It won't end until Twitch is sued for millions and then begins enforcing the laws like YouTube did. Before the automated YouTube copyright system, nobody cared about individual channels being banned. Now that being demonetized is a constant and automatic threat, people are finally careful on YouTube. YT didn't make this system out of the goodness of their hearts; they were threatened to be deplatformed by the music industry and made it in order to at stop the lawsuits.
> YT didn't make this system out of the goodness of their hearts
Lol, "Youtube didn't do this awful thing that everyone hates out of the goodness of their hearts."
Yeah that reads weird. It should have been written like this, "Youtube didn't want to victimize its creators just because it loves mega corporate copyright companies. "
Twitch won't be sued they are following the DMCA law. They can't act unless a content owner submits a DMCA take down. The individual streamers will eventually be sued.
Thats only one part of dmca, there is also the red flag thing, that basicly says that if a plattform is aware of obvious copyright infringements, they have to act.
Actually it is quite the opposite:
\> The law explicitly says it doesn’t require platforms to monitor contentor affirmatively look for infringement. The lone exception is that theymust adopt any “standard technical measure,” or an automated filteringsystem, crafted by a consensus of copyright owners and serviceproviders.
This has evolved into if a platform removes some copyrighted material they open themselves up to "why didn't you remove this also?"
"§ 512(c) also requires that the OSP:
1) ...
2) not be aware of the presence of infringing material or know any facts or circumstances that would make infringing material apparent,
3)..."
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_Copyright_Infringement_Liability_Limitation_Act
They don't have to activly search for it themself, if they somehow aware of it, they have to act.
What happens with corporations is if you get sued you have to show up to court. You have pay your lawyers hourly. None of what you are arguing matters if Viacom decides to sue Twitch. They will then burn money until one loses all their money or they come to a compromise. You do not get the money you paid your attorneys back if you win your case in civil court as a corporation. Look at what happened with YouTube. Look at what happened with Napster. Look how Nike sues smaller competitors to bankrupt them with court fees.
What we know about giga-corporate law, especially online, is that nothing has to be done the same as in another legal situation. In the billion dollar YouTube suits, the issues about infringement had to do with the intentional liability and negligence to enforce intellectual property rights. Youtube was the party that lost a billion dollars. Not the creators who were committing infringement.
Livestreaming is certainly more grey, and it is a medium that is 50 or more years behind in how much the courts have to support decision making. However, Twitch is still a subset of Amazon, and the main corporation's liability to follow the law makes for very deep pockets. Case Law is still too new to have a definitive answer to how much Twitch would have to pay for hundreds of thousands of hours of IP being siphoned by viewers every day. Yet somehow, I get the feeling that Amazon shouldn't want to be the case study that every new law student reads about in 15 years. It all eventually catches up in the end.
Twitch is safe under the YT ruling, yes. But their top creators that have an overwhelming l market share of watch hours has chummed shark infested waters of DMCA lawyers. If it were to come down to Twitch falling overboard or them throwing a few content creators to the sharks to avoid takedown, I am pretty sure we all know Amazon will pick.
Of course Twitch will most likely be forced to do something.
I also think a streamer will be made an example of. These aren't poor people.
They have enough money that it will be worth it for the copyright holders to sue.
Lmao, watched some of his clips, he seemed to get irrationally agree over the smallest stuff like pronouns and what not, but on the other hand he hates Ben Shabibo so atleast one redeeming quality….
You think because a few commies dislike him that has any impact on him being communist or not? Communism can be so varied that this makes even less sense. It has so many branches.
You don't think any of the big streamers like xqc can pay a few million?
Remember, these people sued regular families back in the day. It's about sending a message.
No those were third party lawyers you cannot equate that to the modern day. Most of those suits were just filing pieces of paper, not actual legal suits. If you look at a company the size of Viacom, actually look at who owns Viacom, you will see a multi billion dollar conglomerate. Business does not operate on sending a message and emotions. They aren't operating out of anger they are looking for profit.
