Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Japan top court tells Twitter to disclose retweeters' info

japantimes.co.jp

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 98 posts

Re: Japan top court tells Twitter to disclose retweeters' info

#11

Post by bscphil »

whym wrote: post #5

My understanding is: Photographer published a photo on their own website. Tweeter posted it on Twitter. Twitter trimmed it, removing the credit line. Retweeter retweeted it. Photo was still trimmed. Photographer sued Retweeter for distributing their work without proper credit. An obvious question would be if Photographer asked them to delete the tweet(s) first, and why they chose to sue Retweeter not Tweeter. I'm gue…

> Twitter trimmed it, removing the credit line.

As far as I understand, Twitter does not crop photos, at least not without user intervention, so I don't understand how this part of it could have happened.

Re: Japan top court tells Twitter to disclose retweeters' info

#13

Post by gruez »

halfjew22 wrote: post #9
ladberg wrote: post #4

I don't use Twitter so I could be wrong about what happened, but this seems crazy. Three people retweeted a photo that included the photographer's name. However, Twitter didn't show the name in the thumbnail because it cropped the image (but was still visible when enlarged). Somehow, this led to the government mandating Twitter to release the identities of the retweeters? Does anyone know how a random image from 10 y…

Well, to be fair, the judge in the dissenting position (1/5) freed the 3 retweeters from blame because they did not cut off the photographer's name, but rather Twitter did in order to fit the aspect ratio displayed within the application. I'm still confused though after reading the article.

>but rather Twitter did in order to fit the aspect ratio displayed within the application.

This is bonkers. The attribution is still there, you just have click it. Besides, I doubt anyone who cared about the image is going to be content looking at the low-res thumbnail. The reputational damage done to the photographer is negligible.

Punishing the retweeters is also problematic because they themselves didn't crop the picture, twitter did. What does this mean for cropping that's done by the user-agent, or is otherwise device specific? eg. you post on the desktop site, where nothing is cropped, so you think everything is okay. Little do you know on the mobile site, all the images get cropped. Are you now liable as well?

Re: Japan top court tells Twitter to disclose retweeters' info

#14

Post by duffmancd »

akersten wrote: post #6

Is there some special right for a photographer in Japan to have their name shown on an image, that determines whether a reproduction of it is an infringement? As far as I know, you acknowledge the service will transform your work as part of the ToS for uploading an image to it. Unless, of course, the photographer wasn't the one who uploaded the picture to Twitter in the first place, but then why is the case hinged on…

There is. Japan's "copyright" laws are different and include Moral rights (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_law_of_Japan#Moral_r...) which are nontransferable and include the right to how your work is attributed.

I'm not sure why it is the retweeters, rather than Twitter who are responsible for the automatic cropping that occurs when you retweet. But I neither a Lawyer nor a Japanese Copyright expert.

Re: Japan top court tells Twitter to disclose retweeters' info

#15

Post by akersten »

duffmancd wrote: post #14
akersten wrote: post #6

Is there some special right for a photographer in Japan to have their name shown on an image, that determines whether a reproduction of it is an infringement? As far as I know, you acknowledge the service will transform your work as part of the ToS for uploading an image to it. Unless, of course, the photographer wasn't the one who uploaded the picture to Twitter in the first place, but then why is the case hinged on…

There is. Japan's "copyright" laws are different and include Moral rights ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_law_of_Japan#Moral_r... ) which are nontransferable and include the right to how your work is attributed. I'm not sure why it is the retweeters, rather than Twitter who are responsible for the automatic cropping that occurs when you retweet. But I neither a Lawyer nor a Japanese Copyright expert.

So, asking non-facetiously, as an artist I have the right to decide how my work must be attributed, even if the platform I'm posting it to tells me in their ToS that my work will be altered in a standard way in the course of using the service?

If my understanding is correct (with the caveat that I am nowhere close to an expert), that's frankly bonkers and I have no idea how Twitter can operate at all in Japan.

