Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
firelighter487

(UPDATED - Claim has been removed) The Linux Gamer's response video to LTT got claimed by Fullscreen

1 hour ago, Spotty said:

You seem to be misinformed. There's a HUGE difference between a copyright claim and a takedown notice resulting in a copyright strike.

Copyright claims, which is what has happened here to The Linux Gamer are often an automatic process where Content ID detects that a portion of your copyrighted content has appeared in another video on Youtube, and will issue a copyright claim on the video. The video remains public and viewable by the viewers, however any ad revenue generated by the video may be redirected to the original copyright holder. There's no punishment for the channel when a copyright claim is made against them, they will just lose the revenue for the video.

Copyright strikes or takedown notices, which is what The Verge did, are when they manually issue a legal notice that a video is infringing on their copyright and that they demand the video be removed from the platform. The channel will then receive a copyright strike against their channel which comes with punishments for the channel, such as losing their ability to live stream or perhaps no longer being 'recommended' or promoted in the search results or feed which can severely hurt the channels traffic and views. If they are issued with multiple copyright strikes, their channel can be removed completely.

 

(snip) 

This is an excellent explanation of how these things work. 

 

I'd like to add that as long as the creator who gets the automated claim disputes it in a timely manner, there is no lost revenue during the period while it was "claimed". 

 

I've been down at IBM Think for the last couple of days and this thread is the first I'm hearing of this issue.. Aaaand it's already resolved. 

 

So, as far as I can tell, everything is working as it should...ish

 

We have noticed a significant uptick in copyright claims in the last couple of weeks, though, with some of them being in really really old content which suggests youtube has made some kind of change to ContentID and we've been trying to figure out how to address it.

 

We are generally pretty supportive of the creation of derivative works by our community and we want to make sure that they aren't being algorithmically claimed, but this change has caused other issues for us too. I woke up the other morning to a handful of claims made against Tech Quickie by LTT... Can't have that. 

 

I'm sure this will be resolved, but it's probably going to take some time for youtube to get their crap in order, as usual. 

Recommended Posts

Just now, Rohith_Kumar_Sp said:

He actively ignored people who brought that up on that video, he's removed many people's comments that says the same thing, he knows he's in the wrong, did he take down the video after people informed him? no, he did not. he has a misinformed video still up. 

Still not a crime like perjury which is potentially what Linus did.


-------

Current Rig

-------

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Misanthrope said:

Still not a crime like perjury which is potentially what Linus did.

what?


CPU: Intel i7 6700k  | Motherboard: Gigabyte Z170x Gaming 5 | RAM: 2x8GB 3000MHz G.Skill Ripjaws 5 | GPU: Gigabyte Aorus GTX 1080ti | PSU: Corsair RM750x (2018) | Case: BeQuiet SilentBase 800 | Cooler: Corsair H100i AIO | SSD: Samsung 970 Evo 500GB + Samsung 840 500GB | HDD: Seagate Ironwolf 8TB + 2x Seagate Ironwolf 6TB | Monitor: Acer Predator XB271HU + Samsung BX2450

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Original PosterOP
2 minutes ago, Rohith_Kumar_Sp said:

He actively ignored people who brought that up on that video, he's removed many people's comments that says the same thing, he knows he's in the wrong, did he take down the video after people informed him? no, he did not. he has a misinformed video still up. 

like i said, you don't have to explain that to me.

 

the whole reason i made this topic is i believe that Fullscreen was in the wrong. and i was right. i didn't do it for him.


DISCLAIMER: ANYTHING I SAY COULD BE WRONG. DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH! 

Have a look at my set up your linux gaming pc from start to finish topic if you want to get started with linux :) 

My laptop: MacBook Pro 15" Late 2011 (dGPU disabled): I7 2675QM | HD3000 | 500GB SSD | 16GB RAM | macOS

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, firelighter487 said:

like i said, you don't have to explain that to me.

the whole reason i made this topic is i believe that Fullscreen was in the wrong. and i was right. i didn't do it for him.

and i was just trying to explain why i got no sympathy for him, nothing else. what fullscreen did was wrong nonetheless. 


