1. Youtube makes money from ads.
2. Jimquisition is funded from Patreon, and despises ads on his content.
3. To resolve this paradox, Jim has found a way to (allegedly) infringe on multiple parties' copyright
4. Youtube's technology doesn't allow multiple monetizers, and therefore in this situation allows none.
If Jim disagrees with the funding stategy of YouTube, why bother with YouTube at all? Is free riding on youtube video distribution that valuable?
But it's precisely because YouTube is a megacorp attached to another megacorp that Jim can even upload videos without paying for distribution.
YouTube and these other companies should follow the law.
And I support strategies, such as this one, that forces these companies to follow the law.
The problem is other parties claiming copyright on his videos, placing ads, and getting the payment from those ads.
Sterling's problem is with 3rd parties placing ads on his videos through copyright claims, not Youtube themselves placing ads. I'm sure he'd react differently if it was Youtube themselves mandating the ads.
I'd think so. The only reason I ran into him at all was due to YouTube, and I can't help but think that's for the majority of people (minus those who came to him via The Escapist). I don't know how else I would have discovered him, unless we want to rely on convoluted word of mouth.