YouTuber Angry Joe Threatens To Take CBS To Court Over Halo Dispute

I'm glad I never got into this line of work. It just seems like a real pain in the *** trying to tiptoe around the rules as well as the abusers of the rules and the algorithms. Gives me a headache just thinking about it.😅

Guy must be really full of himself if he actually thinks he can take CBS to court and win.

@LX_FENIX he actually can, easily too! They have no right to take down his videos!

Also, glad he sh*ts on the show, like any sane person would do, cause the show is complete trash! I don't know wtf they were thinking with this, but it's just tv garbage

@LX_FENIX Fair Use is Fair Use. What he's doing is well within the guidelines. Will he sue and win millions of dollars? No. But its an important action to take to protect himself and his livelihood.

I do really believe free speech is being censored by big tech and this article is more about money than anything. But to be fair I've watched angry Joe couple times. To be honest, really think 95% of his viewer base are 9 year olds that think he's cool cause he yells, swears, and dresses up. I can't stand the guy.

CBS is really petty with this, like joe said, maybe they should hire better writer rather than trying to silent critics.

@suikoden Agree 1,000,000,000% x infinity.

His fans lap all this up. He is a very very very savvy influencer. He has a legion of very loyal fans who will no doubt quote their interpretation of the law on his behalf.

YouTube is a minefield. It’s the Wild West and Sheriff YouTube does what it wants when it wants.

Those that have sought to make a living this way know what it’s like. It’s random. One person does a video it stays up and monetised. Another does similar it’s taken down……Another monetisation is removed.

I’m sure CBS aren’t bothered either way. This is triggered by one person employed to do this. Their isn’t a big meeting in CBS towers discussing this video or a personal vendetta - as usual egos are getting in the way here.

The real issue is with YouTube and how it regulates this stuff.

Personally don't care much for the guys videos, but my heart goes out to him...

Having to watch bits of the show FIVE times.
God bless him.

@BBB Basically all comes down to, law is law. Example would be how child labor laws apply to a non governmental private organizations.

Do it! DOOooo IT!!

I'm playing the worlds smallest violin right now...

No sympathy for people who sit at home getting free handouts

@suikoden i'll agree with you when you manage to get the success he had with less effort

I'm sure CBS is terrified of being sued. they'll have to what? choose from among their army of lawyers and spend .0002% of their annual revenue fighting this....

Won't someone please think of the influencers.

No sympathy for a dude that makes his living out of ranting about videogames, oh poor Angry Joe, life is so unfair to him

I often feel that copyright strikes are too easily handed out, fair use rules ignored. This guy though, is a self important *****. So yeah, ***** this guy.

Amazing how many people are more upset about a guy making videos in his house for a living than a company abusing copyright law.

That's OK. You guys keep defending big corporations treading all over your rights, I'm sure it won't have any negative and long terms affects to your rights.

CBS is playing damage control.

The show is awful. They know it's awful. The viewership numbers show it's awful.

So they're doing everything in their illegal power to keep reviews like this out of the public's eye.

I'd absolutely love to see the clowns at CBS be slapped with a fair use lawsuit over Halo.

And you gotta love the CBS fanboys in here. CBS doesn't care about you. Why you stanning for them? The fact that you don't want to see a another greedy corporation out in it's place says all that needs to be said about your person.

@suikoden much like how you couldn't make it in his world, either?

I actually watched his review of the show this morning after reading about the controversy and found it pretty fair. He even said what I have said on here before, who was this show made for? Not fans of the games that’s for sure.

Not a fan of his show or egotistical youtubers in general but good on him. He has every right to express his opinion on the show, taking into account YouTube’s fair use policy of course which he has been following.

We can’t just let mega corporations dictate what opinions we have depending on if they like them or not. YouTube already does it’s fair share of squashing ‘wrong opinions’ too, they go hand in hand with big Corp.

Houston Jones, The World's Strongest Bodybuilder, is one of the few youtubers I watch. Haven't heard of this guy. Anywho, has anyone grabbed and/or playing chernobylite, on xb? How is it, etc?

Fair use doesn't equate to making money off the back of someone elses work. All AJ needs to do is demonetise his video and there is no problem.

CBS know their show sucks. Halo fans were told they didn’t even look at the games or the lore. They seem obsessed with Master Chief getting naked and leaving his helmet off at all times. It’s the classic bait-and-switch that they do with recent shows where they use a popular IP with an established fan base for the marketing, but make the story about a completely different character that most people hate just for the sake of politics.

@InterceptorAlpha For real, I mean what is with all the corporate sycophants who act like the law in no way applies to corporations? Newsflash, if you want to do business in the US you need to abide by it's laws, and last I checked CBS had their headquarters in the US. Nowhere is it written that laws only apply to citizens and government entities, you can't just go around violating the law as a private corporation, and if you think they can just do whatever they want you are in for a rude awakening. Fair use is pretty straight forward in this country and CBS has nothing to stand on. I might not be a personal fan of Angry Joe, but I respect how he must be successful at what he does and a prominent enough figure to where standing up for his rights would be worthwhile in this situation.

Right now he is standing up for the common man. It's disturbing how many people seem to have this "just lay down and die, how dare you go after muh private corporation" sorta mentality.

