YouTube, LLC 901 Cherry Avenue San Bruno, CA 94066, USA
To Whom It May Concern,
On behalf of myself, my startup, and all concerned stakeholders, I write this open letter to demand an immediate and transparent explanation for your repeated removal and suppression of videos exposing alleged corruption, harassment, and misuse of public funds by “Plug and Play Armenia” (“PnP Armenia”) and its affiliates—including a government entity known as the High-Tech Ministry of Armenia. Read More About this here at LENS (https://lens.lunartech.ai/post/plug-and-play-armenia-exposed). You can check the FULL LEGAL COMPLAINT ATTACHED.
Your actions not only undermine public scrutiny of serious allegations but also raise disturbing questions about YouTube’s proclaimed dedication to free speech, anti-corruption reporting, and the integrity of its privacy complaint process. Frankly, it appears YouTube is more interested in protecting powerful networks of individuals than in upholding its own core values.
Factual Background: YouTube’s Hasty and Conspicuous Takedowns
Our Original Exposé: (February 11, 2025)
We published a 2 hour 43-minute, 44-second podcast in Armenian titled “Plug and Play Armenia Exposed ¦ ՄԵԿ ՄԻԼԻՈՆ ԴՈԼԱՐԻ ԹԱՏՐՈՆ ¦ ՀՈԳԵԲԱՆԱԿԱՆ ՏԵՌՈՐԻ ՕՊԵՐԱՑԻԱ.”
In it, we provided documented evidence of contract breaches, sexism, harassment, and potential corruption carried out by a publicly funded accelerator (PnP Armenia), under the stewardship of the High-Tech Ministry of Armenia.
Let us emphasize: We’re talking about a USD $1 million taxpayer-funded grant. Your so-called “Community Guidelines” apparently do not extend to letting the public see how government money might be abused. Another video that doesn't contain single privacy issue has been shadow banned by you without any legal justification simple in support of hiding evidence - https://youtu.be/aO3f7xvREjs?si=IvVosEKginS10peu "Startup Accelerator or Startup Killer? Plug and Play Armenia Exposed!" .
Immediate “Privacy” Complaint by Mr. Alfredo Gomez
Mere minutes after our podcast went live, we received an absurd “privacy complaint” from someone named Alfredo Gomez about screenshot at 2 hour 11 minutes
Let’s be crystal clear: Mr. Gomez is hardly a private, anonymous soul. His name, phone number, and email address and details appear on official government documents associated with the $1 million in public funds available on the Grant - on High Tech Ministry Armenia website -
In other words, the party complaining about “privacy” is the very person who has voluntarily inserted himself into a publicly funded project with millions and we are presenting evidence that that organization funded by tax payers money have not been involved in multiple violations and misuse of funds. The notion that he can hide behind “privacy” is laughable and, quite frankly, an insult to the public’s intelligence.
Repeated Video Blockage and Removal
YouTube promptly removed, restricted, or suppressed our exposé multiple times, giving us only vague references to alleged “privacy violations.” to support its friends in Germany, Europe and San Francisco.
When we blurred or redacted gomez’s contact details (despite them already being public), your platform still throttled views, ironically resulting in a video with more likes than total “recorded” views.
It seems your system not only censors but also can’t keep track of the math.
English-Language Podcast: Same Story, Same Censorship
After a second exposé in English, once again presenting damning evidence of harassment against a female founder and the questionable diversion of public funds, YouTube swooped in to block, remove, or bury the content with minimal explanation.
We can only deduce you are doubling down on this bizarre campaign to protect alleged wrongdoing while muzzling the truth.
Legal and Public-Interest Concerns: YouTube’s Alarming Behavior
Mockery of the “Right to Know”
Public accountability and transparency are no joke—except, evidently, to YouTube. Under established legal frameworks (for instance, Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, as well as widely recognized whistleblower protections), it is entirely legitimate to disclose evidence of state-funded malfeasance.
Yet YouTube appears more eager to cater to the “feelings” of a public-grant beneficiary who claims “privacy” the moment his name surfaces in a corruption exposé.
Public Figures vs. False Privacy Claims
Mr. Gomez, as the project manager of a government-funded scheme, is a de facto public figure (or at least one with drastically limited privacy expectations).
That YouTube tries to pretend otherwise only invites ridicule. No one can realistically claim “private status” when he’s busy signing off on a million-dollar taxpayer grant.
Conflict of Interest and Collusion Fears
One cannot help but notice that Plug and Play Tech Center (PnP’s parent), YouTube (via Google/Alphabet), and other tech companies implicated in these events (like Substack) are all nestled comfortably in the same San Francisco Bay Area bubble.
The suspiciously swift takedowns, combined with a near-total refusal to elaborate, create the unmistakable impression of corporate collusion to silence a legitimate corruption exposé. We can only wonder: does YouTube see itself as some shadow PR machine for the powerful?