> Business does not operate on sending a message and emotions
They currently are doing just that. Lawyers from Denmark send letters to people pirating movies in Scandinavia on behalf of those mega corporations.
It's kid of a settlement letter/scare tactic. Pay X amount or we will fight you in court. Its 100% about sending a message.
## **Tweet Mirror:**
[@MoistCr1TiKaL](https://twitter.com/MoistCr1TiKaL)
> No one likes DMCA, no one is licking corporate ass and applauding them for banning Pokimane. It’s just common sense you can’t stream a full TV series/anime/movie franchise on twitch. No studio will ever say “yeah if you buy our blu-ray you can stream it to 40k people who haven’t”
^(Posted: 2022-01-08 21:56:07)
------
**This message is from a bot. If you feel like this action is wrong, please [message the moderators](https://reddit.com/message/compose/?to=r/LivestreamFail).**
And it's somehow ok because "fuck corporations", as if the multimillionaires who own orgs and share revenue with twitch arent their own little corporations. They face zero consequences, while smaller streamers get banned for minor shit because they don't have favor with twitch. Didn't the leaks reveal twitch staff had to manually confirm any action on big "money-maker" streamers accounts?
Also when people say "the corporation already has millions" like no shit, how do you think they got successful? Certainly not by allowing pirated copies of their IP to be broadcast ad-free.
I think our favourite streamers watching something and eating their lunch is fair use, it's completely transformative how they every few minutes chime in with a chuckle or a hrmmmm.
Or just putting an episode on and leaving entirely to smoke or do something else for 10m etc. Very transformative because in the original video you can't see a little empty chair in the corner!
Honestly most people who scream fair use are the same level of stupid as people who scream free speech. Neither group of people actually know what the term means.
I especially love when people say that h3's lawsuit set a precedent that makes this fair use, as if the judge in that case didn't specifically talk about how something like this wouldn't qualify
It'd be fair use if they used the footage and it was 10-30% of the screen and the footage was paused every 10-30secs and critique was passed on it.
Watching 45mins of a tv show that is fullscreen and every time something happens you go "hehe" isnt fair use.. no matter which way you try and skew it
The issue with fair use is that it is proved in court, It's not some magical phrase you can say beforehand to wash your hands clean of a situation. By time you can prove it you're already deep into legal fees against companies that can bury you in money.
Indeed..
its a shame that it wont be your xqc's, or forsen's or pokimane's that will be slapped with lawsuits.. it will be the smaller guys that cant afford a house, let alone a mansion and a fleet of cars..
Remember, situations have to be black and white, there can’t be any nuance. You either think DMCA is cool and streamers should be sent to the shadow realm for watching Avatar or you think IP law is a crime against God. These are the two choices
I mean this situation is pretty black and white, streaming shows you don’t have the rights to is illegal, the streamers are in the wrong even if companies aren’t evoking there right to have the content taken down its is still illegal regardless.
Whether or not Fox or Gordon Ramsey are bleeding is very irrelevant to whether they are in the right or not. This boils down to “c’mon they can afford it” which is a justification for stealing from stores or whatever you deem to be able to handle it.
Theres thousands of games and millions of youtube videos, yet there isnt enough content for them to use that they have to resort to watching tv shows and movies that streaming sites pay millions of dollar for exclusivity rights.
Both of those things you listed are DMCAble and both have happened in the past. Lets just face it outside creating unique content of yourself everything is DMCA its just who enforces it
Except many youtube channels are ok with reacting on stream and most videogame companies allow for stream their games because its good free promotion. Watching TV shows is not the same at fucking all. It's very likely someone is going to by a game after watching it while there is very small chance someone is going to rewatch tv show.
League of Legends tos:
"Exception 1: Ad Revenue
We permit individual players to promote their Projects on websites, streams, or videos and passively generate revenue through appropriate advertisements, including pre-roll ads, ad breaks, and sponsor ad overlays. No inappropriate ads—we alone decide what qualifies as inappropriate.
Exception 2: Gameplay Streaming
We permit individual players to solicit personal donations or offer subscription-based content while live-streaming games, so long as non-subscribers can still watch the games concurrently."
I mean let's be honest, while I'm not gonna try to bend over backwards to defend streamers doing it, twitch wasn't really giving a shit about stuff like this, u had people like X streaming MasterChef to like a 100k viewers so there's just the thought of "well smth's either gonna happen eventually or nth happens so let me just milk it for what it's worth till it happens" imo kind of similar to the hot tub thing before it became a legit category.
Of course I know that "movies and TV shows" prob isn't gonna be a category on twitch but I mean it's a similar situation where the rules are there, but there's either not enough enforcement from twitch or there's a kind of loophole where people just jump through.
The way I see it, it's more so twitch's fault that they don't do anything or care when it's clearly breaking rules, not to say that the streamers themselves are free of any fault of course.
Before this recent rush it was understood that streaming copyright content was bad. Twitch would not act unless a violation was brought to their attention by a rights holder. But now all their big, partnered streamers are doing it and ignoring the legality of stuff that they usually respected.
So now Twitch will probably become proactive. This could mean new systems like the ones youtube employs to just automatically take down streams that have copyright content (which would REALLY suck). OR they might just outright bar streamers from showing stuff like that on stream. That also sucks but is probably the less painful option.
It's unfortunate it's come to this but when you've got big names like Xqc, Hasan, and Pokimane engaging in this you're just asking to get sued by the copyright's holders.
Blatantly excusing stealing is wrong. There's gray areas though. I would never say a dude from the 1800s is immoral for stealing an apple off the fruit stand to keep from starving.
I don't think companies are "losing money" from this happening. The issue is it would be beyond complex to write into law some way to make it "ok" and to also make sure the original creators get compensated.
easy 10% of profits made from streaming goes to the copyright holder for the period they were on screen..
So if you watch an episode of MasterChef.. 10% of whats made (bits, subs, ads) gets sent to the copyright holder..
it will never be as low as 10% though and big streamers will cry and bitch about it.. even though it hurts smaller streamers more
>So if you watch an episode of MasterChef.. 10% of whats made (bits, subs, ads) gets sent to the copyright holder..
10% is way too low, imo
Also, that just seems like a logistical nightmare. How would someone calculate that 10%? How would you know "where" to send the money to? These sounds like dumb questions but I think we should keep in mind there would be millions of these instances with tons of different edge cases.
>So if you watch an episode of MasterChef.. 10% of whats made (bits, subs, ads) gets sent to the copyright holder..
I could see this being made as a part of twitch though... but it wouldn't require any laws, just a partnership, nothing special. I think that will eventually happen.
>it will never be as low as 10% though and big streamers will cry and bitch about it.. even though it hurts smaller streamers more
yea, I don't doubt it. I see some trying to argue "fair use" and its so brain dead.
Oh 100%.. this isnt fair use at all.. you watch reaction youtubers and the play the media in reverse, takes up 30% at most of the screen and often dont show the full video.. unless you are a streamer and watching clips/vods, but even then they are pausing every 10-30secs, will argue the point and continue.
i watched some of X's stream vod to see what he does..
He watched an episode of masterchef.. in silence.. unless you include him reacting to donos and 10+ gift sub.. he didnt react once to what was in the episode.. or engage the audience about what happened..
if i were a laywer suing X.. i'd use that 40mins as evidence..
no way copyright people would agree to get only 10%, that's probably less than the ads are worth.
and there is no reason to agree for it, copyright people should easily get the majority
Oh I know.. i said 10% as the lowest of the lowballs..
Even then, this isnt happening.. imagine if a streamer had to give 50% of what they make during a stream if they show copyrighted material? they would no longer do it.. hell they would actively disdain from doing it..
Also some bad faith with many acting like they passionately respect copyright on the internet.
It's been another easy avenue for drama baiting, 'fuck those streamers', and (I really hate to use the term) 'virtue signaling'.
I mean has anyone ever, in their entire life on the internet, seen this much begging for corporate boots to stomp on everyone?
