Youtube's new CTM complaint system allows companies to take down videos on modding games and jailbreaking devices

[Arika]

1 minute ago, jagdtigger said:

Which is very interesting since the modders introduce their own HW/code so i cant see where they getting the base for copyright infringement but whatever.....

Modding may sometimes infringe the legal rights of the copyright owner. Some nations have laws prohibiting modding and accuse modders of attempting to overcome copy protection schemes. In the United States, the DMCA has set up stiff penalties for mods that violate the rights of intellectual property owners.

 

In the European Union, member states have agreed the EU Copyright Directive and are transposing it into national law.

 

A 22-year-old man was convicted by Caerphilly Magistrates' Court in the United Kingdom in July 2005 for selling a modded Xbox with built in software and games.

 

However it is also worthy of note that some other European countries have not interpreted the legal issues in the same way. In Italy a judge threw out a Sony case saying it was up to owners of a console what they did with it. Similarly in Spain, mod chips have been ruled as legal despite the EU copyright legislation.

 

Modding may be an unauthorized change made to a software or hardware to a platform in gaming. Case mods are modifications to a device with the altering of certain styles. For example, people who mod a Microsoft Xbox 360 can alter the LED lights on the controller to glow different colors.

 

On August 5, 2009 Matthew Crippen, a 27-year-old student at California State University, Fullerton, was arrested for modifying game consoles including the Xbox 360, PlayStation 3, and Nintendo Wii for profit. Crippen testified that it was so owners could play their backup discs of DRM-laden gaming software that they legally own. However, the DMCA states that it is illegal to circumvent copyright protection software, even for non-infringing uses such as backing up legally owned games. In December 2010 the prosecutors dropped all charges against Crippen because of inadmissible evidence obtained through an audio-less video recording deemed illegal by California law.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modding#Legal_issues

 

[mr moose]

3 minutes ago, jagdtigger said:

Which is very interesting since the modders introduce their own HW/code so i cant see where they getting the base for copyright infringement but whatever.....

The code they introduce or the hardware they modify circumvents DRM in many cases, this makes it a copyright offense.

[Rohith_Kumar_Sp]

1 hour ago, mr moose said:

Youtube really need to stop playing the copyright police.  The laws are pretty simple, what youtuibe is doing goes well beyond their scope.

youtube is weird, sometimes, they wash of their hand saying users to deal with copyright and other times go overboard

for example they don't really deal with disputes and leave it to the actual person who claimed it, has this been posted here? anyway someone used the copyright system to extort money from channels, this is youtube saying you deal with it. and sometimes they go ape shit like what's posted on this thread. it's always the extremes with youtube.
 

 

[jagdtigger]

3 minutes ago, Rohith_Kumar_Sp said:

youtube is weird, sometimes, they wash of their hand saying users to deal with copyright and other times go overboard

for example they don't really deal with disputes and leave it to the actual person who claimed it, has this been posted here? anyway someone used the copyright system to extort money from channels, this is youtube saying you deal with it. and sometimes they go ape shit like what's posted on this thread. it's always the extremes with youtube.
 

 

Just read it on torrentfreak, i dont remember seeing it here so go ahead and make a thread .

[Doobeedoo]

As far as gaming YT is an utter failure and disgrace, glad their YT gaming site never took off. Like it ever could with their anti-gaming approach in every way. 

[jagdtigger]

7 hours ago, Doobeedoo said:

As far as gaming YT is an utter failure and disgrace, glad their YT gaming site never took off. Like it ever could with their anti-gaming approach in every way. 

It still doesnt justify false take-downs, period.

 

10 hours ago, mr moose said:

The code they introduce or the hardware they modify circumvents DRM in many cases, this makes it a copyright offense.

AFAIK there are exemptions that apply here but i cant find any trusted source on it. Whatever the case may be the system in question is way too easy to abuse.

[Doobeedoo]

49 minutes ago, jagdtigger said:

It still doesnt justify false take-downs, period.

Oh for sure, it's terrible in it self.

[Misanthrope]

I'm sure the announcement of a robust effort to get rid of the fucking Nazis will follow...Right?....Mrs.Wojcicki?....She's not coming back isn't she?

[yian88]

On 1/30/2019 at 8:51 PM, BuckGup said:

Why can't someone make a replacement. Sure it's a huge gamble but every content creator that isn't a sellout is looking to move

id say we had a good for a few decades of free of internet,  eventually its going to be taken over fully censored and controlled

something that poerfull wasnt going to be pure wild west forever,  the mafia , politicians, corporations, russians, chinese you name it they are slower but eventually they ill take ful controll

just like you cant find  wild west life in USA no more we wont have free web in about 10 to 15 years

 

 

[mr moose]

5 hours ago, jagdtigger said:

It still doesnt justify false take-downs, period.

