39
Russell Brand allegations question from non American (www.theguardian.com)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml
35 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I was reading about the allegations against Russell Brand and couldn't help but wonder how it works legally that his revenue can be blocked based on allegations and before any juridical ruling.

Don't get me wrong I don't know much about the guy and what he did or didn't do and agree that anyone should be punished according to their crimes.

But how is this possible with the principal of innocent until proven guilty? I'd be happy if someone could explain me.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 6 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

I think it means they're just not paying him. I believe they still play ads on demonetized videos.

There is a difference if the creator demonetizes a video, which I believe removes the ads.

For smaller channels that haven't reached the threshold of monetization, they still have ads on their videos.

I'm including pre-roll ads in my calculation here.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •