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

Fake Nintendo lawyer is scaring YouTubers, and its not clear YouTube can stop it

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 201 posts

Re: Fake Nintendo lawyer is scaring YouTubers, and its not clear YouTube can stop it

#141

Post by AnthonyMouse »

ndiddy wrote: post #67
wongarsu wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yet YouTube's system takes a lot of time from the time the content is claimed to the time you can escalate to an actual DMCA. In this time your video is down or has its revenue redirected. And if your content gets too many frivolous claims your account is taken down by YouTube's three strike policy before you have finished the dispute process for the first video. A single button to immediately and without human revie…

Your idea for a "single button to immediately restore the video" system would violate the takedown process outlined in the DMCA. The way it works is that after someone sends a takedown request, the content can't be restored until 10 business days after the person who uploaded it sends a counter-notice. This gives whoever sent the takedown request enough time to decide whether they want to file a lawsuit and keep the…

> The way it works is that after someone sends a takedown request, the content can't be restored until 10 business days after the person who uploaded it sends a counter-notice.

I'd be curious to know if this has ever been challenged in court as an unconstitutional prior restraint. Pretty obvious problems if you get people e.g. issuing fraudulent takedowns 10 days before an election.

Re: Fake Nintendo lawyer is scaring YouTubers, and its not clear YouTube can stop it

#142

Post by BlueTemplar »

JohnMakin wrote: post #53

The DMCA has absolutely ruined a decade+ long hobby of mine, which was streaming/content creation. I used to have really fun streams not that long ago that featured a variety of relaxing/cool music set to the backdrop of me messing around on the computer, or in some game. Everyone was fine with this arrangement for a long time. Then, things suddenly changed a few years ago. First your VODs would get yanked and you'd…

You can just ignore the DMCA claims, are you really afraid of getting sued ?

Meanwhile if you're still using platforms to host these videos, and not something like PeerTube, you're part of the problem.

Re: Fake Nintendo lawyer is scaring YouTubers, and its not clear YouTube can stop it

#143

Post by IgorPartola »

WesolyKubeczek wrote: post #18
IgorPartola wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not a lawyer but isn’t it your rights to protect your copyright? As in, if you file fraudulent notices, YT removes you ability to file more, then you have a legitimate notice to file, now you presumably can sue YT for denying you the right to defend your copyright.

Tough shit, you shouldn’t have sent the three fraudulent ones then. It’s all in the terms of service you have agreed to.

I mean I don’t disagree with you as a person. I am saying that YT might be hesitant to take this stance because the legal system might not share this sentiment. That’s for their lawyers to figure out.

Re: Fake Nintendo lawyer is scaring YouTubers, and its not clear YouTube can stop it

#144

Post by FireBeyond »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #134
FireBeyond wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it's literally not. Copyright is that you have the right to potentially benefit from your work. You can broadcast it. You don't have any kind of right to an audience to watch it. I don't even know what that would look like.

A plausible interpretation of "you don't have a right to an audience" is that people don't have to watch your dross if they don't want to, and this is the meaning which is normally meant to be implied (the motte in the motte and bailey). Then people want to use it in the sense of, you don't have a right against someone else interfering with your interaction with your willing audience, i.e. you don't have a right not…

Exactly. Or even "you don't have a right to a platform".

You can speak your mind. That doesn't mean YouTube is obligated to broadcast it for you, nor does it mean your speech is being suppressed if they choose not to.

Re: Fake Nintendo lawyer is scaring YouTubers, and its not clear YouTube can stop it

#145

Post by nullc »

onli wrote: post #128
nullc wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google shields the false-DMCA complainers and will absolutely not reveal their identities.

Google has to given a court order. Or is that unachievable?

Perhaps if you're interested in bankrupting yourself fighting against Google's legal budget.

Re: Fake Nintendo lawyer is scaring YouTubers, and its not clear YouTube can stop it

#147

Post by ThatPlayer »

do_not_redeem wrote: post #39
ternnoburn wrote: post #29

I worry about let's plays (especially let's plays without commentary). They pretty clearly exist in a "yes, this is copyright infringement but yes, they are generally considered positive for a game" space. The moment some game creator decides to test this will get very interesting. Not good interesting.

It's not immediately clear to me that this is true. Video games are designed to be played interactively. Streaming a single playthrough via a non-interactive medium strikes me as transformative. Would you say a screen capture of Microsoft Excel is also copyright infringement? If not, what would you say is the legal basis for treating that differently than a video game?

