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

81–90 of 201 posts

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

#81

Post by mindslight »

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 DMCA does not obligate Youtube to do any of the claiming/strikes parts. They could straightforwardly separate out the two processes - a voluntary expedient web process with the contentid fingerprint arbitration, one-click immediate counterclaim, no need to dox yourself, etc. And then a heavyweight strict DMCA process that fulfills DMCA obligations to the letter of the [unjust] law, requiring the waiting period for restoration after the counterclaimant doxes themselves, but doesn't drag in all the extrajudicial "strikes" and whatnot. The filing of a heavyweight DMCA would forgo the option for the voluntary nimble process.

Of course there are plenty of corporate authoritarian imperatives for why they don't. This comment is a thought experiment to demonstrate their complicity in how their system is routinely abused.

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

#82

Post by JohnMakin »

shakna wrote: post #66
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…

As things stand, there's a difference between purchasing for personal consumption, and for publishing. That's been standing, for a very long time. It might be as old as copyright itself. Just because you own the game, doesn't mean you have the rights to use it in more than a personal setting. That's basically always been the case. You bought a personal license, not a broadcasting one. The main reason for not attackin…

We've had the capability to detect audio for a long time. What changed suddenly in the last few years to deploy/enforce this at scale? Certainly not any improvements to detection. I've made a whopping total of $46 in something like 12 years on these platforms. Something tells me this level of enforcement is ridiculous and against the spirit of the law, and I'm certainly not an expert on the DMCA or a lawyer, but I'd be willing to wager a lot that this strict interpretation is misinterpreted. No one is submitting any takedown requests to this content, which to be clear, averages like 1.3 viewers and has less than a few thousand follwers. And when I describe in-game audio - I mean literal 2-3 second song clips like "barbie girl" song happening when you score a goal in rocket league will get your VOD DMCA'd and you can't upload it to YT. That is a newer thing. You really can't view the last 20 years of DRM and the way it's played out, and say something like "this is how it's always been, now automation." That doesn't add up.

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

#83

Post by JohnMakin »

zamadatix wrote: post #80
JohnMakin wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is justified because in overwhelming majority of cases the streamer does not have a license for the audio I guess my point is that this arrangement was fine for a very, very long time. Why is it suddenly not fine in the last handful of years? Who is standing to gain here? In my view, it hurts the very platforms and industries this is trying to "protect." Twitch/YT/etc. are harmed because the content will be in…

As much as I don't like the current rules either "I never got a notice until recently" is a very different thing than "It was fine until recently".

It was fine until recently. Crossposting another reply:

> We've had the capability to detect audio for a long time. What changed suddenly in the last few years to deploy/enforce this at scale? Certainly not any improvements to detection. I've made a whopping total of $46 in something like 12 years on these platforms. Something tells me this level of enforcement is ridiculous and against the spirit of the law, and I'm certainly not an expert on the DMCA or a lawyer, but I'd be willing to wager a lot that this strict interpretation is misinterpreted. No one is submitting any takedown requests to this content, which to be clear, averages like 1.3 viewers and has less than a few thousand follwers. And when I describe in-game audio - I mean literal 2-3 second song clips like "barbie girl" song happening when you score a goal in rocket league will get your VOD DMCA'd and you can't upload it to YT. That is a newer thing. You really can't view the last 20 years of DRM and the way it's played out, and say something like "this is how it's always been, now automation." That doesn't add up.

I'm not exactly a big fish here. I don't make money. There is no takedown request, nor would there ever be, because it's silly.

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

#84

Post by rad_gruchalski »

ToucanLoucan wrote: post #55
xvector wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Big tech has such a twisted incentive structure for devs that I don't see this getting solved unless it impacts YouTube's bottom line. Execs won't care, and ICs will be actively penalized for fixing this vs working on "business priorities."

God I wish there was a decent competitor to YouTube. They get away with so much horseshit because there's just nobody else that can match their service scale and network effects.

And how long do you think it would take until the competitor would end up in the same situation? How can the god help with it? And which god?

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

#85

Post by mulmen »

Vampiero wrote: post #42
probably_wrong wrote: post #30

It is perfectly clear that YouTube can stop it. As the article points out, we know there are things YouTube can do because those are the very same things The Verge asked about and YouTube refused to answer. The DMCA is broken, yes, but YouTube has made it worse with their kind-of-but-not-actually-DMCA counter-claim process. If they really wanted to solve it, here's an idea: if you get a takedown notice you also get a…

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.

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

#86

Post by mystified5016 »

JohnMakin wrote: post #82
shakna wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As things stand, there's a difference between purchasing for personal consumption, and for publishing. That's been standing, for a very long time. It might be as old as copyright itself. Just because you own the game, doesn't mean you have the rights to use it in more than a personal setting. That's basically always been the case. You bought a personal license, not a broadcasting one. The main reason for not attackin…

We've had the capability to detect audio for a long time. What changed suddenly in the last few years to deploy/enforce this at scale? Certainly not any improvements to detection. I've made a whopping total of $46 in something like 12 years on these platforms. Something tells me this level of enforcement is ridiculous and against the spirit of the law, and I'm certainly not an expert on the DMCA or a lawyer, but I'd…

Someone invented a system that makes it trivial for bottom feeding lawyer types to send frivolous notices. They feel like they've accomplished something.

That's the long and short of it. It suddenly became trivial to do and the consequences won't be apparent for quite some time, so there are no consequences as far as the lawyers and accountants are concerned.

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

#87

Post by sleepybrett »

emilamlom wrote: post #16
ikekkdcjkfke wrote: post #14

Impersonating with intent to damage is legal?

When the penalty for frivolous and fake dmca takedowns is basically non-existent, it practically is.

Bungie went after someone going after destiny (the game) creators: https://www.polygon.com/23180433/bungie-youtube-dmca-takedow...

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

#88

Post by cmeacham98 »

mdasen wrote: post #68
stackskipton wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, just enforce the DMCA. Youtube has setup this fake DMCA system where they are acting like they enforcing DMCA but not actually. DMCA has protection for creators. You can say "Copyright holder is wrong, put my content back up and I'll see them in court." and "They did this maliciously, I'll see them in court." However, YouTube fake DMCA system is using the provision of "We don't have to host any content we don't w…

Is YouTube playing a bit loose with the DMCA's requirements here? * YouTube has no liability for incorrect take-downs (17 USC § 512 (g) (1)) * That limitation on liability only exists if they restore access to the disabled material within 10-14 business days of receipt of a counter-notice (17 USC § 512 (g) (2) (C)) https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/512 YouTube doesn't have to host any content they don't want…

> You can't just say that you don't want to host any content that goes through a counter notice.

Why not? (at least legally speaking, it'd be a PR disaster I'm sure)

YouTube is not obligated to host any videos on their platform and US law allows for businesses to discriminate for almost any reason (except specific protected classes like race or sex).

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

#89

Post by JohnMakin »

Aunche wrote: post #49
blueflow wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then hire a lawyer & sue, you have to enforce your rights.

Right. Part of the reason why it's hard to start a business is having to deal with unfair bullshit. Youtube streamlines enough of the process to get people started relatively easily, but they get a lot of shit from these same creators for not doing everything for them.

Because all creators have the means and resources to hire a lawyer to fight forces much more powerful and wealthier than they are. This is blaming the victim.

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

#90

Post by hnuser123456 »

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…

Some games have a "don't play licensed music" setting for streamers.
Post reply on HN