Re: Japan top court tells Twitter to disclose retweeters' info

#17

Post by anonymousab »

bscphil wrote: post #11
whym wrote: post #5

My understanding is: Photographer published a photo on their own website. Tweeter posted it on Twitter. Twitter trimmed it, removing the credit line. Retweeter retweeted it. Photo was still trimmed. Photographer sued Retweeter for distributing their work without proper credit. An obvious question would be if Photographer asked them to delete the tweet(s) first, and why they chose to sue Retweeter not Tweeter. I'm gue…

> Twitter trimmed it, removing the credit line. As far as I understand, Twitter does not crop photos, at least not without user intervention, so I don't understand how this part of it could have happened.

When you make a post with an image, the twitter timeline will show a cropped viewport of the image. Depending on the size and shape of the image, some parts may be cut off until you expand it.

For example: https://imgur.com/pP0HrhG https://twitter.com/Foone/status/1286456314701307906/photo/1

The same thing applies to retweets.

Re: Japan top court tells Twitter to disclose retweeters' info

#18

Post by dylan604 »

gruez wrote: post #13
halfjew22 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, to be fair, the judge in the dissenting position (1/5) freed the 3 retweeters from blame because they did not cut off the photographer's name, but rather Twitter did in order to fit the aspect ratio displayed within the application. I'm still confused though after reading the article.

>but rather Twitter did in order to fit the aspect ratio displayed within the application. This is bonkers. The attribution is still there, you just have click it. Besides, I doubt anyone who cared about the image is going to be content looking at the low-res thumbnail. The reputational damage done to the photographer is negligible. Punishing the retweeters is also problematic because they themselves didn't crop the…

Sounds more like the reputational damage is to the court system allowing this to occur.

Re: Japan top court tells Twitter to disclose retweeters' info

#19

Post by trashcan »

bscphil wrote: post #11
whym wrote: post #5

My understanding is: Photographer published a photo on their own website. Tweeter posted it on Twitter. Twitter trimmed it, removing the credit line. Retweeter retweeted it. Photo was still trimmed. Photographer sued Retweeter for distributing their work without proper credit. An obvious question would be if Photographer asked them to delete the tweet(s) first, and why they chose to sue Retweeter not Tweeter. I'm gue…

> Twitter trimmed it, removing the credit line. As far as I understand, Twitter does not crop photos, at least not without user intervention, so I don't understand how this part of it could have happened.

Twitter does in thumbnail previews. If you've seen someone post a picture of text, the thumbnail is basically unusable because a significant portion is missing until you click through to the full-size version.

It's one of the main reasons I never use Twitter, as silly as that is. It is annoying to see a picture that is cropped that sometimes obscures (or even changes if an important part is missing) the actual point being made because it isn't in the preview. It just seems like a really poor design.

Re: Japan top court tells Twitter to disclose retweeters' info

#20

Post by gruez »

trashcan wrote: post #19
bscphil wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Twitter trimmed it, removing the credit line. As far as I understand, Twitter does not crop photos, at least not without user intervention, so I don't understand how this part of it could have happened.

Twitter does in thumbnail previews. If you've seen someone post a picture of text, the thumbnail is basically unusable because a significant portion is missing until you click through to the full-size version. It's one of the main reasons I never use Twitter, as silly as that is. It is annoying to see a picture that is cropped that sometimes obscures (or even changes if an important part is missing) the actual point…

>It's one of the main reasons I never use Twitter, as silly as that is. It is annoying to see a picture that is cropped that sometimes obscures (or even changes if an important part is missing) the actual point being made because it isn't in the preview. It just seems like a really poor design.

Is it really that hard to click the picture before viewing it? It seems like a necessary evil to me. If you don't do the thumbnail thing and the picture is huge (or has odd dimensions), then it's going to make scrolling past the picture a pain.

Post reply on HN