use the information to track user activity, and cookies are not strictly meant for that purpose.

[@BigHenFor]

But companies use Cookies for that purpose everyday. What would be easier for KZbin and Alphabet to do? They sell that tracking information to advertisers. That's how they make money.

[@Justanotherconsumer]

BigHenFor that’s the technical definition, but not the reason people are concerned about cookies.

[@burrowowl]

It's how websites manage sessions at all. Each HTTP request springs into existence de novo, a tabula rasa unsullied by previous interactions.

[@burrowowl]

@@BigHenFor - their primary business model isn't selling your information, it's selling your attention. You don't give AdSense $100 for somebody's personal information, you give them $100 to show your ad to a number of people the match your keywords.

[@boydstephensmithjr]

But, a cookie *is* a persistent identifier. So, the fact that persistent identifiers can be used to track a user over time or across websites, it's still at issue for COPPA considerations.

[@Convolva]

The real problem with the FTC's interpretations is that content creators cannot be termed as operators who track data regarding children as KZbin itself is the one who collects data on children. I don't know of any place in youtube analytics where it shows any information about anyone under the age of 13. That information is tracked solely by KZbin for their own targeted advertisement which content creators have no control over. KZbin is the one that's at fault here!

[@Trirosmos]

This! KZbin is collecting data mostly for their own use and letting content creators see a very filtered version of it kinda as a courtesy. Saying the data is being collected in behalf of the creators is just B.S

[@pokepress]

It is possible in analytics (old version, at least), to see what percentage of certain metrics is coming from KZbin Kids.

[@Idran]

KZbin is the one pushing the idea that channels could be directly at risk more so than the FTC itself; they want to gin up fear in the userbase so users start going after the FTC. They're leveraging the userbase as a weapon in order to get the FTC to go easier on KZbin, because KZbin was getting so much money from agreements with corporations like Hasbro that they had directed ad contracts with. Like for another example, this machine learning algorithm they're implementing to try and identify child-directed videos? The FTC panel specifically recommended _against_ that, for the exact reasons users are worried: they knew that the false positive rate would be an issue, both in terms of misapplying the intention of the law and in terms of overloading the FTC with complaints that would end up being invalid. But KZbin's going ahead with it anyway and claiming it's to abide with COPPA in order to terrify their users even more. (That's also why KZbin doesn't provide those analytics to users, honestly; by putting more uncertainty in the userbase, it means this fear can be even more established amongst creators)

[@trashcatlinol]

@@Idran This is the entire reason we need to keep repeating why it's KZbin's fault. I'm always a bit suspicious of the intent of authority figures, and it's completely reasonable to think youtube would be trying to weaponize its userbase against the ones who told them to stop. thanks for helping to spread the truth!

[@richardurwin4432]

But the creator benefits from targeted adds. Therefore it could be argued that You Tube is collecting the data on behalf of the creator, even if they don't let the creator see that data. Since the FTC has said that they could (and maybe will) prosecute creators, then they must believe that the creators benefit from collection of the data. It seems to me that by forbidding the use of cookies, the FTC is shooting the law in its foot. If Google could collect data on a particular user that said they had a child's viewing preferences, then it could stop advertising (etc) to that user. But the very fact that it determines that the user is under 13 demands that they then not track that user. It seems to me that cookies should be allowed for the sole purpose of determining if a user is a child. Parental consent is a huge problem. A twelve year-old is perfectly capable of pretending to be their own parent, even to the extent of borrowing their driver's license. About the only way to stop that is like Paypal does it -- make a couple of transactions to the user's bank account and have them read back the transaction IDs. Even that could be worked around if the parent is sufficiently lax with their personal security. It is fundamentally impossible to prove the identity of anyone on the Internet from moment to moment beyond all doubt.

[@dmkatelyn]

I'm suddenly very concerned "I'm twelve and what is this" will go from meme to weapon. Also, what does the FTC actually think is acceptable validation of age?

[@kingcobalt4175]

Katelyn Kivel Textbook Catch 22: Data can’t be collected from children, but proving otherwise needs data collection.

[@Breadcrochets]

I imagine it’s the same as the requirements for parental permission: forms faxed or mailed to the FTC office or by in person appointment

[@chrisxd146]

@Katelyn A Blockbuster membership card.

[@cdgonepotatoes4219]

Worst that could happen is the user saying that gets banned from the channel by the owner themselves if they read said comment. You still can't report a video for improper rating or at least I have yet to notice that, false copyright remains as the biggest weapon to be used improperly.

[@s1r285]

Fr, 12 yrs old is considered a kid in the US, but the majority of FPS games are made up of 12 yr olds... so are FPS games kids games? They have guns tho...

[@jeremyshaferorigami]

OBJECTION 13:05 ..."So they created these 10 or so factors that are objective by nature"..... Subject matter, visual content, use of animated characters, music audio content, etc. NO NO NO! Determining whether subject matter is targeted to children is extremely subjective! It's going come down to some FTC reps opinion. That is why we are so frustrated by the guidelines.

[@Justin-tp1mx]

he talked about that, and they're legally objective questions because they can be answered yes or no, not with an opinion like good or bad

[@Breadcrochets]

Why is coppa so focused on KZbin and creators, meanwhile the advertisers that are actually “ unfairly targeting children” are getting off Scott free? If a serial killer uses craigslist to find victims, we wouldn’t fine craigslist and let the murderer walk. I think the solution is instead of age gating the content or use of the platform, we should require an opt-in for receiving targeted ads. That way children wouldn’t feel motivated to lie about their age to access KZbin

[@ThunderStruck15]

Bread Doughlas fun fact, that’s legitimately what happened to Craigslist. That’s why there isn’t a personals ad anymore.

[@Breadcrochets]

Jen DuBay oh, didn’t know that. But the point remains that advertisers are as much at fault as the platform. The creators (except maybe algorithm cheaters like Elsa/Spider-Man channels) aren’t trying exploit children, and shouldn’t be punished by coppa. If companies weren’t allowed to advertise to children in the first place then this wouldn’t be an issue. Also I don’t see how this is any different from commercials that play during children’s shows on traditional tv

[@Nikifuj908]

@@Breadcrochets Legally, it's different because data isn't collected through your TV. Morally, though, I agree with you that KZbin is no different.

[@ZTanMURReneRs]

@@lunascythe6927 - The problem is, COPPA isn't about advertising to children. It's only about not collecting information about a child that can be used to track them online, ie cookies. As a consequence, specifically personally targeted ads are illegal, simply because they need to know who they are personally targeting, and that knowing is illegal. The personally part is important. It isn't ads that are targeted at "children" in general that are illegal, but specifically those targeted at a specific singular child, because of knowledge about that child.

[@bro748]

From what I understand, they are seeking to amend COPPA so that ad networks are responsible for advertising to kids too.

[@michaelheimburger1115]

Objection: Is there any argument against the "on whose behalf" definition and it's application toward KZbin Creators? I would say that KZbin is NOT collecting the data driving the advertising algorithm "on behalf of" Creators. They're doing it on their own behalf for their own ad engine which Creators have no part in or control of. It sounds like the FTC is putting Creators on the wrong side of the "on whose behalf" as though the Creators are doing the collection. The collection is still done by KZbin itself, just piggybacked on the videos created by Creators. Creators have no access to the means of collection or the data itself. Creators do benefit from the data collection in the form of ad revenue, but I think it's silly to say that paying Creators is the purpose of KZbin's ad engine since they would be doing something similar for their own benefit no matter where the content originated.

[@chaosordeal294]

Yeah, it's pretty hard to show that data is collected on my behalf if I have no say in how or what data is collected, and I have no access to that data.

[@hans-joachimbierwirth4727]

Terrorists acting on behalf of Allah -> Allah sued.

[@neurofiedyamato8763]

Video recommendations also use the algorithm which gathers data. That means either your video isn't recommended at all, or it is relying on personalized data gathered by youtube on your behalf. As a youtuber, you earn some of that personalized advertisements too. You earn much less money with contextualized advertisements, though still better than earning no money and being fined by the FTC

[@rextyrran5644]

As the creators benefit from the gathering of the information, the gathering of said information could be, and has been, said to gathered on their behalf.

[@hans-joachimbierwirth4727]

@@rextyrran5644 Has been said... "said" as in drivel. Who cares?

[@GreebleClown]

"- that I've used to defend my channel against dozens of bogus copyright claims." ... I kinda wanna hear about those..

[@TheNeilBlack]

Imagine filing false copyright claims against a lawyer. I think he's actually a copyright lawyer, too, isn't he?

