Live data from Hacker News

Japan top court tells Twitter to disclose retweeters' info

japantimes.co.jp

31–40 of 98 posts

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

#31
post #27
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…

>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.

Does it mean that any sort of action needed to see the attribution constitutes "hiding" it, opening you to liability? What if the image was too big and I have to scroll down to see the attribution? What's the difference between having to click on a thumbnail to see an attribution, and having to scroll down? What if the attribution is too small to see at normal zoom levels, and you have to zoom in? Unless his name was plastered all over the picture (thereby ruining it), I doubt anyone on a phone is going to be able to read the authorship information. Do we need modals in front of every image with the attribution, so we know for sure that the viewer knows who created the image?

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

#32
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.

The laws are also reflective of the culture --- from what I've seen, they are very pro-copyright, pro-DRM (think of companies like Sony). In contrast, someone attempting to do this in the US would probably lead to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect .

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

#33
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…

This reminds me of a question I asked before on Wikipedia [1].

Some of their pictures on Commons, such as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Belgium_-_Location_Map_(2... , are from UNOCHA (United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs).

UNOCHA specifically asks their work to be 'Credit as follows: "Credit: OCHA"', but obviously Wikipedia don't do it on their article page if you just embed the picture, you have to click on the picture to see the credit.

Actually, they even went further and removed the "OCHA" watermark from the original image (see File History).

To be honest, I wasn't super satisfied with the answers I got there (see ref), but then again I'm not familiar with this topic.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy...

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

#34
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.

Regardless of the legal issue, I sure hate it when social media services like Facebook and Strava crop my photo thumbnails to fit a certain aspect ratio. They frequently end up cropping out important parts like someone's face. I wish there was an option to not crop, and instead add white space around the image to make it fit.

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

#35

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.

The laws are also reflective of the culture --- from what I've seen, they are very pro-copyright, pro-DRM (think of companies like Sony). In contrast, someone attempting to do this in the US would probably lead to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect .

Japan also has strong privacy laws, extending into excessive and absurd defamation laws.

For example, if you have piles of proof of someone committing a crime like sexual assault and the cops refuse to take it seriously, you can reliably post it on Twitter these days and people will take it seriously. In Japan, the person who committed the crime can reliably sue you for ruining their reputation and win. Stating actual plain facts about a person that harms their image on any public platform will land you in trouble, unless it’s something that’s clearly in the public interest to know (like if a company is putting arsenic in their baby food). It’s likely one reason why incidents of work harassment and abuse only become public after someone kills themselves.

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

#37
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…

This reminds me of a question I asked before on Wikipedia [1]. Some of their pictures on Commons, such as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Belgium_-_Location_Map_(2... , are from UNOCHA (United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs). UNOCHA specifically asks their work to be 'Credit as follows: "Credit: OCHA"', but obviously Wikipedia don't do it on their article page if you just embed the pic…

[deleted]

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

#38
post #30
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...

[deleted]

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

#39
post #30
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...

For starters, Japanese copyright laws don't have a fair use exception. Publishers lobby against any attempts to introduce one hard.

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

#40
Possibly unrelated, as this is a bit of a stretch in giving credit, but Twitter has a huge problem with people posting content as if its their own. I've seen multiple things go viral on some random's Twitter account and they have zero relation to the creators of the content, whether it be an image or video, or even just a dumb joke. I feel like retweets died when the button was actually added to the platform. That platform has eroded a ton over the past decade.
Post reply on HN