PewDiePie, Firewatch and DMCA

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4
 

EvilRoy:
... You already do so I'm not sure why you're asking for permission now.

Where did I do this precisely? Or are you just assuming a bunch of shit?

Different question, would it be a good idea of me to do the things I described above? Would doing so make me a reasonable, responsible, empathetic person? Or would I be just another asshole?

Can you guys tell me how I feel, because I've gone back and forth on this in my head like ten times.
On the one hand I agree with the Firewatch dev not wanting PewDiePie to make money off their games, but on the other hand can they retroactively apply a DMCA? Because PewDiePie can make the argument that when he made that video it fell under their vague statement on allowing streamers to make money. The Firewatch devs have the right to dictate who can make money off of their product but I don't see how they can punish PewDiePie for something that he did in the past that he had no reason to belive was a violation of copyright at that time

If the Firewatch dev comes out and bans PewDiePie from making future videos I think that would be a more reasonable thing to do

gsilver:

Exley97:

The Lunatic:

It's like finding out about the word "Mat" in Russian. It's a word so offensive it's banned from all Russian cinema. People lose their jobs for uttering the word and using it in public can actually get you arrested. But, to you and I, English speakers, with no history of Russian culture, there's absolutely nothing to it.

Is he aware it's offensive? Yeah, most likely, it would be naive to say otherwise. Is he aware how offensive it is to Americans? Probably not, honestly.

Okay, here's a good example to illustrate my point. I had no idea about the word "Mat" in Russian. And to be honest, I'm still struggling to understand the context of the word and why it's deemed so bad in Russia that it requires an outright ban.

But here's the thing: now that I know it's bad, I'm not going to go on a Russian-speaking livestream and scream "What a fucking Mat!" I'm not going to start throwing the word around, in anger or otherwise, and use my ignorance of the history/context as an excuse.

So, in Russia, if there's a character named Matt (a perfectly normal name in the West) in a movie, do they censor it?

Are you asking me? I have no idea. I don't speak Russian and don't live in Russia. Mayybe they specifically spell out "Matthew" or maybe the pronunciation is different. Again, no clue. And *because* I have no clue and am generally ignorant of the word's context and history, I'm not going to go throwing it around casually as an insult just because I can. I'm perfectly happy calling people motherf*%$er and other colorful metaphors.

Fireaxe:

jademunky:

Michel Henzel:
Also, by your own logic, there is no excuse for having a show, in 2017, literately titled "Gypsy"

This must be a European thing. I know a few people of Romani ethnicity (well, three actually, all siblings) and they all use the term "Gypsy" to describe themselves when talking to you in casual conversation.

So, from your sample size of one family, you conclude that all (or even more than a tiny minority) Romani are okay with it?

That's basically "I have a black friend".

Clients, in this case. I was a little shocked to hear people refer to themselves as such as well and I don't use the term personally or encourage others to do so.

I think it might have something to do with the individuals in question having been born in Canada and possibly not used to that word being used as a slur against them.

BeetleManiac:

EvilRoy:
... You already do so I'm not sure why you're asking for permission now.

Where did I do this precisely? Or are you just assuming a bunch of shit?

Well I'm speaking in generality about group of people, but that should obvious from context. Your misinterpretation could be due to a lot of reasons but I've read your posts before so I will conclude that you just kind enjoy being outraged and having a go at people over it. Or I'm just assuming a bunch of shit.

EvilRoy:
but that should obvious from context.

A point is always obvious to the person trying to make it. Doesn't mean it is to the rest of us.

Your misinterpretation could be due to a lot of reasons but I've read your posts before so I will conclude that you just kind enjoy being outraged and having a go at people over it. Or I'm just assuming a bunch of shit.

More accurate to say that I don't suffer fools gladly. And you assume way too much.

So let's get back to my question. I can say these awful things in public. Does that mean I should?

BeetleManiac:

EvilRoy:
but that should obvious from context.

A point is always obvious to the person trying to make it. Doesn't mean it is to the rest of us.

Your misinterpretation could be due to a lot of reasons but I've read your posts before so I will conclude that you just kind enjoy being outraged and having a go at people over it. Or I'm just assuming a bunch of shit.

More accurate to say that I don't suffer fools gladly. And you assume way too much.

So let's get back to my question. I can say these awful things in public. Does that mean I should?

I referred to Americans and you interpreted it to refer specifically to yourself. What conclusion could I draw beyond you looking for reasons to be angry? Now you're trying to draw me into a conversation irrelevant to any of the three conversations held up to this point. This has nothing to do with suffering fools, you're just looking for a fight so hard that you're willing to fabricate it from whole cloth.

EvilRoy:
I referred to Americans and you interpreted it to refer specifically to yourself. What conclusion could I draw beyond you looking for reasons to be angry?