[@reveranttangent1771]

He's not a copyright lawyer

[@TheNeilBlack]

@@reveranttangent1771 Thanks for the correction.

[@reveranttangent1771]

@@TheNeilBlack you're welcome

[@citrusblast4372]

I wonder how he dealt with copyright trolls

[@jaketurner8109]

So how do I use this information to stop seeing ads for Raid: Shadow Legends

[@creppersaurusrex2300]

Simple: Stop using YT

[@errorlooo8124]

vanced.app and ublock origin

[@Registered_Simp]

@@errorlooo8124 Sponsorships would like to know your location

[@mercimande8766]

And those weird puzzle games where a guy is drowning in sharks

[@chicharon8171]

Sponsorblock

[@demonmachinegunner]

Part of me can't wait to see Happy Tree Friends getting mislabeled as child-oriented.

[@weirdoneontheblock]

I want it to happen at this point, and have the child of a Karen see it while the Karen is in the room.

[@michaellin4553]

Perfect. Payback for the copyright BS they put creators through.

[@lemonlite_]

Yet, as aforementioned, subject matter and such can overpower other factors, and will be unlikely to be marked as such.

[@CathrineMacNiel]

Uh, how about SaladFingers ? Or Llamas with Hats? That would be fun!

[@0ut1and3r]

😂😂😂😂😂

[@cosmicmelon9305]

"Johnny Johnny" "Yes COPPA?" "Advertising towards children?" "No COPPA." "Telling lies?" " NO COPPA!" "Open your account!" *LEWD LAWSUIT NOISES*

[@shalice7784]

Why does this comment not have more likes

[@MultiTripleRainbow]

@Jastin Guzman this one

[@MASTEROFEVIL]

400th like

[@trinitech6868]

lol smart XD

[@voidgirl7811]

XD

[@InfiniteAnvil]

While I appreciate you walking us through this, I don't think most creators & users are afraid of COPPA per se, or whether the FTC might consider their content to be child-directed. As you say, they don't have a ton of funding right now, and are unlikely to come after individual creators. I think most creators & users are more worried about KZbin using overbroad automated systems that will identify their content as child-directed based on opaque and asinine criteria. This is why animators in particular are scared: animation is easy to identify algorithmically, and after such a big fine, KZbin has every reason to be overzealous in demonstrating compliance.

[@exasperated]

I'm trying to make varied content, from repair vids to Lego reviews. I'm not aiming for, or desiring a child audience. I may make the odd innuendo, or "do a naughty swear", and I get that parents might not want their crotchfruit watching my content. So, I'm happy to mark my stuff as "Why do I have to worry about you failing to properly parent your own damned offspring". But it seems that if I mark a Harry Potter Lego vid as "Seriously, there should be a parenting exam before conception" I could then be in trouble for making content "directed at children" because of the McGuffin, the topic, even if I'm putting a more adult presentation or spin on it. That's what scares me. Trying to do the right thing ending up having me in the mire because someone else judges me to have done the wrong.

[@bolbyballinger]

KZbin got a big fine? When did that happen? Last I heard the fine they got was only the amount they make in 14 hours. The whole thing was just a sick day for them.

[@NotSoProishNoob]

@@bolbyballinger They got fined over a few million because FTC noticed what KZbin did about children ads and shit. It's literally the biggest reason why they started doing this COPPA system madness.

[@bolbyballinger]

@@NotSoProishNoob And that "few million" is the amount they make in 14 hours.

[@KnitGrit]

Bolby Ballinger 170 million 😂😂😂

[@shannonolivas9524]

This makes me worry that channels with "family friendly" language will start swearing like sailors to avoid that "directed at children" qualifier.

[@tealkerberus748]

Shannon Olivas a win for all Aussie channels. We can swear like a bloody Australian and win out. Of course, Aussie kids won't be put off by that, they hear worse in the schoolyard, but it should work to fend off the yanks.

[@qrxmes2073]

Teal Kerberus HAHA I LOVE THIS

[@4TheRecord]

You can choose yourself to make all videos not child friendly. That's what I had to do rather than sit there and go through every video.

[@SeanWheeler100]

@@4TheRecord But if you have a video that you didn't bother to check when you mark your entire channel as not child friendly, and that video happened to be child friendly, the FDA is going to fine you over 42 thousand dollars. If you can't afford that fine, you have to check and make sure you don't have any videos that qualify as child friendly.

[@PetriBass]

@@SeanWheeler100 In addition to this, KZbin will still demonetize videos for that kind of content. So content creators are essentially forced into a narrow box where they can't create kid-friendly or kid-unfriendly content. Just another good product the government is killing off in the name of "protecting the children"... (that, in the end, will only harm children when creators create more kid-unfriendly content and kids watch it anyway).

[@RedwoodTheElf]

"Animated Characters" does NOT equal "Child Focussed." There is a LOT of adult animation out there, from the movie "Heavy Metal" at the mild end, to "Fritz the Cat" at the X-rated end. And that's just American examples, ignoring the japanese end of the spectrum of adult animation.

[@bolbyballinger]

The problem is that they have to make some sort of definition of what counts as "for kids". While "for kids" is an easy thing to know when you see it, it's pretty much impossible to properly define.

[@AlexZandor24]

@@polocatfan No, but the FTC did. Or probably might. Or said they could and wanted to and we will just have to see how "flexible" they decide to be.

[@eji]

@@polocatfan 21:10

[@huesername7476]

@@polocatfan He didn't. Listen to this part 21:24, he even says that he doesn't think that TheOdd1sOut is a child-directed channel. Tempted to say this, so I might as well... It's pretty unfunny though... "did polocatfan not pay attention to the video. that's actually a yikes. gonna have to reply and post a timestamp so this commenter can confirm that legaleagle did not say that."

[@citrusblast4372]

He did not say they were, did you watch the video without bias?

[@gtoger]

Objection! In the video you occasionally refer to creators as "channel owners." Do we actually have any ownership? It's always been my view that this is KZbin's world and we're just allowed to interact in it. We don't "own" anything but are given license to use the platform. Am I wrong?

[@miguelamaton5742]

Yes you're wrong

[@robertkelleher1850]

You have the licensing backwards. You own the content, and license it to KZbin. Granted, the terms are there's not yours.

[@wta1518]

No, you are licensing your content to KZbin in exchange for a cut of their ad revenue.

[@Nater_V]

This is how legally a channel like Drama Alert with Keemstar as the host while being banned off the site. He is the host, not the owner

[@RicardoDelfinGarcia]

You own the videos (and you have full copyright over them), but you don't "own" the channel per-se in that KZbin can choose to stop hosting your content or delete your channel

[@protoclone138]

See, this is why I wanted to see this channel tackle this topic. He knows how to dispense info without histrionics, unlike other channels.

[@KontrolStyle]

me too, im glad he found time to do it. we thank you, guy who loves to read.. :)

[@LordOfSilense]

And as far as he's said, COPPA won't really affect people in any meaningful way- it's up to KZbin themselves to have to act properly.

[@rubyy.7374]

Sile Animus Problem is that with KZbin being KZbin, they’ll find some way to screw it up.

[@syntaxusdogmata3333]

@@LordOfSilense Ugh, God help us!

[@agiammarco94]

I saw another Lawyer channel talking about it but he went into histrionics

[@MartinLeong25]

Creators dont collect information Why are we getting fined

[@changhyon92]

^this

[@frankg2790]

KZbin has been screwing content creators over since WMG were the ones associated with abusing the copyright system. The only difference is that you can either swear and get demonetized or be family friendly and get fined.

[@LadyBeritanavatarius]

@David Francisco Then COPPA and similar future legislation is then turned towards platform after platform. This can go well beyond KZbin over time. Your option might lead you with nothing in the end. It would all be gone... what then? This won't stop with KZbin's death.

[@ivetterodriguez1994]

Because we are the "website" according to the FTC. The individual channels are all their own "website". Thus we're all inidvidually accountable since KZbin is basically a collection of several "websites (youtube channels). And those behind these "websites" are the one's determining if their channels are "for kids" or "not for kids". Which most agree feels very shaky and muddling. We're all concerned about how loose or austere the FTC will be when deciding to fine us or if they'll just make this "mixed audience" deemed content also lose channel features because "there could be kids watching". Some of us are slightly upset that if it weren't for kids lying about their age to make a google account to then make a youtube account then this never would have happened. Also, we're unsure or at least I'm not sure how this will keep kids from watching "not for kids" content. Couldn't they still find some loopholes and work the system? I mean, if KZbin said in their blog post that they will deem all of those watching kids content as kids and all of those watching 13+ content --not for kids-- as "adults, then that implies won't actually be able keep kids from accessing "not for kids" content defeating the whole purpose of not collecting data on them.