 

Spoiler
Spoiler

Intel i7 4790K (4.0 GHz) | MSI Z97-GAMING 5 | Corsair Vengeance 8GB DDR3-1866 2x8GB | Asus GeForce GTX 780 Ti DirectCU II OC | Samsung 840 Pro Series 256GB | Corsair RM 850W | Corsair H90 94.0 CFM | Logitech® Wireless Combo MK330 | Cooler Master HAF XM | Dell S2240L 60Hz 21.5 IPS | 

PCPartPicker 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

Still not a crime like perjury which is potentially what Linus did.

when did linus lie on oath during a court hearing?


if you want to annoy me, then join my teamspeak server ts.benja.cc

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

Still not a crime like perjury which is potentially what Linus did.

Perjury is when you purposefully lie under oath.


There's no place like ~

Spoiler

Problems and solutions:

 

FreeNAS

Spoiler

Dell Server 11th gen

Spoiler

 

 

 

 

ESXI

Spoiler

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Original PosterOP
1 minute ago, The Benjamins said:

when did linus lie on oath during a court hearing?

 

1 minute ago, Razor Blade said:

Perjury is when you purposefully lie under oath.

oh is that what it means? lmao what has that to do with this??


DISCLAIMER: ANYTHING I SAY COULD BE WRONG. DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH! 

Have a look at my set up your linux gaming pc from start to finish topic if you want to get started with linux :) 

My laptop: MacBook Pro 15" Late 2011 (dGPU disabled): I7 2675QM | HD3000 | 500GB SSD | 16GB RAM | macOS

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, firelighter487 said:

what? Fullscreen made the claim. not Linus.

 

on top of that the claim got resolved after The Linux Gamer disputed it.

 

7 minutes ago, Razor Blade said:

Perjury is when you purposefully lie under oath.

 

7 minutes ago, The Benjamins said:

when did linus lie on oath during a court hearing?

 

For legal purposes that's what a DMCA claim is. Just because they've taken it back or because they might say they're sorry or they might want to claim Fullscreen doesn't represents them doesn't means it's not falsely reporting a crime when they know well one wasn't committed other than being critical (misguided as it might be) of their content.

 

Sorry but if all of you lost your shit when the vergue did this to Kyle probably under extremely similar circumstances (Someone or some firm legally representing them acting in an overzealous matter) Yet when Linus Media Group is (directly or indirectly as it might be) doing it to somebody else all of the discussion on this thread is just character assassination of the guy who's on the receiving end. 

 

This is a double standard and you're all too biased towards Linus to want to acknowledge than none of what is being discussed here is any fucking excuse for this strike.


-------

Current Rig

-------

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Misanthrope said:

Sorry but if all of you loss your shit when the vergue did this to Kyle probably under extremely similar circumstances (Someone or some firm legally representing them acting in an overzealous matter) Yet when Linus Media Group is (directly or indirectly as it might be) doing it to somebody else all of the discussion on this thread is just character assassination of the guy who's on the receiving end.

 

This is a double standard and you're all too biased towards Linus to want to acknowledge than none of what is being discussed here is any fucking excuse for this strike.

This was an automatic claim that was done by YouTube's horrible system. It's not Fullscreen or LTT's fault. It's just a bad automated system.

In Kyle's case, it was a manual claim.


Make sure to quote or tag people, so they get notified.

 

 

 

UP THE HAMMERS & DOWN THE NAILS
MAY THE LORDS OF LIGHT BE WITH YOU
BLESSED BE
HAIL CROM
HAIL ODIN
HAIL THOR
HAIL THE MANILLAN EMPIRE
HAIL TO THE BRETHREN OF THE HAMMER

Rest in peace Mark \m/

1957-2018

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Original PosterOP
10 hours ago, Misanthrope said:

This is a double standard and you're all too biased towards Linus to want to acknowledge than none of what is being discussed here is any fucking excuse for this strike.

i'm not biased towards LTT at all. i don't even watch anymore.

the thing is Fullscreen claimed it. unless you can prove that Linus ordered them to, you cannot blame Linus for this.

i blamed Fullscreen. and Fullscreen only. until i see evidence that Linus was involved in the strike i will stand by that.

 

10 hours ago, Cyberspirit said:

This was an automatic claim that was done by YouTube's horrible system. It's not Fullscreen or LTT's fault. It's just a bad automated system.

In Kyle's case, it was a manual claim.

it might have been, but in that case Fullscreen could have removed it without needing The Linux Gamer to file a dispute first.


DISCLAIMER: ANYTHING I SAY COULD BE WRONG. DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH! 

Have a look at my set up your linux gaming pc from start to finish topic if you want to get started with linux :) 

My laptop: MacBook Pro 15" Late 2011 (dGPU disabled): I7 2675QM | HD3000 | 500GB SSD | 16GB RAM | macOS

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Misanthrope said:

 

 

 

For legal purposes that's what a DMCA claim is. Just because they've taken it back or because they might say they're sorry or they might want to claim Fullscreen doesn't represents them doesn't means it's not falsely reporting a crime when they know well one wasn't committed other than being critical (misguided as it might be) of their content.

 

Sorry but if all of you loss your shit when the vergue did this to Kyle probably under extremely similar circumstances (Someone or some firm legally representing them acting in an overzealous matter) Yet when Linus Media Group is (directly or indirectly as it might be) doing it to somebody else all of the discussion on this thread is just character assassination of the guy who's on the receiving end.

 

This is a double standard and you're all too biased towards Linus to want to acknowledge than none of what is being discussed here is any fucking excuse for this strike.

AFAIK, Linus and LMG DID NOT DMCA that video, the actions of Fullscreen or even a automated system run by YouTube should not be LMGs responsibility.

 

Kyle's case is VOX MANUALLY DMCA the videos, which makes VOX the OWNER of the verge at fault.

 

This case is Fullscreen or a automated system flagging the video, this would make Fullscreen a PARTNER to LMG at fault (or YouTube)


if you want to annoy me, then join my teamspeak server ts.benja.cc

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

For legal purposes that's what a DMCA claim is.

Quote

https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/7002106?hl=en

 

Owners can manage their copyright interests on YouTube either by issuing a copyright takedown, or, if they have access to the Content ID tool, by claiming  a video and setting a policy to track it by collecting stats, monetize it by placing ads and collecting ad revenue, or block it by making it unavailable in some territories. A Content ID block isn't accompanied by a copyright strike, while a copyright takedown is.

no it isn't. a youtube contentID claim is not a legal motion. a DMCA is.

 

WJQEnqx.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, firelighter487 said:

i'm not biased towards LTT at all. i don't even watch anymore.

 

the thing is Fullscreen claimed it. unless you can prove that Linus ordered them to, you cannot blame Linus for this.

 

i blamed Fullscreen. and Fullscreen only. until i see evidence that Linus was involved in the strike i will stand by that.

 

When you enter a deal with a company like Fullscreen, no matter how bad it goes, you're legally but more importantly morally responsible for everything they do. For all intends and purposes until Linus himself immediately breaks all further communication and business with them is the same as if he manually claimed it himself: you don't get to hide behind a company you voluntarily decided to get in business with.

 

Just now, The Benjamins said:

AFAIK, Linus and LMG DID NOT DMCA that video, the actions of Fullscreen or even a automated system run by YouTube should not be LMGs responsibility.

 

Kyle's case is VOX MANUALLY DMCA the videos, which makes VOX the OWNER of the verge at fault.

 

This case is Fullscreen or a automated system flagging the video, this would make Fullscreen a PARTNER to LMG at fault (or YouTube)

 

Read above: I don't care and neither should you. It's people like Linus still being in business with people like Fullscreen that creates this problem as is on their end to end it immediately without question or excuses.


-------

Current Rig

-------

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

Sorry but if all of you lost your shit when the vergue did this to Kyle probably under extremely similar circumstances (Someone or some firm legally representing them acting in an overzealous matter) Yet when Linus Media Group is (directly or indirectly as it might be) doing it to somebody else all of the discussion on this thread is just character assassination of the guy who's on the receiving end.  

 

This is a double standard and you're all too biased towards Linus to want to acknowledge than none of what is being discussed here is any fucking excuse for this strike.