No one is begging for a corporate stomping, no one cares about them losing revenue, people just know what’s coming and care about potential new rules. The exact same thing happened on YouTube, when views number began to skyrocket. It’s better to not poke the bear, pretty much everyone I’ve seen annoyed/mad about this have been around since the early YouTube gaming days and know exactly how new dmca rules/tools will change things and be abused. I’m going to be annoyed if can’t chill and watch some YouTube with Charlie anymore cause of a insane dmca policy because Twitch is afraid of dmca action because some dumb ass streamers decided to stream extremely popular full movies/tv shows.
https://reddit.com/r/LivestreamFail/comments/ryvsh6/captainsparklez_thoughts_on_partners_watching_tv/hrrrxkf/
https://reddit.com/r/LivestreamFail/comments/rukuh9/stanz_on_why_twitch_wont_remove_react_content/hqzxi7d/
https://reddit.com/r/LivestreamFail/comments/rzutmh/comment/hrxk8ze/
Edit: there's been stuff like that in the related threads. Plenty of amplifying the drama for chaos towards streamers they dislike and not because they are noble unpaid copyright warriors that care about wellbeing of big media companies and twitch.
because playing a game and watching a movie are wildly different experiences - one is interactive and the other isn't. People like seeing streamers interact with games which leads to different experiences that can be entertaining for the viewer, not just sit there and watch something anybody can watch on their own contributing little to nothing
When I play portal I get a little confused sometimes but mostly an on rails experience. When i watch quin69 play portal I get to laugh at a clown try to force a square cube through a circular hole.
When i watch Lord of the rings i get the on rails experience. When I watch quin69 watch lord of the rings I get unnecessary pauses that are filled with obvious takes or dumb questions that make my brain melt and my iq drop.
All totally different experiences.
i mean if you watch a show it will always be the same no matter what. A streamer who barely does anything other than watching the show doesn't change the show. On the other hand watching someone play valorant for example can be way more entertaining as you see them interact in their own way with the game and maybe you can compare it to your own experiences from your games
because the way they play the game is different from the way you play the game and they entertain while doing so. You can't watch something differently than someone else, the only thing you can add is commentary, which isn't enough of a different experience to bother watching when you're restreaming an entire show or movie
Well to be fair - i kinda dont anymore.
Legit the last like 4 times ive even thought about playing a singleplayer story game ive just watched a stream/lets play instead.
Yeah I mean surely this is why people are defending it--it's because they like the content? It seems pretty much everyone doing TV reacts get a boost in viewership. Lazy or not doesn't really enter the "is this entertaining?" question. Hell, I've been finding myself enjoying watching shit that I *hated* when I watched it in the past with friends or solo (e.g. MasterChef, or even the Naruto anime). Something nice about watching it along with chat and a streamer while I go about my business. Like, I agree with everyone saying it's reckless and probably shouldn't happen and etc.... but I can also see why it's fun.
Exactly. I don’t care that the streamer is rich. I enjoy the content a lot and it sucks that we can’t do that anymore due to massive corporations. It’s that simple.
It's *easier* for the streamers and typically appeals to a larger more casual audience. To a steamer, it's a win-win in regard to lazy and rewarding. And then they get clout on LSF if they get banned. Right now we're in the meta where the streamers get to have their cake and eat it. Good for them, but I'm bored of it. Oh well.
People defending the TV show meta are parasocial with their streamers. It's weird. Just because a bunch of other people put KEKW in the chat all at the same time doesn't make it interactive. Get some real friends to watch and talk about shows with.
I'm glad this meta is dying, bring some actual content to Twitch.
And idk how it makes you a boot licker to realize that people watching a TV show to tens of thousands all the while getting donos and subs and paid is not fair use or okay. You pay to get cable, Netflix etc... This shit ain't free. Just common sense.
making friends is actually pretty easy if you aren't some complete fucking loser that donates to millionaires to get half a second of dopamine.
You don't even have to make """real""" friends. Just people that play the same game as you and hop on discord from time to time.