[@hans-joachimbierwirth4727]

Fined? You aren't.

[@jose41811]

KZbin: *about to slam coppa on legaleagle* LegalEagle: *piano starts playing*

[@Saikoes]

I, Legaleagle, have a dream!

[@chimichangas1432]

legalegale?

[@gaiusjuliuspleaser]

@Ordonity OI ORDONITY

[@thesecondguywhoknowsthings7154]

Your lack of knowledge on how to spell eagle triggers me especially since you did twice

[@aanesijr]

KZbin: Why do I hear boss music?

[@kd8663]

I nearly spat out my drink at "employees who interact with creators." If you're Pewdiepie, you communicate with KZbin, but if their horrendous relationship with false copyright claims levied against creators is anything to go by, KZbin either has no ability or no interest in communicating clearly with creators about legal issues as they arise on an individual, channel level. The lack of liason between KZbin and its creators has been a growing problem, between copyright law infringements and multiple ad-pocolypses, that's now coming into sharp relief with the new Coppa enforcement. Not that I envy KZbin the task of effectively communicating with millions of creators- but if they want to continue their growth competing with cable television, that's a department that needs to grow with them. It's something I'm surprised to see they didn't try to get out ahead of. Now it seems they're playing catch up to deal with a problem that affects every creator on the platform to some degree, and it will likely be those middling creators, too big to avoid attention but too small to have KZbin's ear, who suffer the most.

[@iKiwed]

KZbin: You're going to pay for *COPPA.* LegalEagle: No that's wrong! --- BREAK ---

[@antianslider4636]

@Samantha Sadhmadhi "I'll cut through those words" -Hajime

[@thenextgeneration9030]

Hold on KZbin...what did you just say?

[@MrTrees]

Wait... It was Leon??

[@punipuniclips.6591]

Your deductions are fiction

[@fatuusdottore]

OBJECTION!

[@shikurokasuki5388]

*KZbinKids: Exists* *KZbin: Let's pretend we didn't make that*

[@goldstandard2039]

Genuinly I don't understand the point of making a kid centric version of your website and then going ahead and trying to make your main website more child friendly as well. Seems quite redundant imo.

[@shikurokasuki5388]

@@goldstandard2039 Ikr. It's like they are trying to make them the same. What's the point making the other website?

[@OmegaX5000]

@gold standard It's because KZbin Kids is a total flop. As far as I'm aware, they only advertised it when it debuted and forgot about it afterwards.

[@dancorps1388]

Also the same content on YT kids is also on YT main. So it has to be treated the same.

[@TheAsvarduilProject]

@@goldstandard2039 It's almost like YT Kids was just a transparent attempt to get around COPPA or something.

[@alejandrocastellanos3936]

well, "i'm baby" got a whole lot more dangerous

[@ZenFr0g]

So did the "I am 12 and what is this" meme.

[@Fuzzycuffsqt]

@@ZenFr0g thank joke has been bannable on sites that enforce COPPA for about a decade now. Sucks that YT may go that route =/

[@GRBtutorials]

Actually, to be more accurate, a cookie is just a piece of information. Cookies can’t track anything by themselves (otherwise they would be a standard program, and quite literally, spyware), it’s just that they’re used to store an anonymous tracking ID, which the website uses to track your activity. So basically, when you click on a link to a video, the website stores in their servers’ database this ID along with all the relevant information, something like this: “user 19375 is watching LegalEagle” (in DB format, of course), which is what can be used for tracking. However, there are many other uses for cookies, such as storing personal preferences (such as light or dark mode), and most importantly, session IDs. Session IDs are what is used to keep you logged into a website even if you close it. So rejecting all cookies is not a good idea unless you really have the privacy concerns, because you will have to log in every time you visit the website, and in the worst case, not even be able to do so.

[@excitedbox5705]

You can store anything you want in a cookie. You are right though it is just a storage file on the computer and itself doesn´t track anything. You shouldn´t use cookies for login because they can be modified or read by anyone. You should use session variables instead and even then you need to be careful. I only use cookies for tracking watched videos for instance. You can store a list of video IDs and a time stamp for instance to track which videos have been watched and how long, to continue playing at the right spot when they go back to it.

[@commander31able60]

actually a cookie is a kind of snack.

[@Icantchangemyhandlehelp]

@@commander31able60 Compuer cookies

[@ninten_ka]

applesugarplum dont computers taste like apples? i mean... an apple-flavored cookie?

[@commander31able60]

@@ninten_ka if you wanna pay $2000 for just that yeah.

[@elmateo77]

These changes are going to effectively demonetize and kill all child-directed channels, which will just result in kids watching content meant for adults. Good work FTC.

[@Herowebcomics]

...And that has NOTHING to do with COPPA! Child privacy was the issue, not video content! Good work indeed!

[@woaddragon]

@@Herowebcomics Thank you

[@esotericVideos]

"There's a lot that can still be done: You can leave comments with the FTC". Unfortunately that's probably going to be about as effective as all the comments about Net Neutrality were.

[@frankg2790]

The FTC spokesperson made it crystal clear that they are targeting Content Creators in their witch hunt. Leaving a comment with them is like politely asking the NKVD to not send your kid to Siberia.

[@CelticVictory]

Frank They fined KZbin, not content creators.

[@speedtracker9556]

How do I leave comments with the FTC?

[@jaketurner8109]

Because everything is soo much worse now without Net Neutrality and its a miracle the Internet even still exist /s

[@KyrstOak]

@@jaketurner8109 Give it time. The big guys have yet to realise the power of information directing they hold.

[@GoldenPenHD]

This sounds like doing my taxes. I have to find out how much I owe to the government, and if I get that number wrong I go to jail.

[@Strideo1]

Nah. Unless your return is blatantly fraudulent the IRS is just gonna go after your money rather than trying to put you in jail.

[@johndimarzio8966]

this is way more complicated. And more importantly, permits a subjective review of a third party to levy thousands of dollars in fines. Additionally it requires content creators to basically gamble on a completely ambiguous regulation and hope it doesn't get picked off. Pretty scary government overreach here.

[@exantiuse497]

How many people have actually gone to jail for mistakenly miscalculating their taxes? I don't mean tax evasion, like making a million dollars and "by accident" saying you made 50 000, but people actually making mistakes. Where I live the procedure is simple: you make a mistake and pay too little, you must pay the missing amount, and I imagine it's the same in America

[@johndimarzio8966]

@@exantiuse497 people should not* go to jail for simply making a mistake on their taxes. They simply would need to pay the difference. Now if it is proven you KNEW beforehand, then you go to jail for fraud.

[@exantiuse497]

@@johndimarzio8966 Do you mean people shouldn't go but they do and it's wrong, or they shouldn't as in they don't go?

[@eboomer]

28:47 This is the problem - KZbin will roll out a hastily made algorithm that will mis-classify MANY channels because of things like the usage of animation. Algorithms don't do well with 10 point subjective human judgement call criteria written by politicians and interpreted years later by judges, and KZbin will error on the side of self-preservation, at the detriment of many content creators.

[@Herowebcomics]

And a BUNCH of their cash flow!

[@eboomer]

@@Herowebcomics Yep. I would expect it to end the careers of many content creators, in some cases before they even get off the ground. What is needed is a feedback loop to keep KZbin from viewing that as just an externality. They need competition that is able to take KZbin down a notch or two when they botch things badly.

[@Kardia_of_Rhodes]

"Desperation and Trust are seldom allies." - Apollyon

[@thefoundation4837]

That's [REDACTED]

[@a-s-greig]

LaHaye Jenkins is one of my favorite Sci-Fi writers too.

[@NikaraWolf]

I find the fact that the FTC is “punishing KZbin for children lying” as he put it is awful. To me that would be the equivalent of some 20 or younger faking an ID, getting into a bar and drinking, and then having the bar pay fines for letting someone underage getting into the bar. It should be the perpetrator (or in the KZbin case) the parents of the perpetrator being punished for faking information

[@frankg2790]

The new KZbin policy is more akin to bar management throwing the bartender under a speeding bus because they can't be bothered to actually fix the problem.