You seem to be misinformed. There's a HUGE difference between a copyright claim and a takedown notice resulting in a copyright strike.

Copyright claims, which is what has happened here to The Linux Gamer are often an automatic process where Content ID detects that a portion of your copyrighted content has appeared in another video on Youtube, and will issue a copyright claim on the video. The video remains public and viewable by the viewers, however any ad revenue generated by the video may be redirected to the original copyright holder. There's no punishment for the channel when a copyright claim is made against them, they will just lose the revenue for the video.

Copyright strikes or takedown notices, which is what The Verge did, are when they manually issue a legal notice that a video is infringing on their copyright and that they demand the video be removed from the platform. The channel will then receive a copyright strike against their channel which comes with punishments for the channel, such as losing their ability to live stream or perhaps no longer being 'recommended' or promoted in the search results or feed which can severely hurt the channels traffic and views. If they are issued with multiple copyright strikes, their channel can be removed completely.

What The Verge did was malicious and was purely because they didn't like what Bitwit was saying. What happened to The Linux Gamer is just the result of an automated system, and it appears the MCN Fullscreen has swiftly corrected the mistake and the video is no longer claimed.


CPU: Intel i7 6700k  | Motherboard: Gigabyte Z170x Gaming 5 | RAM: 2x8GB 3000MHz G.Skill Ripjaws 5 | GPU: Gigabyte Aorus GTX 1080ti | PSU: Corsair RM750x (2018) | Case: BeQuiet SilentBase 800 | Cooler: Corsair H100i AIO | SSD: Samsung 970 Evo 500GB + Samsung 840 500GB | HDD: Seagate Ironwolf 8TB + 2x Seagate Ironwolf 6TB | Monitor: Acer Predator XB271HU + Samsung BX2450

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

 

When you enter a deal with a company like Fullscreen, no matter how bad it goes, you're legally but more importantly morally responsible for everything they do. For all intends and purposes until Linus himself immediately breaks all further communication and business with them is the same as if he manually claimed it himself: you don't get to hide behind a company you voluntarily decided to get in business with.

 

 

Read above: I don't care and neither should you. It's people like Linus still being in business with people like Fullscreen that creates this problem as is on their end to end it immediately without question or excuses.

even if it was YouTube automated system it would still be Linus's fault?

also shouldn't you wait to hear a statement from Fullscreen and LMG.

 

But this falls under the same ruling if you go to a accountant to get your taxes done, and they made a mistake. the mistake is on the accountant not the person that went to the account. Fullscreen does copyright management which makes them responsible for the claims they make.


if you want to annoy me, then join my teamspeak server ts.benja.cc

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

When you enter a deal with a company like Fullscreen, no matter how bad it goes, you're legally but more importantly morally responsible for everything they do

There is no moral obligation or responsibility on LMG for what Fullscreen does.


Seagull eat fish. But fish belong to Mafia. Mafia punch seagull for not respecting Mafia. Seagull say "No, please! I have child!"

Mafia punch seagull with child.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pyo.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Best Answer
1 hour ago, Spotty said:

You seem to be misinformed. There's a HUGE difference between a copyright claim and a takedown notice resulting in a copyright strike.

Copyright claims, which is what has happened here to The Linux Gamer are often an automatic process where Content ID detects that a portion of your copyrighted content has appeared in another video on Youtube, and will issue a copyright claim on the video. The video remains public and viewable by the viewers, however any ad revenue generated by the video may be redirected to the original copyright holder. There's no punishment for the channel when a copyright claim is made against them, they will just lose the revenue for the video.

Copyright strikes or takedown notices, which is what The Verge did, are when they manually issue a legal notice that a video is infringing on their copyright and that they demand the video be removed from the platform. The channel will then receive a copyright strike against their channel which comes with punishments for the channel, such as losing their ability to live stream or perhaps no longer being 'recommended' or promoted in the search results or feed which can severely hurt the channels traffic and views. If they are issued with multiple copyright strikes, their channel can be removed completely.

 

(snip) 

This is an excellent explanation of how these things work. 

