- Joined
- Feb 28, 2021
Why AmJad don't simply Copyright Claim, rather than Copyright Strike, baffles me.
A Copyright Claim, if upheld, nets the claimant the revenue from the video claimed and leaves the video up. If the claimed video is making more money than your original video, it's a win-win. Claiming a video also doesn't threaten the existence of the channel that's claimed against, so there's way less hate for the claimant.
However, a Copyright Strike (if upheld) does hurt the channel struck, can get the channel yeeted from YT entirely (and can cause negative blowback to the striker, along with sympathetic attention to the channel struck.) Blowback can also come from YT itself if you make too many unsupported strikes, it could be the striker's channel that takes the yeet.
All that, and yet striking nets the striker no revenue.
AmJad Combined Business Savvy < A Box of Rox.
A Copyright Claim, if upheld, nets the claimant the revenue from the video claimed and leaves the video up. If the claimed video is making more money than your original video, it's a win-win. Claiming a video also doesn't threaten the existence of the channel that's claimed against, so there's way less hate for the claimant.
However, a Copyright Strike (if upheld) does hurt the channel struck, can get the channel yeeted from YT entirely (and can cause negative blowback to the striker, along with sympathetic attention to the channel struck.) Blowback can also come from YT itself if you make too many unsupported strikes, it could be the striker's channel that takes the yeet.
All that, and yet striking nets the striker no revenue.
AmJad Combined Business Savvy < A Box of Rox.
Last edited: