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

Netflix Targets Critical ‘Cuties’ Tweets with Copyright Takedown Requests

torrentfreak.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 161 posts

Re: Netflix Targets Critical ‘Cuties’ Tweets with Copyright Takedown Requests

#121

Post by skitout »

EricE wrote: post #93
skitout wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The director said she did want to denounce over-sexualisation of young girls with this movie. I (and 2 of my friends, feminist women) think she managed to do it, with a relatively good and a relatively subtle movie. Talking about over-sexualisation of young girls require to show stuff linked to... over-sexualisation of young girls, to show some aspect of reality... But if you find this movie erotic, well the problem…

If you turn off the sound (mute the movie) does that message come across? Because there are people who will watch oversexualized stuff like this with the sound off for their own purposes. You don't have to do the thing you are being critical of in order to be critical of it. There is nothing sophisticated in "pushing boundaries" to make a point - it's sophistry to justify child pron, plain and simple.

If you turn off the sound, most film suck and don't have their message passed across.

Of course you don't have to show what you show, but then you make an entire different movie. The fact you could make a different movie, does not make a thing "morally" bad or wrong.

The public swimming-pool of you city is probably much more exciting for pedophile than this movie. Do you suggest swimming-pool are child porn ? Should we close it ?

Re: Netflix Targets Critical ‘Cuties’ Tweets with Copyright Takedown Requests

#122

Post by odshoifsdhfs »

brabel wrote: post #119
cutitout wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The show is criticized for being essential erotic material for pedophiles, filled with up close shots of bums and panties of children. The American poster comes closer to that, but is still tame compared to the actual content, which is what this is about. > And it's worked, in a sense: It wouldn't be on the front page of HN otherwise. Compared to other stories, this one is already being penalized, and the top comment…

I've watched this movie and found it to be a very touching movie. It's a shame everyone seems to focus only on the children's sexualization when that, while definitely pushing the boundary a bit further than most people are used to, is clearly contrasted to the girl's otherwise incredibly childish behaviour the whole length of the movie, as well as her desire to escape oppression by her own family. The girls are 90%…

I only watched some clips, so won't super address the movie context, but are you really comparing 11/12 year old girls dancing the same way as a 17 year old and say it is ok? So, is it ok to have sex with 12/13 year olds, since most girls a few years older (18) can do it with anyone? (and in Europe from 16?)

I am sorry but I don't understand. I hope it isn't what you are trying to say, but if you think a behaviour of an 11 year old is ok because a 17 year old also does it, I just can't agree and hate that train of thought.

* this coming from an european liberal with an 8 year old boy

Re: Netflix Targets Critical ‘Cuties’ Tweets with Copyright Takedown Requests

#123

Post by brabel »

odshoifsdhfs wrote: post #122
brabel wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've watched this movie and found it to be a very touching movie. It's a shame everyone seems to focus only on the children's sexualization when that, while definitely pushing the boundary a bit further than most people are used to, is clearly contrasted to the girl's otherwise incredibly childish behaviour the whole length of the movie, as well as her desire to escape oppression by her own family. The girls are 90%…

I only watched some clips, so won't super address the movie context, but are you really comparing 11/12 year old girls dancing the same way as a 17 year old and say it is ok? So, is it ok to have sex with 12/13 year olds, since most girls a few years older (18) can do it with anyone? (and in Europe from 16?) I am sorry but I don't understand. I hope it isn't what you are trying to say, but if you think a behaviour of…

I am saying that if it's ok for day TV to show 17 year old girls dancing like this, then yes, we should expect our 11 year olds to do the same.

Why are you bringing sex into this. Do you see sex on day TV with 17 year old girls?

Re: Netflix Targets Critical ‘Cuties’ Tweets with Copyright Takedown Requests

#124

Post by axaxs »

hhas01 wrote: post #104
axaxs wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One thing my friends and I agreed on here is that many of the scenes at face value wouldn't be so bad if not for the camerawork. Fine, show kids dancing in a normal shot. Instead, they chose to deliberately zoom in on their private areas, even out-of-place doing so, which pushed it into creepy territory, regardless how the creator intended it.

“private areas” Really? Were they unclothed? If not, perhaps there’s a different message here that you may have missed? Go watch “Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer”, which I believe you’ll find on Netflix too. You’ll totally cheer along when they murder the fat man, who completely deserved it BTW. Though if you’re still cheering when they watch the home video they made of themselves murdering that entire family, the…

Sorry, I don't want to see zoomed in shots of little girls' crotches, clothed or not, regardless of any context. I don't really have much more to argue about.

Re: Netflix Targets Critical ‘Cuties’ Tweets with Copyright Takedown Requests

#125

Post by odshoifsdhfs »

brabel wrote: post #123
odshoifsdhfs wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I only watched some clips, so won't super address the movie context, but are you really comparing 11/12 year old girls dancing the same way as a 17 year old and say it is ok? So, is it ok to have sex with 12/13 year olds, since most girls a few years older (18) can do it with anyone? (and in Europe from 16?) I am sorry but I don't understand. I hope it isn't what you are trying to say, but if you think a behaviour of…

I am saying that if it's ok for day TV to show 17 year old girls dancing like this, then yes, we should expect our 11 year olds to do the same. Why are you bringing sex into this. Do you see sex on day TV with 17 year old girls?