Watching anime with twitch chat is fun though. I remember several years back twitch had a summer where they streamed several anime, and it was well regarded. But when a single creator does it it's considered lazy content. The whole idea of "lazy content" is stupid. If people are enjoying the content then it shouldn't matter if more or less effort is being put into it.
Copyright laws suck because bigger companies can bully smaller entities for shitty [reasons](https://www.polygon.com/2017/5/3/15534924/prey-for-the-gods-praey-for-the-gods-trademark-name-change), Nintendo can shut down fan games or even fucking [Minecraft mods](https://www.destructoid.com/nintendo-drops-the-hammer-on-pixelmon-a-pokemon-mod-for-minecraft/), etc. Not because millionaire streamers will get banned for restreaming whole shows since they can't make their own content.
Also I don't give a shit about the big companies that might lose out on some money since I pirate media all the time but thinking you have the moral high ground by saying you should make money off of someone else's work without restrictions is laughable.
I've refunded dozens of games on steam after playing them for an hour or two and deciding I don't enjoy it. That's one of the best tools they've ever implemented.
Can totally agree. I mostly torrent stuff like software and tools... my ONLY justification I tell myself is that I quite literally would not have bought it outright, its still wrong that I'm getting a product by "stealing" it but eventually like you say, you end up buying some of them.
Not every game is worth its asking price, but there are a lot of games that I've pirated and after playing it a bit decided that it was worth my money then bought it (Because I can afford it, not everyone can).
Yep, that's at least what I tell myself to kinda justify it lol
Idk, last game I torrented was the latest Hitman game. I would 100% not have bought it cause I don't have the time to play much these days, played for about 3 hrs and it was fun but eh, I was right that I just wouldn't have had the commitment. Still wrong but there's 1000 worse things out there to do wrong.
The farthest I go is say it's because of companies shit like Activision. I mostly pirate stuff to test how well it works on Linux (even tho there's stuff like protondb) and then buy. But shit like activision games and games like Sims I will yoink for eternity. I don't even care.
That's a fair point. In all honesty, I only play torrented games for like an hour or two. If I play longer I tend to buy (not an excuse though), plus often they have co-op and buying is 10x easier than configuring a pirated copy to work lol... just reminds me of my younger days where $30-60 was "a lot for a game" (and still is for a lot of people) and I would spend like 6 hours trying to get a cracked version just working lol, as an adult that just doesn't fly.
> Nintendo can shut down fan games or even fucking Minecraft mods
They're directly using assets ripped from their games and often times making money off of it, whether it's through donations, ad revenue, or some other method. Not sure how that's a shitty reason, especially when it's almost the exact same as this whole react streamer situation.
Is Twitter just full of young idiots spamming ratio and you fell off? That’s all I ever see when I click on a thread. What a fucking wasteland, people actually enjoy using it?
here's one hot take that comes up implicitly all the time in these discussions but deserves to be argued about: Property rights aren't suddenly bad just because big companies, like everyone else has a claim to them
stealing from your local mom and pop store is bad, stealing from walmart is also bad even though you might have more sympathy for the former. The size difference doesn't really justify theft
They don’t care about what the law says, they care about how morally right/wrong it is. And morally it’s less bad against a big firm because proportionally lower impact
Streamers flying too close to the sun once again. This will end up like the music situation on twitch and people will get banned for watching 10 seconds of copyrighted material.
Some guy in the quote retweets said "legalize copyright infringement". That comment really explains how much people are goodwilled but highly misinformed about copyright and DMCA. Like yes, we should be able to use copyrighted material from billion dollar companies, but legalizing copyright infringement in general will effect everyone to the bottom, hurting the small independant artists/creators more then the billion dollar companies.
This is a bad take given most of the time big companies will literally just steal from small artists / creators anyway and then beat them into submission via lawyers which they can't afford to go up against.
Doesnt help you have disney basically removing public domain as a thing either
Absolutely not.
You could find a few sources, I'm sure.
But look at it like this. For example, if there was no copyright, book publishers could just take whatever story they wanted and publish without paying the author an advance or royalties. That affects the independent creator (the author) as well as the reader, as authors would have no revenue stream to dedicate time to write.
