YouTube has decided to pull down two of our live videos of Cassidy’s arrest for being a topless free woman. They claim Free Keene violated their “Community Guidelines”, despite the fact that I specifically shot those videos with YouTube in mind. I made sure to avoid showing Cassidy’s breasts on purpose, but I made a couple of errors and a couple of “nip slips” occurred. Here’s YouTube’s policy I supposedly violated:
Most nudity is not allowed, particularly if it is in a sexual context. Generally if a video is intended to be sexually provocative, it is less likely to be acceptable for YouTube. There are exceptions for some educational, documentary and scientific content, but only if that is the sole purpose of the video and it is not gratuitously graphic. For example, a documentary on breast cancer would be appropriate, but posting clips out of context from the documentary might not be.
So, a “documentary” about breast cancer is fine, but live news footage with a couple of brief flashes that is obviously not pandering is not acceptable? I emailed YouTube about their decision, and I don’t expect to hear back. Luckily the videos still exist at Free Keene’s channel at Qik.com, where they originally appeared. As the “Free Keene Live” YouTube channel has been restricted, I have decided to remove it from this website. (Our main Free Keene channel is still okay, as we only place edited content there) Looking at the right-hand links panel, you’ll now see a direct link to our Qik channel. It’s a shame YouTube bows to the demands of a few prudes. The videos they banned were over five minutes in length and had little more than a couple of very brief, accidental, blurry flashes of Cassidy’s breasts. Judge for yourself if you think they were “gratuitously graphic”:
Oh come on now, that's not even a titty bit gratuitous!
YouTube kind of sucks.
Already stopped using YouTube because of their idiotic 10-minute limit for videos in the name of “fighting piracy.” Looks like they just joined my permanent boycott list.
I contacted them earlier today with the following:
I would like to officially file a complaint regarding the removal of two videos that I did not produce.
Specifically, the two videos related to the recent arrest of a woman doing a protest in Keene, New Hampshire. The videos that were shot were done so with YouTube in mind, intentionally avoiding risque shots. By watching this video, you can tell the camera person was intending to document the interaction of this group of people, even stating "I need to shoot this so it's safe for YouTube." This event was specifically conducted with the intent of illustrating a sexist bias in the law where men have the right to reveal their chests, including their nipples, in public but women do not enjoy the same priviledge under the law. The brunt of the video documents the police interaction and arrest of the female activist, and by contrast, the lack of arrests of the topless men.
The group who held this event are "career" activists, many having moved from across the globe to join in this form of real-time, new media centric activism. YouTube has been a huge part of that historically. It's unfortunate that YouTube's policies are now being interpreted in a way that makes newsworthy video "inappropriate". I will admit that for about three frames, it is possible to see a nipple, but camera quality was so low and the shot so fleeting it's
clearly not intended to be lewd, offensive, pornographic, or as the community guildelines specifically state is verboten – sexually explicit.
Thank you, I hope YouTube will reverse this decision and allow the videos to be reposted and not deleted.
Anyone give any thought as to the strong evidence your soapbox videos will provide the police to convict this young lady in court?
Rich, somehow I doubt that the intention here was to get away with a crime.
Dan, Point well taken. But it certainly makes their job easier. If she winds up having to pay a fine or go to jail if she refuses to pay the fine I'm not sure what she has accomplished.
Keep in mind that most take-downs are done because of the community policing aspect of YouTube. That means that it's users that are ruining your fun, not necessarily YouTube itself….
@Rich
Ideally she would be able to do some form of community service and gain (even more) positive public relations for the liberty movement, showing that we are peaceful people who care about the community. But whether that option is available will be up to the judge. What she ultimately does will be her own decision, although I personally would hope that she would not pay the fine, since this would be financially rewarding the city for arresting her and might encourage more of the same from its officers.
As for what she has accomplished, I suppose positive liberty publicity and awareness.
Any/all community service should be performed topless…
Searching for "topless protest" on youtube pulls up plenty of clips with topless people in them. These vids were targeted.
Can't they just be flagged as 'adult'? I thought YouTube allowed some nudity after the viewer clicks an extra time on a warning page.
any community sevice should be performed topless or naked because there is nothing wrong about little kids seeing womens boobs or croch or a mans penis.
womans boobs and nipples are very sexy.
I saw this video on youtube when it was still up & if there was something about it that was graphic I must have missed it entirely. The camera was always at or above her shoulders or focused on the police.
this is enough keep your shirts and bras on in public, stop being ignorant, and get some morals kacy
"KACY"???…WTF???…On March 8, I'm sure she has a lot more than bra & shirt on out in "public". I don't need to review. I fondly remember those videos. I watched them several times, searching for a good nipple shot. NOT ONE! They showed more "tittie/nipple" on regular broadcast(no pun intended – please don't take offense, all you broads out there…)TV – *BEFORE* cable even!…Yes, youtube has a "second-screen log-in" "adult section"…So, yes, these vids were de-posted as a form of ex post facto censorship…Not surprising that the technology makes all this so easy, but disappointing that we humans are so *DEVOLVED*!…Anyway, Kacy, thanks for the reminder, and posting it here. We're always glad to be kept abreast of the latest news…
Greetings!
My name is Erin LaBrecque and I work with Nash Entertainment – in Los Angeles, CA. We produce a caught on tape show and we are interested in licensing the video you posted of the woman topless on the street.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e2ezkOae1Mk http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ClRcOXzVI2A http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L7-4lP787NM&fe…
Do you own this video?
We license videos non exclusively and we compensate to use a copy on our show. Please contact me for more details. And let me know if this is not your video.
Thank you!!
Kind Regards,
Erin LaBrecque Froehlich
Segment Producer
1438 N. Gower Street Bldg. 35
Hollywood, CA 90028
323-468-4615 (phone)
323-468-4740 (fax)
elabrecque@nashentertainment.com
Nash Entertainment produces most of the actual 'reality' type of program,police chase,most daring,etc. Erin LaBrecque has an impressive resume as segment producer. Real people to deal with,great reputation. —bil