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

Luanti removed from Google Play due to baseless AI copyright notice

blog.luanti.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 153 posts

Re: Luanti removed from Google Play due to baseless AI copyright notice

#81

Post by WarmWash »

nvme0n1p1 wrote: post #78
WarmWash wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you look at the screenshots of the game in question, it's pretty obvious what is going on https://www.luanti.org/en/#gallery Even though those are mods, it's a bad look to be holding those up as reference game images.

Um, why? Because they both have blocks? Is Microsoft the only company allowed to use cubes now? Even if they were similar, artistic style is not protected under copyright.

But the IP is, and it's jury that would likely decide.

So with a straight face, you think a jury wouldn't call this Minecraft?

https://www.luanti.org/media/gallery/5.jpg

Also Luanti probably could doge all this if they just ditched all the blatant minecraft clone mods. A mining game with blocks is totally fine. If you look back at infiniminer, it's clearly a different vibe of the same concept.

Re: Luanti removed from Google Play due to baseless AI copyright notice

#82

Post by WarmWash »

xboxnolifes wrote: post #67
WarmWash wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately (or fortunately, juries are generally a good thing), it's a jury of randos that will be shown the screenshots and asked to make a determination. https://www.luanti.org/en/#gallery What percentage of the population would see those screenshots and say "Definitely Luanti" 0.00001%? 0.001%?

If they put them side by side with the closest minecraft equivalent? Hopefully a few. If it was a clone, surely the images would be the same.

A clone isn't the benchmark for breaking the law though, substantial similarity is.

There are a gazillion cases that establish this, and the reason why you can't just paint spiderman green and start selling t-shirts with "spyderman" on them.

Re: Luanti removed from Google Play due to baseless AI copyright notice

#84

Post by Terr_ »

somenameforme wrote: post #70
Ohentis wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean there definitely are penalties, but they only exist if you actually go to court. DMCA essentially serves as game of chicken with no one actually wanting to go to court.

Penalties and counter-suits require intentional misrepresentation by the claimant, which is so painfully unprovable that the existence of penalties for malicious claims may as well not exist. I mean I suppose it can stop some rando guy from sending out claims for lols, but stuff like what Microsoft and a number of other corps do is extremely predictable and certainly malicious in nature.

My cynical view is that the half-measure (punishments for impersonation rather than spurious claims) just prevents well-intentioned protestors from highlighting the insanity of the whole system.

Re: Luanti removed from Google Play due to baseless AI copyright notice

#85

Post by sterlind »

mortsnort wrote: post #83

The game's own website describes it as an "open source alternative to Minecraft". Frivolous or not, MS has financial incentive to try to keep this game offline. I think this is going as intended from MS's POV.

This is the reason anti-SLAPP statutes exist in many jurisdictions.

Re: Luanti removed from Google Play due to baseless AI copyright notice

#86

Post by vorpalhex »

SwellJoe wrote: post #80

I know this isn't the point but this post is a master class in how to inform readers when you expect people from outside your community to read it. It explains what every element is, concisely but clearly. I now know exactly what Luanti is, who all the actors are in this conflict, and what the conflict is about. It clearly conveys the who, what, when, where and why of the situation. Also, DMCA is a damned mess, with…

One of the issues is that these aren't proper DMCA claims, instead Google/Youtube do a weird pseudo-DMCA thing where they just agree to take down your content and make you argue about it.

But the DMCA allows immediate countersuit for false notice with damages. If Google/Youtube actually just forwarded strict DMCA notices and no longer did takedowns once you counter-claimed, you could sue the trolls and collect damages. At that point it's just a free lunch for some bored lawyers willing to publish public domain works, covers, etc that are protected.

Re: Luanti removed from Google Play due to baseless AI copyright notice

#87

Post by sterlind »

somenameforme wrote: post #70
Ohentis wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean there definitely are penalties, but they only exist if you actually go to court. DMCA essentially serves as game of chicken with no one actually wanting to go to court.

Penalties and counter-suits require intentional misrepresentation by the claimant, which is so painfully unprovable that the existence of penalties for malicious claims may as well not exist. I mean I suppose it can stop some rando guy from sending out claims for lols, but stuff like what Microsoft and a number of other corps do is extremely predictable and certainly malicious in nature.

DMCA seems like an ideal place to have the winner pay all parties' attorney's fees, plus damages. It's usually pretty objective and easy to see whether something infringes.

Re: Luanti removed from Google Play due to baseless AI copyright notice

#88

Post by duskwuff »

ethin wrote: post #76
hexator wrote: post #61

There needs to be some sort of penalty for filing frivolous DMCA notices.

There is. 17 U.S.C. 512(f) explicitly provides penalties. The problem is that this subsection is so rarely enforced it might as well not exist.

The subsection requires that the person "knowingly materially misrepresent [...] that material or activity is infringing". Proving that the misrepresentation was made knowingly can be extremely difficult.

Re: Luanti removed from Google Play due to baseless AI copyright notice

#89

Post by Ukv »

WarmWash wrote: post #82
xboxnolifes wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they put them side by side with the closest minecraft equivalent? Hopefully a few. If it was a clone, surely the images would be the same.

A clone isn't the benchmark for breaking the law though, substantial similarity is. There are a gazillion cases that establish this, and the reason why you can't just paint spiderman green and start selling t-shirts with "spyderman" on them.

Green Spiderman would be copying of protected elements - like Spiderman's outline. Style and general ideas are not protected by copyright. Substantial similarity comes in as a test for whether copying of those protected elements occurred, to avoid an otherwise disprovable "I didn't copy, I just drew Spiderman's exact outline by complete coincidence" defense, but is irrelevant if the what's supposedly been copied isn't protected by copyright in the first place.

Re: Luanti removed from Google Play due to baseless AI copyright notice

#90

Post by culi »

vintermann wrote: post #20

> We received a similar notice from the same company in 2023 and successfully appealed against it. This company also filed a similar notice this year against an indie game with similar voxel art style by the name of Allumeria. They'll backtrack and apologize - again. At some point, the pathway for Microsoft to regain some of the goodwill associated with Minecraft is to fire the senior lawyer most responsible for send…

Well they said it was filed by Tracer.AI

Minecraft does indeed have a lot of knockoffs that sometimes even use official imagery (e.g. the creeper). It seems Microsoft is using this AI tool to automatically detect these and submit DMCA requests

If anything, this problem would be fixed by hiring MORE lawyers. Not firing them.

Post reply on HN