[@mennograafmans1595]

The thing is, in the USA, it's the providers fault if anything happens to the consumer. No matter the stupidity of the consumer. Like the person putting her dog in a microwave, killing it. It was considered the fault of the microwavecompany for not stating to never put living things in a microwave, not the fault of the killer that just wanted money. So the companies have to do the craziest shit to avoid people being stupid.

[@LarryInNM]

It should be unless the goal of a puritanical state is to close all the bars.

[@neurofiedyamato8763]

Yea the logic is flawed. There's no way of having a secure age gate without getting said private information of the person submitting their age. That means also getting information of kids which contradicts on not getting information of kids to begin with. Catch 22 much? And since youtube can't catch the lying kids, they are getting punished for the kids lying? So youtube have to pay the price for some kids not telling the truth. Why do others have to pay the price for someone else's mistake?

[@rextyrran5644]

I could be mistaken, but I do believe that serving alcohol to a minor, regardless of whether or not they have a fake ID, would still get a bar in trouble on the grounds that they should have recognized the ID as false.

[@MrCptjsparrow]

Objection: Careful Legal Eagle. My 19 month old was in the room while watching this video and kept yelling “Ironman!” This could be considered child-directed due to your vague likeness to Tony Stark lol

[@Muzer0]

Thanks to your sharing this anecdote, this presumably now means that Legal Eagle now has "actual knowledge" that a child has watched the video and therefore has to mark this video as child directed? What a stupid law...

[@SevenDayGaming]

@@Muzer0 Yes, this is the most destructively ignorant regulation of all time. What do you expect, though, from an internet regulation made in 1998 by people already in their 70s? They knew nothing about the internet, I doubt most of them had ever even USED the internet in 1998, or even a personal computer for that matter.

[@exantiuse497]

Muzer0 What about mixed audience exeption?

[@erickhernandezcrispin9671]

Seven Day matpat in his video said something about that saying that even now, people making laws dont even have a phone xD

[@BanditLeader]

@@erickhernandezcrispin9671 the old men either dont have a phone, or they still have a flip phone

[@krissisk4163]

Pewd likes to talk up his "9 year old army" so he's probably in trouble based on what you're saying here. I think MatPat can legitimately argue that most of his audience is adults or teens though. I also think that the reason the FTC has denied the swing gate is because KZbin has bragged that there are kids on the platform.

[@EvaHoshizora]

It was a joke and now we are 19 year army lol. He can argue that it was a inside joke with his audience, that would hold up on court as well.

[@shippouma121]

Kris Sisk pewds is too important to KZbin they won’t let me go down.

[@max96779]

But pewdiepie is clearly adult oriented

[@KaoruSF]

Pewds is outside of the US so how do this affect him? If I remember well no country can enforce any law under foreign territories

[@shepherd9217]

If they dare touch mat pat... Smh

[@Ostentatiousnessness]

I feel like the reason no one’s done a deep dive into the language itself is because none of us are lawyers like you who can read it and translate it into a text readable by humans. Thank you for the in-depth look! [Edit: Oh my, what a can of worm’s I’ve opened up]

[@HellecticMojo]

It's also because the language is actually kinda meaningless because KZbin's doing it via automated algorithm rather than case by case and it's hard for content creators to regulate the algorithm since their content can get flagged regardless whether they label it or not. The actual enemy isn't Congress or any agency, but youtube itself for putting the burden of self regulation on content creators while giving them zero management tools.

[@phoenixnoire2435]

Isn't it curious laypeople aren't legally allowed to understand the law but we're still expected to follow it?

[@RobotDCLXVI]

Why does everyone say that? Lawyers are human too. I can read legal briefs and legislation and perfectly comprehend it and I didn't go to law school.

[@supersizesenpai]

@@RobotDCLXVI then you are a rare creature or a liar.

[@cizd]

A lot of creators did little research and there were "lawyers" that looked at this in the past, but I have to question if they're actually lawyers or alternatively how good they're at their job.

[@jungwolf]

“Meet all of the other factors but the content is sooo adult it counteracts all the rest.” Porn, he’s talking about porn.

[@leaderofcommunistchina1427]

Or happy tree friends

[@saneiac]

I was thinking Team America: World Police. But porn works, too.

[@fytscosmic841]

HENTAI

[@rookieman329]

or murder, rape, violence

[@finnrock5558]

or shows like "rick and morty" or "hasbeen hotel" or "wundershozen"

[@Official930Studios]

You just made COPPA less complicated and made the announcer of COPPA look incompetent. Thank you, I feel less stressed. God bless

[@guitargodthor2]

I wonder how this will effect porn sites lol "Are you over 18?" 12 year old: "Yes"

[@xilrondo2907]

well..as the head said it'll be used pornhub will be fine, that random amateur doing porn will be fined 45k per video

[@TheRandomChatSeries]

I love my podcast from KZbin to Pornhub

[@randomstuff-qu7sh]

Clearly, porn will be ruled "child attractive" because of natural curiosity and the appeal of the forbidden.

[@breck1637]

It really shouldn’t affect them at all. Porn sites don’t collect the kind of information KZbin does, and most people don’t make accounts on porn sites in the first place. COPPA isn’t about what children should/shouldn’t see, it’s about websites tracking, storing, and using data and/or personal info gathered from kids.

[@joyphobic]

@@breck1637 instead of Coppa, how about improving kids from abusive household,like actual problem rather than this

[@readonly2309]

worried about children? answer? lets treat everyone like children, what can go wrong? ::: :

[@irwansyahteam2842]

Children take lead possible cartoon.

[@richardgates7479]

@@MyNontraditionalLife Are we expected to believe that the PBS channels, of which I watched a lot of as a kid, will no longer make any revenue on YT? Maybe PBS doesn't monetize but other similar channels do.

[@richardgates7479]

@@MyNontraditionalLife I doubt it's a legal issue. It's possible that those channels are part of KZbin TV and so get subscription money. I was talking about channels like Physics Girl that are PBS channels. Not necessarily targeted at children under 13 but educational. I really don't care about children's cartoons, never watched them as a kid as I thought most of them stupid.

[@sophiesong8937]

@@MyNontraditionalLife One way children will benefit is because a lot of very low quality childrens content will hopefully disappear since it will no longer be profitable (see 'learn colours shapes numbers with finger family song' there are millions of these videos, they get millions of views and they are cynical rubbish.) I would hope it also disincentivises unboxing and direct advertising videos for kids, and malicious content created for children. If youtube are smart, they will figure out a funding model for childrens content creators who do make quality, thoughtful content.

[@bap3227]

doesnt everyone do it already?

[@ExplainingComputers]

Useful video, thanks.

[@Icalasari]

"There could be a channel out there that hits all the checkboxes but still is for adults" Hazbin Hotel and Helluva Boss. Animated, bright colours, uses cartoon stock sound effects, even has famous voice actors like the one for Invader Zim ...And it's adult as hell

[@Herowebcomics]

"...And it's adult as hell." Literally!

[@beeble2003]

“Famous voice actors” isn’t a COPPA checkbox. To hit all the COPPA criteria, the voice actors would have to include both child celebrities and celebrities who specifically appeal to children.

[@CaseyDplays]

And the first song isn't really bad for kids. The rest of it is of course.

[@gentleshark9209]

@@beeble2003 Idk what thing you on but I'm pretty sure invader Zim is pretty appealing to children

[@Mr.Plant1994]

Hentai Heaven checks all those boxes

[@trevordavison4078]

Dont hug me I’m scared is definitely the example of... “checks all 10 boxes but is certainly not for children”

[@tbana2396]

What's your favorite idea? Mine is being creative.

[@SSirloiNN]

@@tbana2396 Change your profile. Green is not a creative colour.

[@creppersaurusrex2300]

@@SSirloiNN nice reference

[@CemeteryDriveClown]

Creppersaurus Rex *OH MY GOD YOU NEED TO HELP ME I LOST THE LOG AND IM LOOKING EVERYWHERE AND I NEED IT TO MAKE PIE, DO YOU KNOW WHERE THE LOG IS????*

[@andoryuubushido7191]

@@tbana2396 I might paint a picture of a clown!

[@Boundless-Boredom]

So when are they gonna take facebook for all the children on their apps😂

[@stevethepocket]

Facebook really needs to just be shut down. Lock up Zuckerberg for life without parole, take every last cent its shareholders ever made from it and dump it into the "pay off the national debt" fund.

[@this_is_patrick]

This reminds of me a news article saying that some dude on Facebook pretended to be a chicken nugget and actually managed to lure a few kids to meet him. Some of its users are one of the lowest, most subhuman people I've ever seen.

