

YouTube Reaffirms Zoe Keating’s Understanding of Its Contract Is Incorrect - antimora
http://diffuser.fm/youtube-vs-zoe-keating/

======
je42
The most interesting piece was her comment:

she was “very happy to hear YouTube has changed that language in the contract,
and I look forward to seeing it, since mine does not say that.”

So this means there are at least two "classes" of youtube contracts ??!

~~~
infogulch
More likely, zoe is just being snarky and is still contradicting YouTube's
interpretation. YouTube made claims about the interpretation of the current
contract, zoe says "mine does not say that" so she concludes, tongue in cheek,
that there must be a "new" contract with the changed language.

------
Bahamut
The title is misleading - the title of the article is actually "YouTube
Reaffirms Zoe Keating’s Understanding of Its Contract Is Incorrect"

~~~
IvyMike
I'll agree we usually don't like changed headlines here on HN.

But on the other hand, when you say "title is misleading", well, I'm not sure
how--in the end, both the original and the revised headlines mean the same
thing to me.

~~~
akerl_
There's a very different connotation. It's the difference between telling
somebody they're wrong and telling them that their idea won't work. You may
mean the same thing, but for the audience it sounds very different.

~~~
lesserknowndan
How about: "YouTube reaffirms what YouTube employee told Zoe Keating was
incorrect"