Newsflash: these big corporations don't care about you, and if they can get away with abusing figures like Angry Joe on what should be a public platform, that will erode away the rights of private citizens on public platforms. It should be obvious how serious the rights violations are becoming. A private business does not have the right to dictate public policy, that would defeat the entire purpose of the government and undermine all of it's authority.

I can't stand Youtubers, the Buld-A-Celebrity Workshiop it produces, or virtually anything that goes on regarding anyone "professionally youtubing". The whole thing is a joke I wish would vanish.

And this guy going on about how threatening he is to Viacom is hilarious and sad all at once.

However, it does highlight a case that needs to be brought to Google, not CBS, in general, where at some point Google/Alphabet handed the keys of Youtube to the big media conglomerates and basically told them Youtube is their playground to delete anything they don't like. There's a lot of legal murk around that model that nobody has really challenged. At some point Western society as a whole simply decided the S&P 500 and it's associated shareholders, most of them foreign, should be their governing body, and that's ok.

There's a larger federal battle to have to modernize concepts such as "free speech" and the bill of rights as well. We've hidden behind "private corporations aren't bound by that", however when those rights were designed, the government was the ONLY large body of governance over the population, and therefore was the only one constrained. In the modern world, we've replaced the public square with private forums that stand in place of it, and replaced the controls of the government with the rules of corporations, where nearly all space is private space. In doing so it traded almost all protections afforded by the bill of rights and the constitution to the whims of the private interests that purchased and thus control nearly all things aside from specifically designated government buildings (that now have security checkpoints.) The idea of said freedoms "from government" are neutered in the modern world, where virtually all things are privately owned and controlled, replacing freedom from tyranny with neo-feudalism, itself protected from any rules of tyranny. But these a much larger problems and issues in modern western Corporate Republics than what these Youtubers are willing (or able) to tackle.

@InterceptorAlpha I'm enjoying the show. Some parts are cheesy though, like a scene involving a pool/bath.

angry joe should just talk about the halo show without showing footage then they cant touch any part of his videos.

@RadioHedgeFund The Halo Infinite Review here on Purexbox has ads on the side of the page. The IGN youtube review for Halo Infinite has ads. The IGN videos for the tv show have ads. Angry Joe's Halo tv show review videos do not have ads.

I dare say that these strikes aren't about "making money off of other's backs" and monetisation.

@AFCC I'm enjoying it especially today's episode

@azsx2001 How is he human garbage?

YouTube and these copyright claims are utterly ridiculous and it needs to stop, it works backwards for a start, they should have to prove you've broken copyright and or fair usage

He's right in what he says, it is fair use if you only show snippets when making a review. He is also entirely entitled to give his personal opinion in his reviews too along with those snippets. The threat of legal action is valid IMO.

@BBB It doesn't. The whole debate comes from the idea that in principle, free speech should apply universally (aside from direct threats of violence, doxing, yelling "fire!" in a crowded theatre for no reason, etc...)
From the American context, their 1st amendment does NOT apply to any private platform, it only applies to the government being unable to silence you.
When you sign those terms of service agreements, one is agreeing to abide by the rules of the platform. Violate the platforms rules, you suffer the punishment for it.

Now we can have a debate if those protections should be expanded and apply to private platforms or not. It's easy to see the arguments in both directions.

What drives me nuts is that some individuals, especially those who lean right on the political spectrum, don't fundamentally understand the difference and distinction, and thus they call it "ERR MAH GURD BIG TECH CENSORSHIPZ". They especially cry and scream that they are being targeted, when in actuality right-wing voices and content dominates Facebook and Twitter in terms of popularity and engagement, as proven by data that tracks this information, easily found on Google.

This gets into an even bigger issue how powerful international corporations have far too much control over our lives, and they're to be held accountable, not praised and worshipped like heroes, which sadly far too many do. Personally for the more libertarian left-types like myself, these platforms are too restrictive and we should have such rights and civil liberties extended to them.

Personally I agree 100% with Joe, and I'm not even a fan of his. YouTube's crackdowns on fair use are draconian and need to stop. But he's delusional if he thinks he can take on CBS and/or Google in court and win.

Anyway, at face value, such blanket statements like "big tech is censoring free speech, full stop!" is both incorrect and highly misleading without the added nuances. Hope that helps.

@Korgon I agree, I'm not a fan of those fandoms as well. Would definitely not want to be constantly having to cater for their "wrath" or worse, their boredom (when they invariably move onto other channels or things as they pass into different phases of their lives).

The “First Amendment” to the US Constitution states that “Congress shall make no law prohibiting freedom of expression or of religion…” etc.

However, YouTube and facebook are technically private companies, although they do have the backing of the “Intelligence Community”.

Facebook began as a CIA program called “Lifelog” - which was closed down on the very same day that Facebook went live.

As long as YouTube and Facebook apply their “terms of service” EQUALLY then in theory they break no laws.

However, they do not appear to do so.
Some posts that are clearly Racist, or threatening, or violent seemed to be allowed to stand.

So, YouTube and Facebook clearly have political (left wing) bias.
Essentially you are seemingly allowed to say blatantly violent racist things on Facebook, provided that those are not directed at the WRONG PEOPLE.

However, their are alternatives to both Facebook and YouTube.