[@yungmahon715]

Facebook is a toxic shit hole circlejerk so I agree

[@robinhood5627]

Why would they take action against their own intelligence gathering platform?

[@unclecreepy7025]

Me: KZbin suggestions never match my viewing habits and downvoting videos does nothing to show my disinterest in them. Also me: I’m so glad I have ad blockers so I never have to watch a KZbin ad.

[@SeanWheeler100]

I've got ad blockers too.

[@vakancy]

How do you get add block

[@unclecreepy7025]

Download the app. I use Legacy.

[@Adplusamequalsadam]

You can access your google account and manually select what types of ads you’d be interested in. I forget how but I did it years ago, google also thought I was 40 when I was only 20 or something like that and I changed that too.

[@electrowave114]

Downvoting just tells KZbin that you were ENGAGED in the video, which is all the algorithm cares about. It doesn't care about if you *liked* the video, just about if you were ENGAGED enough to interact with it. So downvoting/upvoting are basically the same thing so far as the algorithm itself is concerned. (Pardon the necro-posting.)

[@KnialPiper]

I started studying for the bar exam...five years after I graduated law school. I needed something to get me pepped up for that task. I used your video to get me re-introduced into studying. I have literally watched all of your videos. Love what you are doing! Glad you taught me some new stuff too!!!

[@Runix1]

Good luck with the exam!

[@tranquilXshorts]

KZbin: Online Creators are on their own when it comes to navigating COPPA LegalEagle: Hold my reasonable affordable tailored suit.

[@boydstephensmithjr]

Indochino always makes LegalEagle look great!

[@beemoney19]

..., fantastic hair product, and killer grizzled beard.

[@zkarebear]

☝️this comment 👏👏

[@RingoYote]

I N D O C H I N O

[@TheItzal11]

@@beemoney19 god I wish I could grow a beard like that, for some reason even though I'm a dirty blond my facial hair comes in in different colors, red, brown, and bleached level white ( to the point you can't tell if I'm growing a goatee unless you touch my chin cause it's so white it's almost invisible). Dude looks damn good

[@odeofdespair]

"the content may not be child oriented but you check all the other boxes" immediately thinks of Happy Tree Friends

[@justintimeleave1360]

Was fun watching Happy Tree Friends at the secondary school level. Seems like a restriction on freedom and essentially a distortion of the world for kids in the long run. Arkangel (Black Mirror)

[@bradypostma5167]

21:20

[@Redmanticore]

fren & stimpy

[@goldstandard2039]

I forgot about happy tree friends. I remember showing a friend of mine it in high school, I can still see their horrified expression when it went from child friendly to bloody massacre.

[@joshualeroy6618]

"KZbin is directed for only the people above the age of 13." PG13 baby shark music get louder

[@dancorps1388]

Daddy shark do do do, daddy skark *KILLS* (insert Jaws screen here)

[@spinningbackkick6021]

"When you say teenage, how old we talking?" - R. Kelly

[@edgarordaz4798]

Lmao!!

[@pitobrain]

"How old is 15 really?" - Dave Chappelle

[@AC3handle]

I dunno. Lets go ask Mr Epstien here. Oh wait...

[@1dogissky]

AC3 💀💀💀

[@DahVoozel]

"It depends on the child." - Sargon

[@ventezcamilo]

I'm 34 years old and youtube still recommends me to use youtube kids, guess because i see a lot of animated and videogame videos. Saddly it is hard to trust in youtube age segregation you mentioned before

[@Call-me-Al]

I watch a lot of doll makers and doll repainters, and other geeky arts and crafts channels. They aren't child directed yet it is easy for KZbin to claim it's for children just because there are bright colors and for instance child marketed dolls like bratz being turned into for instance baby yoda or monsters. You need to be an adult to handle harsh solvents and varnishes, and is aimed at adult crafters. But all those child targetted toys being used as raw material will probably make KZbin claim it is child targetted.

[@Call-me-Al]

I should add that by KZbin I mean KZbin Algorithms. KZbin is already atrocious at handling false copyrights strikes. I have no doubt they will be as bad and worse at handling adult crafting channels.

[@exantiuse497]

I once watched a video by Jim Sterling (a VERY foul-mouthed youtuber) that had a few minutes of footage from a game trailer with pretty colors and childlike characters... and literally all the videos in the recommended tab were actual kids' shows. I mean actual full episodes that someone uploaded on KZbin and I guarantee the uploaders were not the copyright holder. Inappropriate video recommendations and recommending literal piracy, KZbin algorythm in a nutshell

[@QuimBeeLivingstone]

Same, i get that damn pop up asking me to sign up for KZbin for Kids/Kids Premium at least once a week. Maybe 30% of the videos i watch are animated but most of those arent directed at kids. i also see 'recommendations' for incredibly childish cartoons that ive never heard if and arent even in english. Im in my mid-30's. Almost every channel im subscribed to has either the creator worried sick or people in the comments saying can't use intro music in a medical video because you tube will shut the channel down. It has every one so crazy

[@MajinErick]

Right click and tell the algorithm that you are Not Interested. Your preferences will start building.

[@imamused4819]

I think the concern isn't just the FCC ruling. It's the fact that KZbin has a tendency to over correct for problems.

[@redredmane5544]

Well, they got fined TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS for violating the FTC backed FCC’s COPPA laws!!! So you have to forgive them for panicking and going “overboard!!!”

[@d73w80]

If their demonization bots are any indication, I'm scared of what KZbin's automatic COPPA bot will do.

[@sunnyrainyday6820]

Objection: KZbin does use persistent identifiers on children, but they can only discover or even suspect that a child is on the platform through those persistent identifiers.

[@HiddenAgendas777]

Unintended consequence: a Minecraft creator, leaves, a Sky Rim creator stays. This repeats. An animation that is gross, sexual or violent - not aimed at kids. Animation that is cute and wholesome - at risk for being aimed at kids. Result: KZbin becomes less wholesome and kids still come here.

[@Yora21]

Reminds me of: "Rare bird is bothering nobody. Bird gets protected, farmers are not allowed to work on the land close to its nesting site. Now farmers want to get rid of it."

[@Siaman668]

Did you watched the video? Like at all? He covered the animation section. It isn't going to picked for kids just because it hits some factors. It will be individually reviewed.

[@truthiseverything9511]

@@Siaman668 "Individually reviewed" by whom? We all know how well these social media review process go.

[@Siaman668]

@@truthiseverything9511 it's the government. This has happened before. Google the court cases for coppa. There not gonna judge a video because it has let's say 6 out of nine factors.

[@userJohnSmith]

The original comment is still accurate. The incentive (financial) to produce wholesome kids' content like the "little snowflake" song or "Lucas the spider" will be greatly reduced. Going viral will be more difficult (baby shark) and pouring tons of hours into a well produced short is less likely to pay off (Lucas or the song I mentioned) even if kids and parents love what you've made. Educational content is also a mixed bag and depending on FTC whims some channels could take a hit because some videos walk the line between both worlds. This all means the good wholesome stuff my son watches will be less likely to be produced. It also incentivises modifying otherwise PG content that isn't specifically kids oriented and making it more mature just to be safe. Pretending like this isn't a bad thing for kids content in the near and mid term is ridiculous.

[@CPTHammer314]

Hey LegalEagle: May I suggest a review of the film "Law abiding Citizen"? I'm certain it has some flimsy depictions of the legal system, but it also has an underlying theme that criticizes legal procedure like plea bargains, testifying against someone to receive a lighter sentence, and a prosecuting attorney making insane "deals" (as the film puts it) with the accused. Some of the scenes and themes aren't very family friendly; if that's a deal breaker, then i understand. other than that, I think that film would be a great addition to your library of film critiques.

[@bigshow771]

Love that movie.

[@DarkEchoFF]

I started putting the PG-13 logo on my thumbnails and in every video and stream (visible at all times). I also have put a disclaimer at the start of every video and on my start and end screens during my stream. Also when I see someone say they're under 13 I always tell them they need permission from their parents to watch my content. I have a gaming channel and it is family friendly, just NOT directed to children. I hope all of the above I mentioned will do at least something in my advantage of proving I am not a "child directed channel"....

[@ZeldagigafanMatthew]

And COPPA actually has a section for that, unfortunately, the way KZbin went about things, it's a binary system, either you are, or you aren't, and simply claiming to be either is not good enough.

[@capiron2316]

The long-awaited analysis is here at last!

[@ericwsmith7722]

Lets face it, Walt Disney movies are not aimed at children, they are aimed at their parents money.

