also, by your definition, if WB even BELIEVED they owned something in the video, the claim would be valid.
-
-
Replying to @AwfaFalafa @jess689_ and
Yes, if WB believed they owned something it would be valid. But in order to support that belief they would have to have some kind of copyright. If their belief was something that obviously they don't own they would get sued for falsely using the DMCA takedown system.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Bucket_Of_Crabs @jess689_ and
do they own the content if it falls under fair use?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @AwfaFalafa @jess689_ and
We don't know if it falls under fair use until a court decides it. Obviously we can see how the court would most likely rule here, but we don't have to, because it seems UMG will sue the content creator or drop it. Thus proving if it was fair use or not.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Bucket_Of_Crabs @jess689_ and
sorry? a court? but in your own link, wordpress states that THEY determine what counts as fair use before allowing claims to go through. why isn’t youtube able to do this?pic.twitter.com/WRBPMOEPL8
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @AwfaFalafa @jess689_ and
Oh, im sorry if I misled you. Youtube can in fact do whatever they like they will just be liable for any damages in the case they lose.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Bucket_Of_Crabs @jess689_ and
back to my original question, then. is youtube being forced to follow a law as written, or are they simply failing to do their due diligence? i think you just answered it for me though. that’s the whole point of the criticism they’re receiving, isn’t it?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @AwfaFalafa @jess689_ and
I don't study law but : "To fall within the protection of the DMCA, an internet service provider must, among other things, take certain steps when it receives notice that infringing material resides on its network" https://dmca.harvard.edu/pages/overview Seems to imply they do [cont.]
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Bucket_Of_Crabs @jess689_ and
one of the steps is determining whether the content being claimed falls under fair use. i honestly can’t tell if you’re fucking with me at this point, man, that is incredibly easy to find out even for us non-lawyers.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @AwfaFalafa @jess689_ and
But if a Youtube says it falls under fair use then Youtube is suddenly the arbiter of truth of the companies claim, and guess what happens? Youtube gets sued, for either not complying with DMCA or for Copyright Infringement.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Just fwiw, in the Ninth Circuit (where most of these companies are based), any company issuing a takedown strike MUST in good faith consider fair use before issuing it. They cannot handwave it as a courtroom defense.
-
-
Replying to @ademska1 @Bucket_Of_Crabs and
Fair use is not a defense to infringement in the 9th Cir; it is straight up not infringement at all. It's only an affirmative defense as a matter of procedure.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 likeThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.