 

AFAIK there are exemptions that apply here but i cant find any trusted source on it. Whatever the case may be the system in question is way too easy to abuse.

No argument from me that youtube's system if fucked, none at all.  But there aren't any exceptions to the breaking DRM law that I can find, especially not in the USA.

[jagdtigger]

4 hours ago, mr moose said:

But there aren't any exceptions to the breaking DRM law that I can find, especially not in the USA.

AFAIK you can jailbreak/root your phone for example legally:

Quote

In 2010 and 2012, the U.S. Copyright Office approved exemptions that allowed smartphone users to jailbreak their devices legally,^[76] and in 2015 the Copyright Office approved an expanded exemption that also covers other all-purpose mobile computing devices, such as tablets.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IOS_jailbreaking#Legal_status

[kilgore_T]

i dont understand the anti modding stance companies take - games you can mod can last decades...games you cant last a couple of years...oh wait i think i just explained it to myself, so like a cheap vacuum cleaner, the company wants you to keep buying their new product. they really do want to make the iterations of their games disposable 

[Thaldor]

21 hours ago, mr moose said:

The code they introduce or the hardware they modify circumvents DRM in many cases, this makes it a copyright offense.

Actually that depends on a lot of things. In EU circumventing DRM on gaming machines is legal in some situations, mainly circumveting the DRM is illegal when it's aim is reproduction, communication, public offer or distribution and even that is faiding line when most of the EU countries have extempted "computer programs" from DRM protection because they don't want to start deciding what is and what is not legal circumvention reasons and methods. US also has holes in the DMCA which provides protection for DRM, like as long as you are working with open source stuff you basicly don't need to care about DMCA and you can circumvent as much DRMs in devices as you need. Mainly you can circumvent device/OS DRMs as long as it's not ment to violate or engourage others to violate copyrights.

 

So, in most of the world it's totally legal to make a video about how to mod your console so it can run Linux, no matter how many DRMs you need to break doing so. E: Only place I know where this is illegal would be Japan (Thanks to Nintendon't).

[RejZoR]

On 1/30/2019 at 8:01 PM, imreloadin said:

Oh so you want an ad-based system again? What do you think got Youtube in this position to begin with? They've been really hurt by all of the adpocalypse stuff so of course their video take-down process is going to side with the companies who also purchase ad space from them...

The "offensive videos" association is bullshit excuse. Who really honestly believes just because Coca Cola ad was played before some Trump video that Coca Cola is endorsing Trump? That's just idiotic. That's like saying Coca Cola advocates terrorism because they roll their ad in the middle of TV action movie with terrorists. That's the same level of ignorance and stupidity. Ads are randomly selected from a pool of ads so they fill the required quota of displays.

 

There was some other bullshit going on that they weren't telling us.

[mr moose]

13 hours ago, jagdtigger said:

AFAIK you can jailbreak/root your phone for example legally:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IOS_jailbreaking#Legal_status

We are talking about modifying consoles that breaks DRM. Jaiklbreaking phones is different and I don't actually have an opinion on that yet.

13 hours ago, Thaldor said:

Actually that depends on a lot of things. In EU circumventing DRM on gaming machines is legal in some situations, mainly circumveting the DRM is illegal when it's aim is reproduction, communication, public offer or distribution and even that is faiding line when most of the EU countries have extempted "computer programs" from DRM protection because they don't want to start deciding what is and what is not legal circumvention reasons and methods. US also has holes in the DMCA which provides protection for DRM, like as long as you are working with open source stuff you basicly don't need to care about DMCA and you can circumvent as much DRMs in devices as you need. Mainly you can circumvent device/OS DRMs as long as it's not ment to violate or engourage others to violate copyrights.

 

So, in most of the world it's totally legal to make a video about how to mod your console so it can run Linux, no matter how many DRMs you need to break doing so. E: Only place I know where this is illegal would be Japan (Thanks to Nintendon't).

I'm not sure what you are trying to say here,  Because some EU states allow breaking DRM for "some situations" does not make it the majority nor the common.  In the US there are no exceptions to the law.

 

Also I am not arguing that these videos are illegal, so not sure why you even made the last sentence.

[Fnige]

On 1/31/2019 at 6:01 AM, imreloadin said:

Oh so you want an ad-based system again? What do you think got Youtube in this position to begin with? They've been really hurt by all of the adpocalypse stuff so of course their video take-down process is going to side with the companies who also purchase ad space from them...

Sponsor based system?

[Thaldor]

53 minutes ago, mr moose said:

I'm not sure what you are trying to say here,  Because some EU states allow breaking DRM for "some situations" does not make it the majority nor the common.  In the US there are no exceptions to the law.

