YouTube suspends filmmaker Oliver Ressler’s account without warning
art-leaks.org
art-leaks.org
Inhuman-ops
But that's a bit like the legal system. A government or civil case against you may be completely unwarranted, but it likely will cost you time and resources (and connections to powerful people) to fight.
If one feels that YouTube is abusing a monopoly position, then one should be in favor of breaking up YouTube. Period.
You cannot deny business to someone because of their race or ethnicity, and generally people think this is a good thing.
Legal theories aside, I think people feel that it is unjust when a monopoly or near-monopoly business acts in a manner discriminatory to one group or another.
If nothing else, it informs others about Youtube censorship - even the most radical libertarians are pro-informed consumers.
Governments tend to put additional restrictions on the biggest players, and perhaps YouTube should be the subject of such a restriction.
Do I think that YouTube should be forced to allow content on their platform that they don't want? No.
Do I think the monopoly of cloud providers (AWS, GCP, etc) should be allowed to censor content they don't want? No.
The solution here is finding a hosting provider to host your own content. IPFS is a great alternative, and LBRY has proven to be pretty open-minded.
If you build up a library of your creations, your email, your communications, whatever, and the masters can just flip a switch and make it all unavailable to you (and the rest of the world), then you are really putting yourself at risk by using those services.
Often it seems "AI" just makes mistakes. Whether that's the case or not, the dispute "resolution" phase is almost universally a joke - a preprogrammed NO response.
This is not reasonable, and it ultimately should fall under consumer protection or other standards.