 

I'd like to add that as long as the creator who gets the automated claim disputes it in a timely manner, there is no lost revenue during the period while it was "claimed". 

 

I've been down at IBM Think for the last couple of days and this thread is the first I'm hearing of this issue.. Aaaand it's already resolved. 

 

So, as far as I can tell, everything is working as it should...ish

 

We have noticed a significant uptick in copyright claims in the last couple of weeks, though, with some of them being in really really old content which suggests youtube has made some kind of change to ContentID and we've been trying to figure out how to address it.

 

We are generally pretty supportive of the creation of derivative works by our community and we want to make sure that they aren't being algorithmically claimed, but this change has caused other issues for us too. I woke up the other morning to a handful of claims made against Tech Quickie by LTT... Can't have that. 

 

I'm sure this will be resolved, but it's probably going to take some time for youtube to get their crap in order, as usual. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, LinusTech said:

I woke up the other morning to a handful of claims made against Tech Quickie by LTT... Can't have that.

Easy to solve, Linus.  Do a copyright strike whenever those Tech Quickie guys steal your content.  3 strikes and you don't have to worry about them anymore.

 

😋

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Rohith_Kumar_Sp said:

He actively ignored people who brought that up on that video, he's removed many people's comments that says the same thing, he knows he's in the wrong, did he take down the video after people informed him? no, he did not. he has a misinformed video still up. 

2 hours ago, Rohith_Kumar_Sp said:

he gets no sympathy from me.


Btw both of you are wrong, the repository for the graphics driver he mentioned ALWAYS gives always the beta drivers anyway (which are still better) I don't know why he doesn't said that, he is a bit of an as*hole when it comes to this, it also doesn't matter what version you are talking about you should have that repo installed (still easy to do also with a GUI)
From the beta repo the .396.16 driver (superior to stable 390 in every way, the names are confusing) driver exist from april, the one that came the 23rd is the 396.54 which got the previous package updated
There is also the confusion on the package names... I understand why this happened.

Anyway the driver from the ubuntu versions should never, ever be considered for gaming with DXVK, why tf? this dude (The linux gamer) should be aware of this

EDIT: I'm editing this for the third time, the nvidia site and ubuntu repo are so confusing

Edited by Guest
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Original PosterOP

@Lukyp are you drunk?

 

2 minutes ago, Lukyp said:

Btw both of you are wrong

you quoted @Rohith_Kumar_Sp twice.

 

3 minutes ago, Lukyp said:

this dude should be aware of this

who?


DISCLAIMER: ANYTHING I SAY COULD BE WRONG. DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH! 

Have a look at my set up your linux gaming pc from start to finish topic if you want to get started with linux :) 

My laptop: MacBook Pro 15" Late 2011 (dGPU disabled): I7 2675QM | HD3000 | 500GB SSD | 16GB RAM | macOS

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, firelighter487 said:

@Lukyp are you drunk?

 

you quoted @Rohith_Kumar_Sp twice.

 

who?

Whatever, the same pic was posted twice by different persons I got confused

The Linux Gamer, I watched a couple of his videos but he seems to be confused sometimes

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Original PosterOP
Just now, VegetableStu said:

maybe he meant LTT and Linuxgaming? o_o

i dunno...


DISCLAIMER: ANYTHING I SAY COULD BE WRONG. DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH! 

Have a look at my set up your linux gaming pc from start to finish topic if you want to get started with linux :) 

My laptop: MacBook Pro 15" Late 2011 (dGPU disabled): I7 2675QM | HD3000 | 500GB SSD | 16GB RAM | macOS

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, firelighter487 said:

i dunno...

 

22 minutes ago, VegetableStu said:

maybe he meant LTT and Linuxgaming? o_o

No I was referring to those dudes arguing in the youtube comments, I couldn't quite quote the image for some reason, and for some another reason another guy reposted the same image probably for the same reason and I thought it was a bug, sorry for the confusion  @Rohith_Kumar_Sp


I was just saying TLG did't tell the 396.16 actually came in april while the other one claiming the actual 396 it came on sep 23rd, which is true but for another 396 version TLG just did not respond properly

Edited by Guest
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×