 

Also I am not arguing that these videos are illegal, so not sure why you even made the last sentence.

Your short coming is that you only read the law. Both EU with their copyright directive and US with their DMCA have made it illegal to circumvent any DRM, but in 2014 EUs court of justice made the decision that circumventing DRM in some cases is legal (to increase peoples interest, that EU court ruling is actually done against Nintendo):

Quote

The Court of Justice next states that the legal protection covers only the technological measures intended to prevent or eliminate unauthorised acts of reproduction, communication, public offer or distribution, for which authorisation from the copyrightholder is required. That legal protection must respect the principle of proportionality without prohibiting devices or activities which have a commercially significant purpose or use other than to circumvent the technical protection for unlawful purposes.

The Court of Justice notes that the scope of legal protection of technical measures must not be assessed according to the use of consoles defined by the holder of copyright, but that rather it is necessary to examine the purpose of devices provided for the circumvention of protection measures, taking account, according to the circumstances at issue, of the use which third parties actually make of them.

In US the same thing has happened where court rulings have been positive for circumventing DRM in computer programs (citing wikipedia):

Quote

Reverse engineering of existing systems is expressly permitted under the Act under the specific condition of a safe harbor, where circumvention is necessary to achieve interoperability with other software. See 17 U.S.C. Sec. 1201(f). Open-source software to decrypt content scrambled with the Content Scrabling System and other encryption techniques presents an intractable problem with the application of the Act. Much depends on the intent of the actor. If the decryption is done for the purpose of achieving interoperability of open source operating systems with proprietary operating systems, it would be protected by Section 1201(f) the Act. Cf., Universal City Studios, Inc. v. Corley, 273 F.3d 429 (2d Cir. 2001) at notes 5 and 16. However, dissemination of such software for the purpose of violating or encouraging others to violate copyrights has been held illegal. See Universal City Studios, Inc. v. Reimerdes, 111 F. Supp. 2d 346 (S.D.N.Y. 2000).

So yeah, it's illegal but as with any law the true ruling is done in courts which decide how that law is interpret. Yes, in both EU and US it's still case by case, with EU having far more directed course of rulings, because EUs court of justice overrules every member countrys own courts of justice because the lower courts cannot make rulings that are against higher court rulings and the EUs court of justice is the highest court order in any EU country (so if you live in EU and Nintendo sues you for rooting/jailbraking Switch to run Android and you haven't done it to break copyrights, just use that EU court ruling and the case should be over). EU also has that thing that the EU directives are just as they literally sound like, directions, like in Finnish copyright law, which goes mostly with the directions of the EU copyright directive, there is a part that makes it illegal to circumvent DRMs, except there's also a part that excludes "computer programs" from that, so it's illegal (no one has been ever sued over it, so there's no court rulings) to circumvent DRM in music CDs and whatever, but it's totally legal to circumvent DRM in "computer programs" (which can be anything between firmwares, OSs and games/applications, Finnish law doesn't really have clear lines what is a "computer program") [side note: Finland is usually the country that takes any EU directives as literally as possible and goes for the most strict path (that is where the joke in Iron Sky -movie, where the US president asks "who didn't arm their spaceship?" and only Finland rises his hand, comes from)].

 

Spoiler

Also as a side note, EUs court of justice has also ruled that DRMs should not prevent reselling computer programs, even downloaded ones (the press release of the ruling from 2012).

Quote

By its judgment delivered today, the Court explains that the principle of exhaustion of the distribution right applies not only where the copyright holder markets copies of his software on a material medium (CD-ROM or DVD) but also where he distributes them by means of downloads from his website.

Where the copyright holder makes available to his customer a copy – tangible or intangible – and at the same time concludes, in return form payment of a fee, a licence agreement granting the customer the right to use that copy for an unlimited period, that rightholder sells the copy to the customer and thus exhausts his exclusive distribution right. Such a transaction involves a transfer of the right of ownership of the copy. Therefore, even if the licence agreement prohibits a further transfer, the rightholder can no longer oppose the resale of that copy.

So, don't say EU never did something good, okay.

 

[aezakmi]

On 1/30/2019 at 3:50 PM, VegetableStu said:

top comment in the reddit thread suggests Louis Rossmann's channel might be implicated (at least some possibility over the schematic diagrams he shows off in his repair videos) ._.

I'm sure Apple literally shoved a million dollars to Google just to have them ban the Louis Rossmann from Youtube.

[Trik'Stari]

On 1/31/2019 at 4:57 PM, jagdtigger said:

It still doesnt justify false take-downs, period.

 

AFAIK there are exemptions that apply here but i cant find any trusted source on it. Whatever the case may be the system in question is way too easy to abuse.