This isn't anything new and unique to video games. Generally this is considered a performance. No different than copyright protecting a performance of sheet music or a play. Even dance choreography can be copyrighted.

Re: Fake Nintendo lawyer is scaring YouTubers, and its not clear YouTube can stop it

#148

Post by Aunche »

JohnMakin wrote: post #132
Aunche wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Welcome to being a business owner. Nobody is going to protect your business more than yourself. A tenant refuses to pay rent and eviction takes a year? Too bad. Next time, do a better job of screening for risky tenants. The problem with the victim first mentality is that it causes you to underestimate how much agency people actually have (e.g. being unaware of how excessive tenant protections decrease the supply of h…

You know not all content creators are out for money, right? If you want a trivial example, I am one of them. It may even shock you to learn that in the before-times, people even created content purely for fun and the entertainment of others. Wow! Hardly believable now, especially reading this post I am replying to. That said, again, how is a small creator, which at least several nines of all creators are, supposed to…

> people even created content purely for fun and the entertainment of others. Wow! Hardly believable now, especially reading this post I am replying to.

Believe it or not, I shitpost on the internet for fun. Sometimes, I get flagged for bullshit reasons (moreso Reddit than hackernews), and there's nothing I can do about it. Since it's for fun though, it doesn't really cost me anything outside some minor frustration.

> That said, again, how is a small creator, which at least several nines of all creators are, supposed to scratch up the legal and financial resources to fight massive corporate interests and industrial scale fraud?

This article is talking about a small-time copyright troll who is obviously pretending to be Nintendo. There is virtually no risk of calling their bluff because they obviously aren't going to commit identity fraud in court. Chances are, the troll has better things to do than to leak your personal information, but if you're worried about that, you can hire a lawyer to file the counter notification for you for a couple hundred bucks. I'm sure there are ways to do this yourself as well if you need to fight a lot of claims. Just spitballing here, but if you have a business owner friend, you can use their business address and have them be your representative and file on your behalf.

If we're talking about large corporations with armies of lawyers like real Nintendo, then there's not much you can do besides hiring a good lawyer and listening to their advice. For very straightforward cases, you can probably play lawyer yourself so long as if you do enough research and preparation (again, just spitballing). Also, it's not like Nintendo is unaffected by legal costs. In fact, any legal action will probably be several times more expensive for them than it would be for you. If they're pursuing legal action, they likely genuinely believe they're in the right.

Re: Fake Nintendo lawyer is scaring YouTubers, and its not clear YouTube can stop it

#149

Post by ndiddy »

lesuorac wrote: post #121
ndiddy wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your idea for a "single button to immediately restore the video" system would violate the takedown process outlined in the DMCA. The way it works is that after someone sends a takedown request, the content can't be restored until 10 business days after the person who uploaded it sends a counter-notice. This gives whoever sent the takedown request enough time to decide whether they want to file a lawsuit and keep the…

> Your idea for a "single button to immediately restore the video" system would violate the takedown process outlined in the DMCA. IIUC, YouTube's copyright system is not a digital implementation of the DMCA. It's an additional system that occurs before the DMCA notice/counter-notice process so the laws about the DMCA are moot because it's not a DMCA notice (yet).

You're right that it's an additional system prior to the DMCA process. I was interpreting his/her "declare you are willing to solve it in court" as applying to the DMCA takedown process, as that's what filing a counter-notice does.

Re: Fake Nintendo lawyer is scaring YouTubers, and its not clear YouTube can stop it

#150

Post by bingaweek »

mulmen wrote: post #85
Vampiero wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Consider the following: I make a form of parody that is known as a Youtube Poop. It was all the rage last decade, but now it's a dying art. In part because of these stupid DMCA rules preventing people like me from expressing their creativity. I can appeal the strikes, but every time I do so I risk losing my channel forever. I don't monetize, and I only make parodies of stuff that came out over 10 years ago. So I've a…

Nobody has a right to an audience. > Also, I'm from Europe. Which court should I go to when I infringe on an american dub copyright for a japanese cartoon, exactly? Well the copyright and the site are American so probably America.

Comments like yours are why ycombinator has a horrible reputation. It's a worthless dismissive truism to shut down a legitimate complaint from a creator who is being screwed around by bad laws and bad applications of bad laws. Yes, we know we don't have rights, that's why we're complaining.
Post reply on HN