[@MustraOrdo]

Replace "Walt Disney" with "every media conglomerate" and we can stop pretending that these businesses would give a single shit about the general consumers.

[@MrHamiltonShihTzu]

this is so true

[@ericwsmith7722]

What I learned early on, is if you do not have a KZbin account, you do not have access to "adult videos " as deemed by KZbin . I am sure no minors would have figured out to click *yes I am at least 18. As for copyright infringement , if its not yours,,,,,its not yours.

[@wahlex841]

Lets face it, no commercial product is really aimed at children.

[@giabarrone7422]

LegalEagle Per your own advice in this video, since Eeybui Vee has declared that he is an 11 yr old viewer in your comment section, you would now be subject to COPPA. Will you change the designation of this video to "child directed", when it clearly isn't, simply because you "have knowledge" that children under 13 are watching your video? Or will you keep it as is, and try to argue a "mixed company exception" if the FTC determines you are in violation? I know that this video is one of the most unlikely to be pursued by the FTC, but there a number of "family friendly channels" that have been getting these types of underage user comments too, and it is not so clear cut for them. Should one comment automatically flip the switch to "child directed" for that video? How many to designate the whole channel as "child directed"? Also, what is to stop unscrupulous people from intentional sabotage by either posing as a child, or having a child comment on a competitor's videos?

[@GenoRiolu]

i like the thought of that, just... known bogus claimer: do you have a lawyer that would like to dispute this claim? theyre expensive you know. legal eagle: no, but i personally am a licensed lawyer who, if you were somewhat observant to see, is practiced in this specific field and would happily defend myself on this matter.

[@nnelg8139]

"The lawyer who represents himself has a fool for a client."

[@GenoRiolu]

@@nnelg8139 this is a fair point that i forgot about, but the counter scare tactic potential is still amusing.

[@jaschabull2365]

"So, you have until the 9th to try to stop this." I take it this was the wrong video to put off watching until after Christmas was over...

[@lerilfex4126]

Thanks for talking about this, I feel this is a very important issue for content creators.

[@michaelwinter742]

Impact of COPPA on KZbin: now all videos start with a splash screen, “This video is NOT directed to children.”

[@ScooterinAB]

Pretty much. Though there is a higher degree of oversight and accountability that some channels are going to need to start using (and should have already) when it comes to their community, the reality seems that this will have little meaningful effect.

[@5folklore]

The content of this program is intended for mature audiences, TV-MA for Sexual References, Dirty Jokes, Drug Reference, and Foul Language. KZbin, needs to allow creators to curse and swear in their videos without censorship... it's time to shift gears and focus on that older audience, F-Bombs are now allowed. Adult content is now allowed. Nudity and Sex are not allowed though. XD

[@devrajsengupta9979]

@@FlameOnTheBeat ok boomer

[@soarinskies1105]

Michael Winter I think the bigger problem is the belief that the FTC will abuse the COOPA law in order to get to somebody even when they aren’t breaking the law. It’s happened before and people have been audited, fined, and sent to prison for tax fraud or tax evasion because of it even though they had done nothing wrong.

[@tianasparklez]

Flame Beats nobody is at school 24/7 bruh

[@YonatanZunger]

A footnote: it's not that children are getting a veto on content for adults (39:20); it's that legislators and regulators get a veto on content for adults on the grounds that it may affect children. If you've ever encountered the extremely weird mess that is (say) child porn law in the US, where "we need to fight this obviously bad thing" is used as a tool for all sorts of other things, or obscenity laws in the UK, you can see how this creates a very dangerous mechanism: if KZbin is required to treat content as being aimed at children _by default,_ then can that in turn be used to (say) apply non-COPPA-related obscenity laws, FCC regulations, and the like to all KZbin content as well, perhaps with an exception for "adults-only" content that people need to prove their access to with a driver's license? (Consider that many states consider any discussion of the existence of LGBTQ+ people as inherently sexual; combine that with the "community standards" idea of the Miller test, and a prior legal stance that this material is _per se_ oriented towards children.) This could create a world analogous to that of broadcast TV in the 1960's: everything has to be considered "child-appropriate," and very powerful censors can remove any content which violates _their_ norms of what that is. LGBTQ rights? Cannabis legalization? Discussions that may fail to show the "respect and support that law enforcement deserves," as our Attorney General recently put it? That may all be constitutionally mandated as permissible for adults, but we have long legal precedent (eg Miller v California) for setting entirely different standards for what children can see. That would be _dangerous,_ after all.

[@happycamperds9917]

How are you verified with 100 subs?

[@RobertoBlake]

DekuShrub 99 back in the day you could do it. It wasn’t hard.

[@RobertoBlake]

Yonatan Zunger I’m if the opinion that COPPA is soft censorship and unconstitutionally sound.

[@YonatanZunger]

@@happycamperds9917 Back when G+ and KZbin were merged, I had around 300k subs over there. :) But I'm basically off social media nowadays.

[@YonatanZunger]

@@RobertoBlake I think the law is a train wreck and should be repealed (and perhaps replaced with something written with an understanding of the Internet!), but I'm not convinced it would ever be held unconstitutional. There's a lot of case law that says that "but think of the children!" is a valid punch-through to most things.

[@williamduncan7401]

That is NOT what a cookie is. A cookie is not a file stored on your computer that tracks you and watches you, etc. (too long, won't read: this has a TLDR at the end) In as simple but accurate terms as I can put this: Some important terms are "client" and "server". The client is you, your browser, your computer, etc. when you make a request online. The web server is software that responds to your request. When responding to your request, the server sends you data (e.g. a web page you want to view) and "headers" which are like metadata. Cookies are pieces of data that are stored on the client usually by a browser. Browsers store cookies when a server tells them to store a cookie when responding to a request (via the headers). The server tells the browser 1) what website this cookie belongs to 2) name of the cookie 3) data of the cookie 4) expiration of the cookie (other technical information is sent too). Once the browser has stored the cookie, in any new requests to the web server on the same site, the browser will provide all the saved cookies for that site. Cookies do not track you: as the cookie is a simple piece of data, it does not literally track you. Cookies, however, can be used to track you when a site that wants to track you (let's call this "bad site") agrees with the owners of other sites ("3rd party sites") to include an embedded part of the bad site in the 3rd party site. This "embedded" part can be a like button that a social network provides, a piece of content from such social network like a post, video, image, etc. When your browser loads this embedded content, a request is sent to the bad site and all of the cookies the bad site has set are also set. Now the bad site is informed of your visit of a 3rd party site (which the bad site knows the topic of or other info that it wants to tie to your "interests"). In this way, the "bad site" is being told by many 3rd-party sites whenever someone visits these 3rd party sites (and these 3rd party sites choose to allow this). **Now in technical terms:** (still simplified since if you actually knew how this works you wouldn't be reading this) A cookie is data namespaced by the domain name or other URI of an HTTP server. It includes data such as cookie name, cookie data, expiration, security policy, etc. A browser that supports cookies will save cookies on a client's device whenever it sees the "Set-Cookie" header in responses to HTTP requests. Whenever the browser sends HTTP requests to a URI for which it has saved cookies, it will include any such cookies in a "Cookie" header. Cookies do not track you, but here is how they can: A website can track your visits to many 3rd party sites by asking these 3rd party sites to include e.g. an pointing to the URL of said website that wants to track you. Whenever the is loaded, all relevant cookies are sent together with the HTTP request the generates. E.g. by giving each 3rd party website a unique URI for the , the websites that wants to track you can identify which 3rd party facilitated the tracking. The website that wants to track you will tell your browser to set a cookie with an ID for you. This ID allows the website that wants to track you to know that it is you whenever a request is sent. TLDR: Cookies don't track you. Could use to track by agree between site you open and site that want track. Cookie not bad same as knife not bad. Site can only tell you are same guy visiting again by cookie. No cookie, site think you completely new visitor. No agree to track cookie. No agree ads. No agree data collect not need for site work.

[@minimytch3967]

I was waiting for you to talk about COPPA since I felt like it was inevitable that you'd talk about it. It's relevant to your channel in more than one way, after all. Good to see this coming from a person whom is not only a lawyer, but also someone who is directly affected by the law change. Gives a lot of insight to the issue from multiple perspectives.

[@mattwo7]

13:58 "KZbin would ban that user immediately" Hahahahahahahaha... Oh wait, you're you're serious? Here, let me laugh harder *_HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!_*

[@Legion849]

HAHAHAHAHAHA

[@tiagotiagot]

If KZbin knows they have children watching to sell those children to advertisers, they know who needs to be blocked from accessing "adult" features. It's ridiculous users and creators are gonna be punished. And if they don't know who the children are, then the only responsibility is left to the parents.