No, I'm genuinely curious. Do you think that because a person can, they should? If you know something is offensive, shouldn't there be some discretion as to what platform you say it on? I'm just using myself as an example. If that offends you so much, I'll use someone else.

How about Game Grumps? Their sense of humor gets pretty filthy, but they've made it a point not to use racial slurs. When this stuff is brought up, it's in service to a finer satirical point. There's a difference between making a joke about the cultural perception of the word "nigger" and just shouting it. Do you disagree?

DrownedAmmet:
Can you guys tell me how I feel, because I've gone back and forth on this in my head like ten times.
On the one hand I agree with the Firewatch dev not wanting PewDiePie to make money off their games, but on the other hand can they retroactively apply a DMCA? Because PewDiePie can make the argument that when he made that video it fell under their vague statement on allowing streamers to make money. The Firewatch devs have the right to dictate who can make money off of their product but I don't see how they can punish PewDiePie for something that he did in the past that he had no reason to belive was a violation of copyright at that time

If the Firewatch dev comes out and bans PewDiePie from making future videos I think that would be a more reasonable thing to do

They can certainly refuse to do business with him later on. They could hypothetically sue him for damages to their brand. If there was a contract where he was promoting their content and it had some sort of behavioral clause, thats another route.

DMCAing him is straight up committing fraud though, a lazy response that isn't actually legal, though no case has yet defined a punishment for misuse of DMCA.

Exley97:

gsilver:

So, in Russia, if there's a character named Matt (a perfectly normal name in the West) in a movie, do they censor it?

Are you asking me? I have no idea. I don't speak Russian and don't live in Russia. Mayybe they specifically spell out "Matthew" or maybe the pronunciation is different. Again, no clue. And *because* I have no clue and am generally ignorant of the word's context and history, I'm not going to go throwing it around casually as an insult just because I can. I'm perfectly happy calling people motherf*%$er and other colorful metaphors.

The word Mat is not censored, as it is the word for mother. What is censored is the type of language that's called "Mat", which involves the Russian equivalents to the c-words, fuck, whore etc.. The reason it is called Mat is because they are often strung together with the word mother ("Fuck your mother", "Whore mother" etc.) to create chains of profanity similar to what you'd expect out of a USMC drill instructor. So what's banned is essentially profanity in media and culture, which makes it a law similar to parts of the Hay's Code back in the day.

This makes no difference at all to PewDiePie however, who's Swedish and as such has a solid understanding of just how denigrating the slur of Nigger is. He's got no excuses for different cultural heritage, since Swedes are incredibly Americanized due to pop culture osmosis.

So, I have only one question. How many black people care about what Pew said, let alone are angry about it, and how many white people are getting angry for black people?

Metalix Knightmare:
So, I have only one question. How many black people care about what Pew said, let alone are angry about it, and how many white people are getting angry for black people?

I can only speak for myself: but as a person with very brown skin I do care what Pew said. And as a person who follows Black Twitter, plenty of black people cared what Pew said as well.

Gethsemani:

Exley97:

gsilver:

So, in Russia, if there's a character named Matt (a perfectly normal name in the West) in a movie, do they censor it?

Are you asking me? I have no idea. I don't speak Russian and don't live in Russia. Mayybe they specifically spell out "Matthew" or maybe the pronunciation is different. Again, no clue. And *because* I have no clue and am generally ignorant of the word's context and history, I'm not going to go throwing it around casually as an insult just because I can. I'm perfectly happy calling people motherf*%$er and other colorful metaphors.

The word Mat is not censored, as it is the word for mother. What is censored is the type of language that's called "Mat", which involves the Russian equivalents to the c-words, fuck, whore etc.. The reason it is called Mat is because they are often strung together with the word mother ("Fuck your mother", "Whore mother" etc.) to create chains of profanity similar to what you'd expect out of a USMC drill instructor. So what's banned is essentially profanity in media and culture, which makes it a law similar to parts of the Hay's Code back in the day.

This makes no difference at all to PewDiePie however, who's Swedish and as such has a solid understanding of just how denigrating the slur of Nigger is. He's got no excuses for different cultural heritage, since Swedes are incredibly Americanized due to pop culture osmosis.

Thank you for clarifying that.

Metalix Knightmare:
So, I have only one question. How many black people care about what Pew said, let alone are angry about it, and how many white people are getting angry for black people?

How many white people are there in this thread telling black people what to not be offended by?

McMarbles:

Metalix Knightmare:
So, I have only one question. How many black people care about what Pew said, let alone are angry about it, and how many white people are getting angry for black people?

How many white people are there in this thread telling black people what to not be offended by?

Less than the amount of white people claiming that black people who DIDN'T take offense at something or another are Uncle Toms or have internalized their racism, or keep speaking for black people as if they can't fight their own battles.

Granted, none of that is in THIS thread mind you, but I've seen some of the ugliest things said about black people come from supposed allies towards minorities that don't march in step.

