The case was a nonstarter from the very beginning. As a private company, Youtube can decide to host, or not host, whatever videos they want. And they can put age restrictions on whatever videos they deem inappropriate, even Prager U videos.
We know Youtube is biased. What can we do about it?
U.S. District Court Judge Lucy Koh wrote in her decision on Monday that PragerU had failed to demonstrate that age restrictions imposed on the company’s videos are a First Amendment violation.
“PragerU’s videos weren’t excluded from Restricted Mode because of politics or ideology, as we demonstrated in our filings,” a YouTube spokesperson said in a statement. “PragerU’s allegations were meritless, both factually and legally, and the court’s ruling vindicates important legal principles that allow us to provide different choices and settings to users.”
I used to have videos on my blog long ago. People read the blog, watched a video or 2 and that was that. I never heard of you tube. SO….. can’t you just embed? Your own videos and not use YouTube?
I think the site eject eject eject used to host its on videos. But I could just be off the beam in today’s world. Maybe you have to go through UT.
See how this precedent plays out for other private companies…like bakeries…
“As a private company, Youtube can decide to host, or not host…”
But if they were bakers they would not have that right.
Tekkies are just the unwitting stooges of the far left. Hopefully it will dawn on them at some point that they are behaving like totalitarian thugs.
Thanks to all the schools out there that have produced these little creeps.
Oh and Catholic institutions must pay for abortions and the pill….
Ya’ know what the GREAT thing about working for SCREWtube these days is?
As useful idiots (along with FAZEbook & Tweeter) they’ll be allowed to ride in the LAST boxcar… 😳
You Tube should be declared a common carrier.