Chilling Effect on Whistleblowing
By effectively punishing us for shining a spotlight on sexism, harassment, and potential corruption, YouTube has given a carte blanche to every other would-be abuser: “Don’t worry, if you file a trivial complaint, we’ll hush the critics for you.”
This places YouTube on the wrong side of the fight against corruption—and ironically, the wrong side of history.
Potential Legal Infringements by YouTube
Violation of Public-Interest Exemptions
Various jurisdictions protect disclosures regarding possible malfeasance involving state funds. YouTube’s dogged removal of factual content implicates your platform in a potential breach of these protections.
We trust you understand that aligning yourself with parties obstructing public scrutiny could invite regulatory attention, especially in EU jurisdictions.
Questionable Application of Your Own Policies
YouTube’s official guidelines purport to allow content on “newsworthy events” and to protect “public discourse.” Yet ironically, our inherently newsworthy exposé was nuked because an individual who leveraged public money supposedly has “privacy concerns.”
If your “privacy complaint” system can be exploited to hide corruption, it’s worthless as a legitimate policy tool.
Failure to Provide Transparent Notice or Appeals
YouTube’s cryptic, dismissive “notifications” offer little recourse or explanation—another hallmark of bad faith.
Some regions have consumer protection and transparency laws that require fair notice and a meaningful opportunity to appeal. You might want to brush up on those.
Potential Breach of Contract (Terms of Service)
Content creators enter a contractual agreement with YouTube’s Terms of Service. If YouTube is applying those terms in an arbitrary, pretextual manner—especially to suppress lawful whistleblowing content—it may well be violating the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing.
Our Demands
Immediate Restoration of All Lawful Content
Remove your nonsensical “privacy complaint” blocks and reinstatement-limiting tactics. Allow the public to see the evidence of possible corruption and harassment in a publicly funded program.
We do not appreciate the comedic scenario of likes exceeding total views, courtesy of your manipulation. Kindly fix that glitch or strategy—whichever it is.
Full Accountability for Unjustified Takedowns
Provide a written, point-by-point breakdown of any alleged policy violations. Show us (and the public) how referencing publicly available documents and screenshotted communications (about taxpayer spending) contravenes your guidelines.
If you have zero real grounds for these takedowns, then publicly apologize for suppressing public-interest journalism.
Renewed Commitment to Anti-Corruption and Anti-Harassment Principles
We dare YouTube to publicly reaffirm it does not stand with alleged harassers and corrupt officials.
We challenge you to prove this by treating genuine exposés as protected commentary—rather than hamper them at the first whine of a newly minted “privacy” claimant.
No Further Retaliation or View Throttling
We demand assurances that you will not continue to sabotage our channel, artificially deflate view counts, or bury content in search results.
We reserve all rights to pursue appropriate legal avenues if YouTube persists in punishing honest investigative reporting.
If YouTube truly operated as a lawful, principled entity committed to public accountability, it would have forwarded this evidence of wrongdoing to the appropriate authorities or oversight bodies—not blocked, buried, or removed it. Our videos contain multiple proofs of serious allegations, including potential corruption, misuse of public funds, and discrimination. Any responsible organization that encounters credible evidence of legal or ethical violations by an entity (especially one headquartered near YouTube’s own corporate offices) has a moral and potentially legal obligation to flag it for investigation, not to facilitate a cover-up. Instead of performing a public service by drawing attention to these issues, YouTube’s platform has actively suppressed the disclosures, effectively shielding the subjects from any serious inquiry. Had YouTube adhered to its own stated values of transparency and social responsibility, it would have ensured the content remained available to the public—and, if necessary, escalated the matter to the relevant authorities (be they Armenian regulatory agencies, EU oversight bodies, or law enforcement) for a closer look. By choosing to censor rather than cooperate, YouTube has not only undermined its credibility, but it has also enabled potential wrongdoers to remain unaccountable for their actions.
In your rush to placate big players (or to avoid stepping on certain toes), YouTube has trampled on the basic right of citizens to learn how their taxes are possibly being misused. By doing so, you have signaled to the world that even verified evidence of harassment, sexism, and corruption can be sacrificed at the altar of a “privacy complaint.”
Consider this a final warning: if YouTube doesn't want to delineate between legitimate free-speech exposés and “privacy” nonsense used to dodge public accountability, hide evidence, unethical and discriminatory conduct against female founders and exposes potential corruption - the platform stands to lose its credibility as a global forum for truth. We will be releasing this open letter publicly and will continue exploring legal and regulatory remedies across multiple jurisdictions.You have fourteen (14) days from receipt of this letter to offer a substantive, detailed response—one that does more than copy-and-paste your usual script. We await your reply and hope you choose to stand on the side of public integrity and lawful free speech.Signed,
%402x.svg){kind=icon}