Maybe false takedowns should come with severe consequences, like loss of copyright?

 

For instance: When Nintendo or some other jackass makes a bogus claim over something that is fair use, like a review.

[jagdtigger]

8 hours ago, Trik'Stari said:

Maybe false takedowns should come with severe consequences, like loss of copyright?

 

For instance: When Nintendo or some other jackass makes a bogus claim over something that is fair use, like a review.

Guess how big is the chance of that happening. Even DMCA lacks any punishment for false claims.

 

7 hours ago, Arokhantos said:

It would be so easy to restrict report system abusers from using the system, would't that alone scare companies into not abusing it ?

They would make a new account and carry on destroying legitimate channels.

Edited February 2, 2019 by jagdtigger

[Trik'Stari]

17 minutes ago, jagdtigger said:

Guess how big is the chance of that happening. Even DMCA lacks any punishment for false claims.

 

They would make a new account and carry on destroying legitimate channels.

I'm saying that's what should happen.

[Bitter]

As someone who has to monitor and report stuff for their partner (they make the content, I monitor for infringement) it is still very annoying for the 'little guy' to get stuff removed from some websites. I'm sure YT is fine, Pornhub isn't too bad, but some other sites are a pain and super slow. Even at PH I had to go outside the normal strike tool and send several legal threats to get an account taken down that kept re-uploading their content, blatantly violating PH's TOS repeatedly. I'm sure they just made another account. PH didn't even comply with DMCA entirely, failing to furnish any IP address or other information that I requested after like the 18th violation. That's when I threatened legal action, that's when they finally terminated the account. I'm sure her stuff is still floating around, I understand that's never completely fixed because internet, but when she see's a dip in sales and then we find about $1000 worth of her content is being freely viewed by thousands of people, it's a little annoying. She's a small self content producer using this money to help with her car payment and what's left over she re-invests into 'stuff' for making content, it's only about $200 a month.

[Thaldor]

1 hour ago, Bitter said:

As someone who has to monitor and report stuff for their partner (they make the content, I monitor for infringement) it is still very annoying for the 'little guy' to get stuff removed from some websites. I'm sure YT is fine, Pornhub isn't too bad, but some other sites are a pain and super slow. Even at PH I had to go outside the normal strike tool and send several legal threats to get an account taken down that kept re-uploading their content, blatantly violating PH's TOS repeatedly. I'm sure they just made another account. PH didn't even comply with DMCA entirely, failing to furnish any IP address or other information that I requested after like the 18th violation. That's when I threatened legal action, that's when they finally terminated the account. I'm sure her stuff is still floating around, I understand that's never completely fixed because internet, but when she see's a dip in sales and then we find about $1000 worth of her content is being freely viewed by thousands of people, it's a little annoying. She's a small self content producer using this money to help with her car payment and what's left over she re-invests into 'stuff' for making content, it's only about $200 a month.

That case is clear as water, the right use for DMCA takedowns. Problem arises when we talk about the border cases like videos showing modding PS3 (later models that "doesn't" have support) to run Linux or the very classic bad reviews which affect the sales because they are right about something being terrible. First ones are really in the border of being illegal (depends on the use case, as long as it's not done to piracy in mind, it's legal) and the second one is 100% legal, but in both cases companies have thrown DMCA takedowns because they can, not because it would be right and legal. YTs automated system makes these "illegal" DMCA takedowns far too easy to do and then there isn't even any kind of punishment for using them so (if we rule out they targeted someone who managed to make the case a public and get a enough coverage that you can say there rises mass outcry). Not to even mention now that YT has started to make their own laws about what is and what isn't a copyright infringement even against the law in practice.

 

I strongly wave my flag for manual handling of DMCA takedown notices. Automated systems at least today are far too prone to make mistakes and being misused (see the past month in YT where content creator was extorted with takedowns and strikes, another one lost monetization from his own song because someone gained a great idea to reupload it looking like a record company and make a claim to the orginal song and there's probably a lot of stuff that doesn't surface). Yes, doing it manually would be so hard and annoying for the copyright holders because it would take a lot more time to handle the notices, but at least it would significantly reduce the possibilities to misuse the system. And before you bring out the sites that are mainly made just to spread copyrighted material illegally, they would do it any way, it doesn't matter what the law and courts say, they would still do it and use your DMCA notices as toiletpaper.

[SenKa]

If were keeping words at face value with taking morals/personal beliefs out of the equation, all Youtube is doing is removing illegal practices from their site...

 

The question of if said illegal practices should be illegal is different entirely. But as the laws stand, Youtube is doing the right thing...

[PocketNerd]

Sounds like modders and other such folks should start their own peertube instances.