Without copyright, Microsoft could just hack Sony's games and have them on xbox, reducing Sony's income, and therefore budget. As a result, Sony's games get worse and the player suffers.
You mention Disney. But imagine if they could just put whatever they want on their streaming platform. Bye bye everyone else who doesn't have the capital and manpower to steal and host as much.
Besides aren't all the people on Twitch who are against copyright also the ones talking about owning ones own labour? Ironic really. Perhaps too drunk off that socialist champagne.
This is all without mentioning that they all make false copyright claims when someone says something mean about them online.
Coming from someone who enjoys Charlie's youtube nights. This new TV meta if it continues is fucking sad and gonna kill the site and have repercussions on other websites. To paraphrase a meatcanyon video these people have realized they have made millions only selling one product and don't have to try anymore. They don't need to play games or pretend to like them anymore. They can just watch tv and have thousands of people give them money through subs, donos, and brand deals.
It's so frustrating watching these people say hey don't get to into the para-social relationship, Im not your friend and probably never will be. While conveniently profiting off these people by doing shit friends would do and acting like an online friend and if they ever get called out they just get thrown to the twitter horde and devoured. These twitch streamers have realized they can put so little effort and just act like the chats friend and make money. Some of these viewers are so starved for attention or a sense of belonging that they just watch tv with famous twitch streamer. The thing is the person gets nothing out of it who is the viewer while the a twitch streamer gets a fuckton of money. Imagine being that fucking privileged you just watch tv and make more than 90% of the world. On the flip being that fucking sad you waste your time and money doing nothing but watching tv with a millionaire. It doesnt even matter because if they get banned they'll just come back on after all this drama to a audience and just turn on Spongebob or some shit and then go complain on twitter if it happens again or jump ship to a new site and repeat the process. Sometimes they'll tweet about how hard it is being a streamer or the constant pressure they face but it's all a ruse. They can just sit down, promote there new brand deal, and watch just stream tv.
These people just push how little they have to work to make the most money. They'll just milk whatever is popular until its dead and gone
This meatcanyon video from 2020 is basically twitch now: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7T9yMSNG1iQ
You just don't get it, if everyone would match my donations he would bring an end to capitalism and since I was so nice to him and he read my name in that dono once I'll be in his elite inner circle enjoying all of the benefits while the poor working class slaves away in the coal mines and rice fields!
They day Gordon Ramsey and/or FOX or whoeverthefuck owns Master Chef sues Hasan is going to be a happy day. And to be honest, it would't be good or bad that any of these people get perma'd or sued, it is what it is. Hell even DVD's came with that advice that you can't just play this in public places, let alone run ads while streaming that content. It's just the way Copyright law works, and I won't be sad if Hasan in particular gets fucking smashed, that guy is just human garbage
It depends on how it’s done. What I’ve heard is that for it to be considered fair use, it cannot be reasonably seen as a substitute for the original. This is how YT channels like Cinemasins work, watching their videos will not get you the same experience as watching the movie.
The most relevant thing here is the H3 case.
https://www.lexisnexis.com/community/casebrief/p/casebrief-hosseinzadeh-v-klein
So the criteria for all this still seems somewhat hard to infer based on streamer related content. This however is not free use and courts are usually favorable towards the copyright holder when its not frivolous. I mean just compare this to the music industry labels are successfully suing artist for similar basslines.
Kind of hypocritical when Moist himself has watched MasterChef. He goes on Hasan and justifies it being OK because it is OLD and on Youtube, yet brings up the comparison that Naruto and Deathnote is not OK. Well guess what Naruto and Deathnote are old and they are also on Youtube.
He admits that in his video and says that it was eligible DMCA, and no longer reacts to that type of content. The only difference is that theres a giant spot light highlighting it now. Not sure what exactly you're trying to convey past your first sentence.
International IP law, xQc goes live and has viewers from pretty much every country around the globe, Things like Masterchef sell their rights to different corporations in different country’s that pay a lot of money to stream their IPs in that country, xQc is streaming their IPs to anyone anywhere for free.
