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

21–30 of 98 posts

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

#21

Post by trashcan »

gruez wrote: post #20
trashcan wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 thu…

It's just that the context is frequently misleading (combined with the character limit to describe the images). If this part is designed so poorly, it makes me less interested in the rest of the product which may have other similar issues. I recognize it is a fairly silly (and trivial) opinion.

Is there a reason the whole image couldn't be scaled down? Or at least be done proportionally. That's how thumbnails work in basically everything else.

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

#22

Post by phkahler »

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…

>> 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.

It was not the photographer who originally tweeted it. At first I thought the original tweeter was the one at fault, but if it was OK to tweet it with the attribution in the image then it was after that when the violation occurred.

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

#23

Post by duffmancd »

akersten wrote: post #15
duffmancd wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I'm also not an expert: based only on my reading of Wikipedia, you are correct and it is bonkers from a US perspective.

The photographer may be in breach of Twitter's ToS for enforcing their moral rights, but that would not _stop_ them from enforcing their rights. In this case, the initial post to twitter was not from the photographer, but someone else. So Twitter likely has nothing to hold against the photographer.

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

#24

Post by [deleted] »

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…

[deleted]

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

#25

Post by numpad0 »

akersten wrote: post #15
duffmancd wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Appears the original uploader wasn’t this photographer/angry copyright holder.

Uploader stole a pic and posted it, which normally constitute a consent to ToS, or something like that. Others unknowingly retweeted the stolen pic and the photographer wants their identity disclosed to proceed with lawsuits.

Twitter argued that retweets don’t count as distributing and requiring a click to show full photo isn’t cropping, but the court determined it does/it is.

Counterintuitive way to draw a line but I’m not sure if it’s terrible that court find cropping the photo with CSS require user consent. Maybe not as bonkers as Coinhive case.

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

#26

Post by talaketu »

duffmancd wrote: post #23
akersten wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I'm also not an expert: based only on my reading of Wikipedia, you are correct and it is bonkers from a US perspective. The photographer may be in breach of Twitter's ToS for enforcing their moral rights, but that would not _stop_ them from enforcing their rights. In this case, the initial post to twitter was not from the photographer, but someone else. So Twitter likely has nothing to hold against the photographer.

> So Twitter likely has nothing to hold against the photographer.

Nothing in the article suggests any agreement between the photographer and Twitter.

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

#27

Post by darren_ »

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…

> This is bonkers. The attribution is still there, you just have click it

This means, almost by definition, that the most viewed versions of these photos on twitter, probably by a very high margin, have no attribution.

Why is this bonkers? The right to attribution is clear, and it’s not your place to judge whether or not the artist should be exercising it.

The latter question comes down to how feasible it is for a person tweeting to know how their tweets are going to look on the main timeline w/regard to attribution, which seems like something it’s reasonable for a court to decide.

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

#28

Post by aahhahahaaa »

akersten wrote: post #15
duffmancd wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It's weird in our context but there's followable logic there.

Being absurdly protective of the person who did the work is at least erring on the side of protection.

It's not impossible to imagine a world where the internet could have social media platforms with some attempt at media attribution functionality...

...instead we have the wild west where the vast majority of content is shared without acknowledgement, let alone attribution or permission. Even EXIF attribution data is stripped whether you like it or not. You have incredibly successful artists trying to protect their work with watermarks and JS-disabled right-clicks. Seems silly.

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

#29

Post by em-bee »

darren_ wrote: post #27
gruez wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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…

> This is bonkers. The attribution is still there, you just have click it This means, almost by definition, that the most viewed versions of these photos on twitter, probably by a very high margin, have no attribution. Why is this bonkers? The right to attribution is clear, and it’s not your place to judge whether or not the artist should be exercising it. The latter question comes down to how feasible it is for a pe…

what's bonkers is wanting to punish users for something they didn't do. judges not understanding technology strikes again.

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

#30

Post by em-bee »

Camillo wrote: post #12

IIRC, one reason why there are so few images on the Japanese Wikipedia is that it's almost impossible to avoid running into legal trouble with pictures there.

how is japans copyright different than the rest of the worlds? as far as i know most countries either follow the european model with stronger moral rights, or the US model.

unless japans courts take a stronger interpretation of the laws than most other countries. or few people in japan release their images under suitable licenses...

Post reply on HN