Facebook’s Piracy Problem

Post by jonah » Thu, Jul 09, 2015, 1:24 AM UTC

leephillips wrote: post #31

rwmj wrote: post #22

This should be a fairly open and shut piracy case for the video maker. Zoo is a British magazine with a real company behind it. Facebook is a US-based company and is redistributing the video (and likely making money from the adverts). The video maker is based in the US. He can start with filing a case against FB (seems he has a US lawyer lined up already), and once he collects from that, he pays a UK lawyer to follow…

And Zoo's actions are clearly willful infringement. I don't know if he can apply US law when going after the UK magazine, but in the US willful infringement can lead to $150,000 statutory damages per incident. They can't fall back on the "the user did it, we're not responsible" defense relied on by Facebook, Wikipedia, etc.

Post by cmdrfred » Thu, Jul 09, 2015, 1:33 AM UTC

stevenh wrote: post #121

mosquito242 wrote: post #3

This is super interesting - it seems like facebook's more likely to get away with it too because the people being ripped off are smaller independent YouTube Channels. It seems like YouTube's main incentive to build out copyright infringement tools was all of the record labels that had songs being uploaded and re-uploaded on the platform. I can see YouTube getting really aggressive in fighting FB on this legally, beca…

I wish Google would start fighting dirty. Want to access Facebook mobile? Hope you have an iPhone, because Google pushed a mandatory update last night which banned Facebook from all Android devices. Want to access Facebook through Chrome? Sorry, it seems that site has been flagged as a malicious piracy hub; however, you might enjoy this 302 redirect to an automatically-generated clone of your Facebook profile hosted…

Post by bemmu » Thu, Jul 09, 2015, 1:35 AM UTC

Jare wrote: post #10

Mithaldu wrote: post #5

It sounds to me like part of the problem is that the people making popular videos don't share them on facebook themselves, which results in the modern internet native's primary reaction to media being unavailable in their preferred venue and at their preferred comfortability level: Piracy. Sure, you can fight back by appealing to the public about facebook's evility, or by spending lots of resources in legal action. O…

How would those videos monetize for the author when posted on Facebook? The article says Facebook's ad revenue sharing is in the works but not quite there yet .

Post by leephillips » Thu, Jul 09, 2015, 1:40 AM UTC

taejo wrote: post #124

leephillips wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Takedowns suck." No, stealing (yes, stealing) people's work sucks. Unjustified takedown requests do suck (and what makes them suck so much is platforms' craven response to frivolous requests). But we're talking about real, willful infringement here. "Content creators don't want that" You probably shouldn't try to speak for all of us, because you are wrong.

What does the content creator gain from the user seeing a black box? That's way worse than them seeing the content and the creator getting money for it, from both the user and the creator's perspective.

Post by habitue » Thu, Jul 09, 2015, 1:51 AM UTC