[@williameldridge9382]

Unfortunately, that is not the case in the eyes of the law. COPPA and FOSTA/SESTA both specifically hold companies responsible for EVERYTHING that happens on their platform, regardless of if they are aware of it or not. Prime example is Craig's List. They removed their relationship based ad services from their site because if someone was underage or doing anything else illegal, they would be held liable for that content, even if they were unaware it existed.

[@tiagotiagot]

@@williameldridge9382 How is it legal to punish people for things they couldn't even know was happening and had no control over?

[@CrissaKentavr]

@@tiagotiagot The default is you're responsible whether you know the law or not, for something that happens on your turf. That's why they wrote a law to make it so.

[@sharkwolfdarkwolf2625]

@@CrissaKentavr should be the party that is acting illegally. How is a supermarket responsible for a brawl between customers in it's parking lot?

[@tiagotiagot]

@@CrissaKentavr We're not talking about knowing the law though, but about knowing of a problem.

[@OlaftheGreat]

The problem with this system is that still 2 years later it doesn't work correctly. False flags are still a huge issue. Also there is quote unquote children's media that appeals to adults that grew up watching it, and the video features are restricted heavily.

[@MultiClassGeek]

The whole “Age Gate Isn’t Enough” argument bugs me. In this context, an under-13 signing up to KZbin Main is basically the equivalent of getting served on a bar with a Fake ID. Why are the content providers liable for Bad Faith actions on the part of users? Is there no Due Diligence argument here? Or if one were feeling cantankerous, one might try and push the Knowledge argument from United States v X-Citement Video...

[@leoanything7285]

Not really. It’s more like if you ask someone if they’re 18 and they say yes, you sleep with them, oops turns out their 15. You could definitely still go to jail even though it isn’t necessarily your fault

[@JaeJonson]

@@leoanything7285 Better analogy, good job.

[@Fade2GrayOG]

I think the main problem here was that Google knew people were lying about their age and was openly using that fact to make money. The FTC went after them hard because it was such an obvious violation, and didn't care what the implications would be for things like age gating. The FTC aren't saints here, their eagerness to retain as much power as possible by being as vague as they can possibly be while thing threatening massive fines is making life unnecessarily hard for everyone, but Google are the ones who kicked the hornet's nest with reckless abandon.

[@xilrondo2907]

@@leoanything7285 not really. if you have no reason to believe they're under age taking them at their word is actually a perfectly legal defense infact there was a case in DC awhile back that outright stated it (from the SC) if you solicit a minor without the knowledge that they're a minor it's not constitutional (ie legal) to prosecute as if you engaged in soliciting a minor

[@xilrondo2907]

@@Fade2GrayOG alright..let's pretend they will do anything and everything that the FTC and you can come up with to prevent it what is your solution to minors lying about their age online? how do you solve it?

[@Alias_Anybody]

KZbin, some time ago: ALL CONTENT HAS TO BE CHILD FRIENDLY! KZbin, now: IF YOU CAN'T PROVE THAT YOUR CONTENT IS NOT AIMED AT KIDS YOU ARE SCREWED, AND THAT'S YOUR PROBLEM.

[@Kynk]

Did you even watch the video? Just because KZbin has to follow the law doesn't mean this is their fault.

[@Shin_FTW]

@@Kynk Actually since KZbin were the ones pushing creators to be child-friendly when KZbin isn't even for people under 13 in the first place and it was actually illegal to gather data from the audience KZbin was trying to appeal to, it kind of is.

[@Alias_Anybody]

@@Kynk It's absolutely their fault. They refused to pay more human mods, so the adocalypse happened. They deliberately broke the law, now the next one may happen. They f*ck up and the content creators have to deal with the fallout.

[@Kynk]

@@Shin_FTW you did not watch this video....

[@Kynk]

@@Alias_Anybody I agree that KZbin is partly at fault. But I still don't think you watched the video, or if you did you did not understand it.

[@maxcovfefe]

THIS is why nice restaurants should have "child free" seating.

[@merlin4real]

And planes! People would pay double fpr a ticket if they knew kids and pets were not allowed.

[@adamgray1753]

Sadly enough, @@merlin4real, this is a valid idea for our rapidly dying modern world. My local Brookshire's store outlawed therapy animals to be in their stores. Heck yeah! Now that's a win!

[@irobot9250]

@@adamgray1753 I think therapy animals should be an exception. therapy animals are there for, you know, the person's mental health.

[@adamgray1753]

Screw other people's mental health, @@irobot9250. If you need a therapy animal then you are not fit for real life under any circumstances.

[@fleshymeatsac9371]

@@adamgray1753 what a worthless waste of life you are.

[@richardgates7479]

Raising the defined age of a child is a lot like waiting a few more years before telling them about the Birds and the Bees.

[@phoenixnoire2435]

"It's on their behalf that KZbin collects personal information." Is it tho? They can pass the responsibility onto the KZbin user with a "because we said so"? They don't have to demonstrate that? They just get to assert it without any evidence?

[@debilas2354]

Phoenix Cat What evidence do you need? If you're currently running ads on your channel, they are most likely targeted ads (based on personal data collected). Targeted advertisement is more valuable to an advertiser, so youtube can charge that advertiser more and both youtube and YOU earn more money. Targeted ads (personal data collection) improve the monetary value of your content => it is done for your monetary benefit => the data is collected on your behalf.

[@lostwizard]

@@debilas2354 Unless your channel is monetized (and it's bloody difficult to achieve that these days), you are definitely *not* earning any money from those ads.

[@phoenixnoire2435]

@debilas23 So if I rob a bank and tell the police I did it on your behalf you agree you should be arrested? If I use a small portion of the money to buy you a billboard? You agree you should go to jail or are you just inconsistent? Frankly all your gibberish about Google does with collected data doesn't in any way justify blaming any of their victims over it. The fact you're justifying data farming in the first place shows me you probably work for Google

[@debilas2354]

Phoenix Cat that's not the same thing. If a robber suggests they can steal some money for you, or that they could finance your bilboard with the momey they are going to steal and you agree to it, then yes they are doing it (at least in part) on your behalf. On youtube, you currently have a choice of running youtube ads (data collection, applies to COPPA) or disable/not run youtube ads and monetize your content in another way, that doesn't include personal data collection (sponsors/in-video ads (that will probably not be based on collected personal data, just because it would be damn expensive to do on an individual channel level)/patreon/etc.). If you choose to run youtube ads, you choose to run targeted ads and agree with the responsibility of associated data collection. Your example would be true if you had no say in running youtube ads on your content, but you do.

[@debilas2354]

William Astle if there're ads on a video, it's monetized. Why else would you switch the ads on? Unless the video has copyright issues, in which case ads are run for the benefit of a copyright holder and by extension data is collected on their behalf.

[@thecollierreport]

When people have no idea how a law applies, that is tyranny.

[@forcelightningcable9639]

The Collier Report the day I agree with a trump supporter... now I know hell has frozen over. You’re completely right though with that comment.

[@benwillems8584]

Don't tyrants know exactly how laws work and just don't give a damn?

[@Kardia_of_Rhodes]

@@forcelightningcable9639 The worst part about being in a Dystopia is you never realize you're in one until it's already too late.

[@---cr8nw]

@Ben Williams, the law is written in such a way that the SUBJECTS don't understand it and can thus be easily prosecuted.

[@forcelightningcable9639]

Heart of Iron RGF if you study enough historical materialism you’ll realize that this has been going on since the inception of industrialization (and the underlying power relations have never really changed since the “dawn of time”)

[@thecrabmaestro564]

The fact that this guy ends his videos with "see you in court" makes me feel threatened that he might sue me

[@WindowsEater]

I think that was more-or-less referring to KZbin.

[@cdgonepotatoes4219]

Think of it as the opposite, you get sued he'll be on the defense.

[@f4ptr989]

Ugh I could live the rest of my life happily without ever setting foot in a court room again.

[@Zalarys]

@@f4ptr989 ... again?

