Youtubers H3H3 sued by Youtuber Boldguy over a critical video (yet another fair use case)

[Master Disaster]

So this one is a little out there. Popular tubers H3H3 posted a critical video of another tuber,  Boldguy. In the video they used 3 minutes (of an 11 minute video) of footage from Boldguys channel. 

 

Boldguy responded to the criticism by striking the video and making some rather bizarre demands which were

Quote

H3H3 must:

Immediately cease and desist the use of his work and remove the offending video

Sign an agreement to never use his work or talk about him again

Pay him $3,750

Of course H3H3 refused so Boldguy decided to push it further by starting a lawsuit against H3H3 and demanding the following 

Quote

H3H3 must create a video promoting his channel and him and keep it live for 2 months

H3H3 have decided that this whole thing is preposterous and that they'd rather meet him in court than relent to his demands. 

 

As this news started to break lawyers Ryan Lawson and Michael Lee (both are tech and video game lawyers) have offered H3H3 initial consultation for free but have stated this case could wind up costing H3H3 over $100,000 if they win. Luckily for H3H3 the YouTube community has responded and set up a go fund me campaign which has already had over $100,000 donated,  there's even been donations by PewDiePie,  the Fine Brothers and Notch. 

 

Source is a video

 

I think this is worth reporting as this could be important in what happens with YTs copyright policies going forward. The outcome of this court case (assuming the judge doesn't just throw it out that is) will set a precedent for future idiotic copyright claims. 

 

The Know even mention the fact that Google has remained quiet throughout all this which is unsurprising,  it's not like Google want to take sides and I'm pretty sure they're worried about what the judge will say about their fundamentally flawed system which allows shut like this to happen at all. 

 

Thoughts?

[Stevoisboss]

Yea I saw this a couple days ago...pretty bullshit. #makeyoutubegreatagain

[Masada02]

The FUPA will protect us all.

[DioOmicida]

I think for content to be considered fair use, it has to use something along the lines of only like 5% of your overall presentation. While the initial demands seemed a little strange, he is in he right to file a suit and very likely to win. Hopefully the first unlawful demands may help swing in H3H3's favor. Plagiarism is plagiarism. It's not something you only hear and forget about in grade school.

[Master Disaster]

3 minutes ago, DioOmicida said:

I think for content to be considered fair use, it has to use something along the lines of only like 5% of your overall presentation. While the initial demands seemed a little strange, he is in he right to file a suit and very likely to win. Hopefully the first unlawful demands may help swing in H3H3's favor. Plagiarism is plagiarism. It's not something you only hear and forget about in grade school.

Parody and criticism is protected by law and in this case it constitutes fair use as it was a critical video. They didn't plagiarise anything, they used examples to demonstrate the point to they were making and under copyright law that's fine. Boldguy doesn't stand a chance of winning. 

[DioOmicida]

5 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

Parody and criticism is protected by law and in this case it constitutes fair use as it was a critical video. They didn't plagiarise anything, they used examples to demonstrate the point to they were making and under copyright law that's fine. Boldguy doesn't stand a chance of winning. 

Original content is also protected by law.

Critical is a point of view and with fair use is usually expressed in an educational manner. 

The length of examples compared to the original content can constitute plagiarism. 

They wouldn't go to court if they didn't think they had a case. 

[Misanthrope]

Good, but they should return the Fine Bros. donation with a note saying: Thanks, but no thanks: Fuck off.

 

Seriously they basically tried to make the opposite precedent for this exact case themselves and NOW they want to offer a donation as penitence? Fuck them.

[Misanthrope]

20 minutes ago, DioOmicida said:

Original content is also protected by law.

Critical is a point of view and with fair use is usually expressed in an educational manner. 

The length of examples compared to the original content can constitute plagiarism. 

They wouldn't go to court if they didn't think they had a case. 

No, you're wrong. It's not just educational purposes criticism and comedy should be protected since this is a free speech issue ultimately. That's why the fair use provision even exists.

 

And your other argument is just presuppositional nonsense: the fact that the guy wants to sue is proof of his argument? Ever heard of the term frivolous lawsuit?

[Master Disaster]

16 minutes ago, DioOmicida said:

Original content is also protected by law.

Critical is a point of view and with fair use is usually expressed in an educational manner. 

The length of examples compared to the original content can constitute plagiarism. 

They wouldn't go to court if they didn't think they had a case. 

I'm sorry but I disagree. Criticism as a concept must have a legal definition otherwise it wouldn't be protected by law so it's in no way a POV. 

 

I'm not sure length is even a factor at all. 

 

Anyone can sue anyone for anything (in America) so that's hardly an indication of a solid case. I'm guessing you've never heard the term frivolous lawsuit? 

[DioOmicida]

1 minute ago, Misanthrope said:

No, you're wrong. It's not just educational purposes criticism and comedy should be protected since this is a free speech issue ultimately. That's why the fair use provision even exists.

 

And your other argument is just preposicional nonsense: the fact that the guy wants to sue is proof of his argument? Ever heard of the term frivolous lawsuit?

I didn't say just, I said usually. Yes, criticism and comedy should be protected. I never said that. If it's your own work and not plagiarism than yes, it should be protected. 

