DarksydePhil / TheyCallMeDSP / Phil Burnell: General Discussion #2

Where is DSP?

  • He is in Connecticut visiting family/funeral

    Votes: 213 47.9%
  • He and Khet are on a honeymoon style trip

    Votes: 12 2.7%
  • He has an issue (s) with the HOA requiring immediate fixes

    Votes: 27 6.1%
  • Comcast/ISP/Internet Issues

    Votes: 16 3.6%
  • He is taking a Kino Casino style break by not announcing when he comes back

    Votes: 30 6.7%
  • Phil and/or Khet Health Issue

    Votes: 48 10.8%
  • This is a social experiment from DSP

    Votes: 99 22.2%

  • Total voters
    445
  • Poll closed .
>no you don't understand I'm not being impersonated by a channel
>someone is using my personal info and using it to file false claims while pretending to Be me
WHAT THE FUCK. I would be confused too! My boi, does he not realize that even if it's just one guy it's a guy who uses their own channel?
All that wall of text and the only thing he needed to say was: "Someone is issuing DMCA takedown requests using my name and business, but they are not my authorized agent."
 
"I've never claimed anyone's videos. The videos I have claimed..."
So... to prove that he's not lying about not currently striking videos, he confirms that he's been lying for years.
This seems to happen quite frequently. I wonder why that is.

He's also again doing this to avoid the fact that he won't email Youtube. Likely because he wants his best buddy SH to keep impersonating him.
 
View attachment 5001608
Phil just posted proof he took down DDM
View attachment 5001617

Guys I don't copy write strike people *Shows picture of him claiming videos* Ooohhh Phil. Here I was today and yesterday giving DSP the benefit of the doubt he wasn't directly involved in all the gay claiming going on. I am now of firm belief he is up late at night drinking whale tail gin and flagging videos or getting his dents to do it in his secret discord.
 
So he striked at least 1 suprcrzy video. I don't recall suprcrzy reuploading dsp's videos with no commentary or editing, so that already disproves Dave's argument. It looks like the video in question was reuploaded on suprcrzy's 2nd channel, but it's now privated. Why did Phil want that specific video taken down so badly?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kG8lrvmtb88 https://web.archive.org/web/20220812011857/https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCh8OCwBpQ6BnnI4mDECod3w
""fundraiser for taxes or scam wedding, you decide""
Edit: He also said that this person (presumably suprcrzy) "I think they learned a lesson and I retracted the takedown"
suprcrzy.png

Edit 2: suprcrzy just unprivated the video. This is the one phil tried to strike, but this is a reupload. The original video was on suprcrzy's original channel, hence why there is no name appearing because the 1st channel was terminated.
 
Last edited:
I wonder which of his dents convinced him of doing this. Well in the end it doesn't change anything other than give his detractors another piece of evidence that hes nothing but a liar and should NEVER be trusted.
I don't care about dentractors but what i do care about is cunts abusing the copyright system. Go fuck yourself pig you couldn't even win this easy fight. Forever level 1.
 
Posted the video as proof?
Interesting.
Does this prove this is SH? Not in my eyes.
last year this happened was a different story now there are additional elements
Why is the Supercrzy video privated?
Remember Supercringy can ALWAYS choose to upload the video on an alternative platform.
He does not.
Which dent convinced him?
Keith did.

This absolutely a win for him. If you don't know you have not been paying attention. Just read the comments.
By the way Doody and Snort you dumb asses. You got outsmarted by Phil.
Almost as if he is doing this on purpose.
 
Last edited:
He should 100% be slammed for lying about taking down videos for years. His takedown history shows he's been doing it and he has denied it hundreds of times. Just because he decided to show the history doesn't mean we should just ignore his lies. The criticism is perfectly valid.
I agree. I was disagreeing with someone who criticized him for showing it not for what it showed.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Dona Morte
He's also again doing this to avoid the fact that he won't email Youtube. Likely because he wants his best buddy SH to keep impersonating him.
This "impersonting" wording needs to stop. There's no impersonation. Issuing DMCA takedowns on behalf of someone else is completely legitimate, as long as you're authorized to do it. The 3rd party (if it really isn't Phil) is *potentially* unauthorized, not impersonating DSP.
 
So he striked at least 1 suprcrzy video. I don't recall suprcrzy reuploading dsp's videos with no commentary or editing, so that already disproves Dave's argument. It looks like the video in question was reuploaded on suprcrzy's 2nd channel, but it's now privated. Why did Phil want that specific video taken down so badly?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kG8lrvmtb88 https://web.archive.org/web/20220812011857/https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCh8OCwBpQ6BnnI4mDECod3w
""fundraiser for taxes or scam wedding, you decide""
Edit: He also said that this person (presumably suprcrzy) "I think they learned a lesson and I retracted the takedown"
Irony

irony.png
 
So he striked at least 1 suprcrzy video. I don't recall suprcrzy reuploading dsp's videos with no commentary or editing, so that already disproves Dave's argument. It looks like the video in question was reuploaded on suprcrzy's 2nd channel, but it's now privated. Why did Phil want that specific video taken down so badly?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kG8lrvmtb88 https://web.archive.org/web/20220812011857/https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCh8OCwBpQ6BnnI4mDECod3w
""fundraiser for taxes or scam wedding, you decide""
Edit: He also said that this person (presumably suprcrzy) "I think they learned a lesson and I retracted the takedown"
So he admits, in his own video, to abusing the copyright claim system against people who make fun of him until "they learn their lesson" in his eyes. Interesting move DSP, surely there's no way this could ever come back to bite you in the ass.
 
This "impersonting" wording needs to stop. There's no impersonation. Issuing DMCA takedowns on behalf of someone else is completely legitimate, as long as you're authorized to do it. The 3rd party (if it really isn't Phil) is *potentially* unauthorized, not impersonating DSP.
Doesn't the takedown notice say specifically which channel's account it was filed by? I've never seen one so don't know. If so why haven't any of these people getting the strikes just produced the receipts? Seems like that'd make a popular video.
 
If so why haven't any of these people getting the strikes just produced the receipts?
Snort showed a screenshot on Twitter.
We only have Doodys word for it.
Smaller channels I noticed just stay silent.
I know Aqua did when she got struck (did not this time).
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Surly Muppet
Wouldnt be surprised if he got an apology email from the guy. We know he has an apology fetish.
There is a short here... @Meerkat Ink tell ALT to make a short with the Dave incident and over top him reading out an apology super chat he has gotten.

Instant gold. I won't even copyright strike it on my DSPReacts account.
 
Back