[@thecrabmaestro564]

Just because he's a defence lawyer doesn't mean he can't sue people

[@TheFanalysisChannel]

I just saw one comment where someone expressed concern that some 'family friendly' channels may almost be compelled to "start swearing like sailors" in order to avoid being regarded as 'directed at children' and, not gonna lie, I genuinely felt as though that was gonna be an element I would be expected to include in my videos just so I could avoid this claim. I haven't even uploaded any new content in years. I was just pursuing it as a hobby. I enjoyed watching review channels for years and I was eventually inspired by the direction I took with my art degree to attempt making my own spin on these channels where I, instead of primarily looking at films/TV shows, I focused more on fan-generated content and original content primarily produced for sites like KZbin or Newgrounds or talk about aspects of fan culture and my own experiences with it. While LegalEagle certainly has presented some interesting points here that could serve as an argument on behalf of creators, the incredibly vague and even subjective nature of this act is what what makes me feel insecure. I only ever built up a small audience on my channel and based on the comments I had seen on my videos, it's very unlikely a significant portion of them were actually children. I never made my content with a child audience in mind. Hell, my most popular video was a review to a fan series that's even older than the children COPPA is supposed to protect. But because of the presentation and the material often referenced in my videos, I can easily see how they may be considered appealing to them. So because of this risk, I ended up making my videos no longer available to view until I could be certain how my channel could be affected. I've had trouble getting myself back into making videos again and unfortunately, with this act going forward, I suspect I may very well never take it up again while such a risk is viable to something I only ever did just for the fun of it...

[@outsider_in]

FTC: "So you see, with all your animated content, we're going to have to mark all of your content as being for kids." Hentai Creator: "..........excuse me?"

[@IIxIxIv]

The FTC said that not all animation is child directed.

[@theorganizer1273]

IIxIxIv but KZbin bots will...

[@IronycheinPain]

Gore animators: Okay here have a dead drawn cat

[@MegaPompoen]

@@IronycheinPain You mean half of a dead drawn cat

[@IronycheinPain]

@@MegaPompoen No. I mean a shot full of cat gut and the cat itself No I do not have that type of content but damn I'm stepping up my game

[@williamsimkulet7832]

9:19 - No one enjoys ads, so no one enjoys targeted ads. I have never once heard a story about someone happy that an ad that relied upon their search data was targeted at them; but you hear stories of people being upset by targeted ads all the time. For example, I took a trip two weeks ago, and for a week practically all the targeted ads were about planning trips.

[@declaringpond2276]

Its not about youe enjoying them, youre a product you dummy

[@williamsimkulet7832]

@@declaringpond2276 He said some people enjoy them, this is irrelevant. The question is whether they're a violation of your right to privacy, and the answer is clearly "yes." And yes, even if you expressly consent, and actually understand it, it can still be a violation of you rights - think "Your money or your life" or "Your money or your freedom" or the like.

[@raztaz826]

I prefer the targeted ones. Better than the belly fat and and 'simple trick' ones

[@williamsimkulet7832]

@@raztaz826 Maybe if the oontextual ads think you're fat, you shouldn't be watching that content?

[@declaringpond2276]

@@williamsimkulet7832 As long as you living in a capitalists society, its not a violation of your privacy. If you actively campaign against big tech with Marxist ideas, yet ignorantly praise other alternatives or other markets you're lost.

[@susume6]

This will not protect children and this will push a lot of content creators into paywall services. Its a loss for everyone.

[@altersami9660]

A paywall might be the better option. How much do creators get per view? around $1 per 1000? How many videos do you watch per month? I'd wager less than a 1000. That means if you pay $1 per month that is distributed to all the video you watch, the creators of said videos would make more money AND you'd be relieved from watching ads and getting your info collected. Everyone wins except advertisers, as it should be.

[@susume6]

My concern is fragmented communities of creators. Especially if you are on a budget.

[@andrasbiro3007]

@@altersami9660 Except getting new viewers will be orders of magnitude harder. Who will pay before they even had a chance to see the content? And how will they even know about it? Then there's just simple laziness, a paywall is a huge inconvenience compared to simply clicking on a recommended video. I actually want to subscribe to such a service, but I keep putting it off, exactly because of the inconvenience.

[@CelticVictory]

George Rome The idiots are the ones running KZbin.

[@gredystar8333]

@@altersami9660 "relieved from watching ads and getting your info collected" lol. It's cute that you think there won't be ads and trackers to sell your info just because it's a paid service. With so little customers they'll need a way to squeeze all the money they can from every single one. Things used to be like: if you aren't paying for the service, you are the product. Now it more like: if you aren't paying for the service, you are the product. if you are paying for it, you are still the product but you pay to be.

[@fragalot]

7:55 That is NOT what a Cookie does. A cookie is just repository of the information the website has collected; it doesn't actively "look at your activity" because it's simply a text file, not executable code that runs on your computer. It's the websitte(s) you use is what reads and writes to a cookie file and does the accrual "looking at your activities" as well as the browser you're using, your operating system, and all your apps.

[@nefertitig4782]

Dude its like a 50 minute video, he explained it well enough to convey his point

[@fragalot]

@@nefertitig4782 but he's wrong about this notion of what cookies do. they really do nothing in and of them selves. it's the websites you use that scrape information from cookies, yet they want us to be held responsible for what is in those cookies.

[@tsilb]

An IP Address can be thought of as a Persistent Identifier. Sometimes they change daily, sometimes they stay persistent for weeks or months, but they do identify a specific home/business/address to Law Enforcement. Even the public can track an IP address to within a town or small area in many cases. Hopefully they don't decide an IP is a PI, or every website in the world will need to be reconfigured, since most web hosting software logs IP addresses of every HTTP request by default. I fear this is a precursor to forcing age verification on every website some day, which will mean we'd be positively confirming that we visited such site, which is a whole 'nother level beyond even PRISM and Carnivore/Omnivore. Ooh, speaking of which, do a video on the constitutional legality and consequences (both good and bad) of government surveillance!

[@weirdoneontheblock]

This is a great point. On top of that if having an ID is at some point required to go online that makes yet another pay wall to those trying to better themselves.

[@JuneNafziger]

I had the same thought. The internet works on the principle that the website will track your IP to *coppa alert* communicate with a specific user. To, yah know, send the website data to the computer and the correct persons website data instead of Adam from Wyoming’s data

[@BichaelStevens]

Freedom is slavery War is peace Ignorance is strength

[@ScooterinAB]

You can't identify a kid from an IP address though; only that a kid was there once.

[@TheAmazingDolph]

The big threat from KZbinrs is KZbin. Likely the automation that won't work will be the worse affect of COPPA complaince.

[@ZakTheFallen]

At this point there's no way in hell it's going to work as intended. KZbin has proven that they're too incompetent to even detect what games/movies are being shown in the video, let alone deciding if that content is aimed to children or not. But they'll continue boasting they have the best algorithms around, nevermind the thousands of false positives their system flags every day. I'm sure the 5 actual human beings working at KZbin are doing their best... problem is that 99% of the company is run by algorithms.

[@xilrondo2907]

@@ZakTheFallen can you? would you qualify GTA as aimed towards kids? i mean kids are a huge part of the audience of the game what about CoD? huge child fanbase and parents that buy the game(s) for them what about videos where people pretend to kill one another? sex scandals? the issue with determining "what's for kids" and "what's not for kids" is it's an extremely...EXTREMELY hard thing to do youtube is also a multi national organization so as one example.. is the show death note for kids or for adults? in it's home country it's a kids show, in others it's not shows with nudity? it's hit and miss..some are made for kids and others aren't DBZ? it's technically a kids show but it's primary audience in most of the world isn't children (under 13) so which do we class it as? how precisely do you determine what is for kids and what isn't? because even on a national (U.S) level there's no clear guideline for when something is and is not made for kids

[@justnoah2073]

How does this help? If a 10 year old child makes a account and says he's 14 he can just watch all the videos not for kids and still get targeted ads.

[@thekriegsmarine5621]

On some websites, I can say I was born when My title was actually formed May 1935

[@piculra7441]

And the kids under 13 who aren’t lying about their age can’t have an account since KZbin only lets you make an account if you’re 13 or older...so kids that aren’t lying about their age won’t get targeted Ads with or without COPPA and those that are lying...well the only way to know they’re lying about their age is if they say they are, and many people don’t make comments...

[@justnoah2073]

You're right! This is just dumb.

[@SeanWheeler100]

KZbin should just block people when they find out that they're lying about their age and not make this stupid rule about marking innocent content as child-friendly and blocking all the features on those videos. It's those kids who did the wrongdoing, not us! An adult who grew up playing Pokémon should be able to watch Pokémon fan videos, and discuss them with other Pokémon fans, not be treated as children. Age hardly matters in your interests.

[@0g0mogosepikworld31]

Sean Wheeler you don’t get it buddy but this is internet. Everybody is anonymous and taking that away would be stupid