Metalix Knightmare:
Granted, none of that is in THIS thread mind you, but

There's a "but" there, so let's cut to the chase. Who in this thread are you accusing of doing these things? Come on, name names. Let's get it all out in the open. And if you're not out to accuse anyone of such, then why are you coming into this thread to bitch about something that is not happening in this thread?

BeetleManiac:

Metalix Knightmare:
Granted, none of that is in THIS thread mind you, but

There's a "but" there, so let's cut to the chase. Who in this thread are you accusing of doing these things? Come on, name names. Let's get it all out in the open. And if you're not out to accuse anyone of such, then why are you coming into this thread to bitch about something that is not happening in this thread?

I'm accusing no one Beetle, and if you actually continued reading past that you'd know that. Why so confrontational about it?

Also, not so much bitching as much as it is commenting that, as much as people ride Pew's ass about this, a lot of those same people are consistently saying just as ugly things with a lot more vitriol in them.

Metalix Knightmare:
Also, not so much bitching as much as it is commenting that, as much as people ride Pew's ass about this, a lot of those same people are consistently saying just as ugly things with a lot more vitriol in them.

The thread isn't about that. The thread is about YouTube celebrities like PewDiePie and how the industry is reacting to his ill-advised behavior. Don't derail somebody else's thread because you feel like complaining about SJWs again. You want to complain about SJWs being racist? Make a thread about that.

And for those arguing that it's OK:
If this is OK, then what's to stop bad game developers from issuing DMCA claims against anyone who is critical of their (not so stellar) work?

What about perfectly legitimate channels who post nothing "offensive" whatsoever, but happen to get three of said DMCA claims and get their channel destroyed because of Youtube? Youtube has a rather famous 3-strikes policy.

*That* is why this is an issue.

gsilver:
And for those arguing that it's OK:
If this is OK, then what's to stop bad game developers from issuing DMCA claims against anyone who is critical of their (not so stellar) work?

What about perfectly legitimate channels who post nothing "offensive" whatsoever, but happen to get three of said DMCA claims and get their channel destroyed because of Youtube? Youtube has a rather famous 3-strikes policy.

*That* is why this is an issue.

'Fair Use' laws with plenty of legal precedent would stop that, provided said criticism isn't in the form of a Let's Play. That legal battle's been fought ages ago.

altnameJag:

gsilver:
And for those arguing that it's OK:
If this is OK, then what's to stop bad game developers from issuing DMCA claims against anyone who is critical of their (not so stellar) work?

What about perfectly legitimate channels who post nothing "offensive" whatsoever, but happen to get three of said DMCA claims and get their channel destroyed because of Youtube? Youtube has a rather famous 3-strikes policy.

*That* is why this is an issue.

'Fair Use' laws with plenty of legal precedent would stop that, provided said criticism isn't in the form of a Let's Play. That legal battle's been fought ages ago.

Didn't stop them from deleting I Hate Everything or Team Four Star without any warning. And they would have stayed deleted if they couldn't make a big enough fuss as they did.

Scarfulu still gets strikes for his reviews.

RaikuFA:

altnameJag:
'Fair Use' laws with plenty of legal precedent would stop that, provided said criticism isn't in the form of a Let's Play. That legal battle's been fought ages ago.

Didn't stop them from deleting I Hate Everything or Team Four Star without any warning. And they would have stayed deleted if they couldn't make a big enough fuss as they did.

Scarfulu still gets strikes for his reviews.

Dunno about the other two, but TFS is in the same boat as a lot of Let's Plays: for the most part, they aren't making their own animation.

'Course, they do leaps and bounds more than you average Let's Play, which is why they're re able to consistently wrestle their channel back from YouTube bots and Toei's summer interns, but still not liking their chances in actual court.

Hbomberguy had a similar problem with his Sherlock video: using snippets of stuff is fine, using too much is not, the line is vague, and YouTube algorithms don't give a shit.

altnameJag:

RaikuFA:

altnameJag:
'Fair Use' laws with plenty of legal precedent would stop that, provided said criticism isn't in the form of a Let's Play. That legal battle's been fought ages ago.

Didn't stop them from deleting I Hate Everything or Team Four Star without any warning. And they would have stayed deleted if they couldn't make a big enough fuss as they did.

Scarfulu still gets strikes for his reviews.

Dunno about the other two, but TFS is in the same boat as a lot of Let's Plays: for the most part, they aren't making their own animation.

'Course, they do leaps and bounds more than you average Let's Play, which is why they're re able to consistently wrestle their channel back from YouTube bots and Toei's summer interns, but still not liking their chances in actual court.

Hbomberguy had a similar problem with his Sherlock video: using snippets of stuff is fine, using too much is not, the line is vague, and YouTube algorithms don't give a shit.

Scarfulu got his for reviewing Elf Bowling the Movie. Apparently someone loves their work on a film where there's a song on the joys of slavery.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here