No YouTube for You!
Governments bans website for questionable video
Andrea Francese
Issue date: 2/22/07 Section: Impact Staff Blogs
- Page 1 of 1
FEB. 28 - YouTube has become an Internet sensation. Hundreds of thousands of videos ranging from clip of television shows, music videos and home videos have been posted since the site was founded in February of 2005. Currently YouTube staffs 67 employees and was named "invention of the year" in 2006, but not all the videos are worthy of the "invention of the year" website and the website is coming under fire for what its members post. In some very harsh moves, some countries are banning the website completely.
A couple of weeks ago a video of Daniela Cicerelli, a Brazilian model,was posted of her having sex on the beach. YouTube did not remove the video and Cicerelli and her boyfriend filed suit in Brazilian court in a move by the government. YouTube was banned for failing to remove the brazen video.
The Brazilian case is a bit hypocritical. I mean if you're famous and going to have sex on a public beach in the middle of the day, can you honestly be surprised that it resurfaces in some form? Considering the technology of video recording on cell phones and other gadgets, you shouldn't be.
India soon followed the example of Brazil, calling for YouTube to be banned from the country following the emergence of a video staring a Gandhi look-a-like in underwear swinging around a stripper pole. Although the video is not really funny (more stupid then anything) I also don't think it's overly offensive, but India and similar countries have previously banned other websites and web services because of questionable content.
It's funny to consider that countries can ban websites completely, especially for home videos created by people who think they are amusing or for videos captured on a public beach. If its public property videos are fair game and although most of the home videos are not at all funny, they are much closer to stupid or moronic for an entire government to take offense to the twisted humor of a certain few is ridiculous.
A couple of weeks ago a video of Daniela Cicerelli, a Brazilian model,was posted of her having sex on the beach. YouTube did not remove the video and Cicerelli and her boyfriend filed suit in Brazilian court in a move by the government. YouTube was banned for failing to remove the brazen video.
The Brazilian case is a bit hypocritical. I mean if you're famous and going to have sex on a public beach in the middle of the day, can you honestly be surprised that it resurfaces in some form? Considering the technology of video recording on cell phones and other gadgets, you shouldn't be.
India soon followed the example of Brazil, calling for YouTube to be banned from the country following the emergence of a video staring a Gandhi look-a-like in underwear swinging around a stripper pole. Although the video is not really funny (more stupid then anything) I also don't think it's overly offensive, but India and similar countries have previously banned other websites and web services because of questionable content.
It's funny to consider that countries can ban websites completely, especially for home videos created by people who think they are amusing or for videos captured on a public beach. If its public property videos are fair game and although most of the home videos are not at all funny, they are much closer to stupid or moronic for an entire government to take offense to the twisted humor of a certain few is ridiculous.
Be the first to comment on this story