Psycho YT Photographer - advice needed.

NORTHSTAR said

Just a quick follow up on the topic of my YouTube channel content being subjected to malicious copyright claims last week - The lady in question has recently made a video boasting about destroying 27 other YT channels.

I don't know if I imagined it or whether it's real, but something at the back of my mind is saying that YouTube has a threshold of tolerance for malicious copyright strike claims.

Or it might just have been wishful thinking on my part...

Sensual Art said

NORTHSTAR said

Just a quick follow up on the topic of my YouTube channel content being subjected to malicious copyright claims last week - The lady in question has recently made a video boasting about destroying 27 other YT channels.

I don't know if I imagined it or whether it's real, but something at the back of my mind is saying that YouTube has a threshold of tolerance for malicious copyright strike claims.

Or it might just have been wishful thinking on my part..

According to her video she has maliciously destroyed 28 you tube channels content , so the threshold of tolerance must be high 

for anyone interested here is a link to another one of her channels 

https://www.youtube.com/@trollchannelkiller-e6v

priceb61 said

RaphaelPhoto said

....
I have no doubt that Northstar here didn't do it that way, and I quote his own words: "I commented that I disagreed with her", which is perfectly fine.

And she responded to his comment, which is also perfectly fine.

Well, is it?

She made allegations which we are given to understand were entirely untrue that artistic material posted by him on a system which can I gather generate monetary value were someone else's, which is generally regarded as bad, and thus might tend to decrease his reputation among people who include some who would pay for his services.

Pique is not an excuse, I think, IANAL but that looks like dishonesty and deliberate harm, albeit perhaps hard to measure in its extent.

Also,

It may be difficult to prove that a particular artist is the best, now, or ever, and there is scope for opinion, is Rembrandt better than Leonardo da Vinci than Damien Hurst, than {whoever} gets a reasonable answer that they are of a similar high level and importance.

But it is not difficult, and contrary opinion is hard to back up, to look at someone's work and regard it as proved and evident that they are _not_ the best. Or near. 

The difficulty is not symmetrical.

There is plenty of scope for being good, competent, having some nice pictures for sale (David Bailey suggested anyone could make one good photograph, and he was ahead because he had made two).  But best... Trade Descriptions Act.