> Is it normal for a 17 year old girl to behave like that on TV? How about 20?

I have seen 17/20 year olds in tv (I think, I don't double check actress ages, but I'm sure at least in porn there are 18 year old ones) and I WOULD NEVER expect to see a show/movie about 11 year olds emulating that.

And you are basically saying (because it is in tv) we should accept the same behaviour from an 11 year old as an 17 year old, which I strongly oppose. there is 6 years difference and A LOT of things in between for me to find it ok. I don't mind a 17/18 old to be naked on tv, I don't think it is ok for an 11 year old. I think it is ok for 17/18 year old to emulate sex/erotic things on tv, I don't think it is for a 11 year old.

There is also the concept of consent, which I don't think an 11 year old should be able to give to spread her legs on tv, while a 17 year old should (maybe not all but hey...).

Re: Netflix Targets Critical ‘Cuties’ Tweets with Copyright Takedown Requests

#126

Post by [deleted] »

skitout wrote: post #76
cutitout wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The show is criticized for being essential erotic material for pedophiles, filled with up close shots of bums and panties of children. The American poster comes closer to that, but is still tame compared to the actual content, which is what this is about. > And it's worked, in a sense: It wouldn't be on the front page of HN otherwise. Compared to other stories, this one is already being penalized, and the top comment…

The director said she did want to denounce over-sexualisation of young girls with this movie. I (and 2 of my friends, feminist women) think she managed to do it, with a relatively good and a relatively subtle movie. Talking about over-sexualisation of young girls require to show stuff linked to... over-sexualisation of young girls, to show some aspect of reality... But if you find this movie erotic, well the problem…

[deleted]

Re: Netflix Targets Critical ‘Cuties’ Tweets with Copyright Takedown Requests

#127

Post by aaron695 »

The anti-Cuties thing is QAnon.

Netflix are in a war companies aren't used to dealing with.

This feels like an idiot contracted company has screw this up.

It's such clear fair use under critical review it's hard to see Netflix thinking this would be a good idea when they have shows that do reviews like this. And Lawyers. And some understanding of internet battles.

Re: Netflix Targets Critical ‘Cuties’ Tweets with Copyright Takedown Requests

#128

Post by saurik »

dragonwriter wrote: post #113
saurik wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the punishment to Netflix once you win in court is just damages (good luck showing any actual serious large damages here) and legal costs... there should be a massive fine and a loss of DMCA Section 512 expedited takedown privileges if you use it incorrectly.

> loss of DMCA Section 512 expedited takedown privileges No such privilege exists, so I don't know what this is supposed to mean. I suppose that you could put violators on a list where, for parties on that list, a 512 notice didn't require a takedown to stay in the safe harbor but triggered some other (new) process, like (for instance) notice to the user and defined-in-law period for the user to submit a counter-noti…

Yeah: clearly to make that happen would require some kind of new process ;P. As for your questions, as clearly I am an angry Internet commentator being maximally punitive, the answers are simple: "everyone involved loses the ability to be de facto trusted forever" ;P. Of course, this makes no sense in practice, but neither does the status quo: the cost to Netflix for filing frivolous claims is essentially 0, and puts the burden entirely on the users, which is as ridiculous to me as my drastic alternative.

Re: Netflix Targets Critical ‘Cuties’ Tweets with Copyright Takedown Requests

#129

Post by saurik »

jandrese wrote: post #108
saurik wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the punishment to Netflix once you win in court is just damages (good luck showing any actual serious large damages here) and legal costs... there should be a massive fine and a loss of DMCA Section 512 expedited takedown privileges if you use it incorrectly.

> loss of DMCA Section 512 expedited takedown privileges if you use it incorrectly Not gonna happen. It would cut copyright bots off at the knees since they're currently designed to err on the side of false positives over false negatives and that's the way the media cartels want it. You would have to break the RIAA and MPAA's hold over Congress first, and good luck with that. You can't vote them out because they own…

> Not gonna happen.

Obviously... trust me: I know that nothing I want is ever going to happen (and my having become a politician years ago--one who successfully sits on various elected boards and commissions--has only made that more clear to me, not less ;P).

Re: Netflix Targets Critical ‘Cuties’ Tweets with Copyright Takedown Requests

#130

Post by dragonwriter »

blendergeek wrote: post #2

> Legally the company is allowed to do this of course, as they own the rights. Isn't this textbook fair use? Nothing about these clips being shared on Twitter replaces the viewing experience of Cuties. The tweets are definitely transformative and provide a critique of the film. Doesn't copyright law explicitly permit this use of copyrighted works?

> Isn't this textbook fair use?

Debatable. A good faith case can be made that its not.

> Nothing about these clips being shared on Twitter replaces the viewing experience of Cuties.

"Replacing the viewing experience" isn't necessary to be outside of fair use, and the work at issue is probably the trailer itself, not Cuties. Which matters a lot when you look at the "amount and substantiality" prong of fair use analysis.

> The tweets are definitely transformative and provide a critique of the film.

Sure, I don't think anyone would argue that the purpose prong of fair use is in dispute.

> Doesn't copyright law explicitly permit this use of copyrighted works?

There is very little explicit about the "fair use" defense; even how the four prongs of the test interact isn't explicit.

Post reply on HN