[DioOmicida]

1 minute ago, Master Disaster said:

I'm not sure length is even a factor at all. 

If length wasn't a factor I could quote whole sections of books in a paper with short opinionated criticisms prior to and after the quote. 

[Misanthrope]

3 minutes ago, DioOmicida said:

I didn't say just, I said usually. Yes, criticism and comedy should be protected. I never said that. If it's your own work and not plagiarism than yes, it should be protected. 

Fair enough

[MrRavens]

2 minutes ago, DioOmicida said:

I didn't say just, I said usually. Yes, criticism and comedy should be protected. I never said that. If it's your own work and not plagiarism than yes, it should be protected. 

I'm not trying to cause a big fuss or anything, but h3h3 didn't claim BoldGuy's video as his own nor represented it as such. So we can't call it plagiarism, since we're using the word. This is where ppl are discussing where the line of fair use is. Cause laws really need to catch up and make this black and white clear.

[DioOmicida]

3 minutes ago, LtRavens said:

I'm not trying to cause a big fuss or anything, but h3h3 didn't claim BoldGuy's video as his own nor represented it as such.

Videos posted to Youtube are considered usable by Youtube itself, like joint ownership but mostly there so Youtube can cash in when needed, but all content published you claim all the rights and responsibilities too. Either you know that or not based on if you read terms and agreements. 

[DioOmicida]

5 minutes ago, LtRavens said:

This is where ppl are discussing where the line of fair use is. Cause laws really need to catch up and make this black and white clear.

I do agree. It's a pretty hard line to draw.

[TheMissxu]

Here are a couple facts...

 

They used 3 minutes out of the 5 minutes of Boldguy's video. They also included 11 minutes of their own content.

[Valentyn]

For those wondering, this is the video that resulted in them being sued. It's a normal reaction video; even the Fine Bros donated money to them for support in their legal fees. 

One of the items on the "Deal" to drop the suit was that H3H3 was supposed to promote them, yet that's exactly what they did at the end of the video, and even originally linked to the chap's channel.
 

 

[HKZeroFive]

40 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

Good, but they should return the Fine Bros. donation with a note saying: Thanks, but no thanks: Fuck off.

 

Seriously they basically tried to make the opposite precedent for this exact case themselves and NOW they want to offer a donation as penitence? Fuck them.

I can seriously see where the FineBros are going with this. If Ethan and Hila lose the case, it basically sets a precedent that other YouTubers can get fucked over for doing the same way. Unlikely but you get what I mean.

 

Seeing how the FineBros' business (and $$$) works off using other people's content, it's understandable to see why they'd support FUPA. Same goes for Leafy (although I despise the cunt - clickbait videos everywhere, holy fuck).

 

And while everyone is involved in this shitshow, I'm asking myself if Baldie can even afford to fight in court. It's a waste of everyone's time and money and it's a case he's going to likely lose.

[SuperShires]

The fact they raised over $115k in 1 day and have given it to VideoGameAttorney to fight bullshit lawsuits like this show how important it is to YouTubers. Papa Bless.

[Misanthrope]

36 minutes ago, HKZeroFive said:

I can seriously see where the FineBros are going with this. If Ethan and Hila lose the case, it basically sets a precedent that other YouTubers can get fucked over for doing the same way. Unlikely but you get what I mean.

 

Seeing how the FineBros' business (and $$$) works off using other people's content, it's understandable to see why they'd support FUPA. Same goes for Leafy (although I despise the cunt - clickbait videos everywhere, holy fuck).

 

And while everyone is involved in this shitshow, I'm asking myself if Baldie can even afford to fight in court. It's a waste of everyone's time and money and it's a case he's going to likely lose.

Well he already filed meaning that if he looses due to poor representation (due in turn to lack of funds) it just means that the precedent will be set easier that way. Plus I'm pretty sure once you file you can't simply back down and the funds can be used to counter sue to 1) Still set the precedent and 2) Ruin his shit cause fuck him

[patrick3027]

1 hour ago, LtRavens said:

h3h3 didn't claim BoldGuy's video as his own nor represented it as such. So we can't call it plagiarism

This, so much this.

[spartaman64]

9 hours ago, DioOmicida said:

I think for content to be considered fair use, it has to use something along the lines of only like 5% of your overall presentation. While the initial demands seemed a little strange, he is in he right to file a suit and very likely to win. Hopefully the first unlawful demands may help swing in H3H3's favor. Plagiarism is plagiarism. It's not something you only hear and forget about in grade school.

idk if i made a research paper i dont think there is a limit to how much of the source i can cite as long as I make it clear that it is a citation from that source

[crystal6tak]

Holy crap, either boldguy got destroyed or his content was never good to begin with 

 

And I thought finebros's backlash was insane, pretty much all this boldguy's video are in the red for like/dislike ratio.

[Yog]

Besides the occasional video about vaping most of the dude's channel is just criticism of other people...all suing him will do is give him fuel and legitimize him to his age 18-25 fans that are somehow already old and crotchety. Seriously, it's like the millennial version sitting on the front porch, yelling at anyone that passes.