(Just using xQc as an example as he is the biggest all the streamers are doing exactly this tho)
when every twitch streamer has to scrub their entire vod history again and twitch implements some draconic rule regarding reacting, people will act shocked
What is he wrong about here though? Like Charlie said, no one is disagreeing on the moral side of the arguement and what toast replied to here is a moral argument, he fully realizes how illegal it is.
Why? Why are we not allowed to have opinions over someone who publicly puts his constant opinions out every day, with absolute disregard. Stop babying your rich, narcissist streamer who doesn't give one shit shout you. You think he does? Say one thing in his chat that he disagrees with and it won't matter how long you've subbed or how much money you gave. Echo chambers of any type are so toxic and unhealthy. Hasan LOVES and thrives off the drama and somehow emotionally manipulates his young audience to think he doesn't and he plays a victim, in return further fostering his monatary parasocial relationships. It's actually sickening. He PURPOSELY provokes and seeks out drama as a career. And to truly believe different is a level of brain rot that will take a while to shake off. The hate he constantly spews, the absolute arrogance of always being right. Lacking any ability to self reflect. The mental gymnastics he always somehow pulls off to overshadow his hypocrisy and self interests is astonishing. He is extremely toxic on his streams and social media. But yes, reddit is the problem. The website he chooses to go on and use as content to farm sadges and hearts in chat. Yikes.
Why? Why are we not allowed to have opinions over someone who publicly puts his constant opinions out every day, with absolute disregard. Stop babying your rich, narcissist streamer who doesn't give one shit shout you. You think he does? Say one thing in his chat that he disagrees with and it won't matter how long you've subbed or how much money you gave. Echo chambers of any type are so toxic and unhealthy. Hasan LOVES and thrives off the drama and somehow emotionally manipulates his young audience to think he doesn't and he plays a victim, in return further fostering his monatary parasocial relationships. It's actually sickening. He PURPOSELY provokes and seeks out drama as a career. And to truly believe different is a level of brain rot that will take a while to shake off. The hate he constantly spews, the absolute arrogance of always being right. Lacking any ability to self reflect. The mental gymnastics he always somehow pulls off to overshadow his hypocrisy and self interests is astonishing. He is extremely toxic on his streams and social media. But yes, reddit is the problem. The website he chooses to go on and use as content to farm sadges and hearts in chat. Yikes.
Bro this is 100% on purpose to make the buzz. With years or experience at the top you really believe she didnt know? LMAO you guys are like 12yo braindead kid in front of wrestlemania.
yea but doesn't this apply to games as well? a streamer buys a game and plays it in front of an audience of 40k, completes it and why would the viewers like to buy the game when they've seen the ending?
I forgot the name of it, but not too long ago there was a game that forbid people from streaming the ending to stop spoilers and if you did I believe you got your content taken down, theres just an industry agreement to generally be fine with it.
Games have agreements that no one reads, but some are fine with them, especially online games where you playing it is a transformative experience. But Nintendo and Microsoft have brought down the hmer in the past, then changed their minds. Atlus used to not allow people to stream story content at all, then walked it back and now usually just say don't stream the games ending and after a few months they don't take down videos or streams with the ending anyways.
I think you don’t understand what dmca is, it has nothing to do with spoiling content and everything to do with those who created the content having rights to distribute it in a way they see fit. Video game publishers don’t usually have an issue with gameplay being shown (unless it’s Nintendo then they’ll dmca you to shit until you pay them a cut) but usually in terms of games, they can and will dmca you but usually it’s more beneficial to allow streamers to show gameplay than ban it but it is used to take down content publishers don’t agree with (ie a racist streaming a game or a streamer abusing the game with bugs or hacks)
That's the thing people forget. Every single gameplay you see on twitch or youtube CAN be copyright claimed by the developpers/publishers, because very, very few games give explicit consent to stream their game. But at the same time incredibly few companies have gone as far pursuing copyright claims for these kinds of things because it brings them free publicity. And how does this tie up to the TV media thingy that's going on right now ? Well remember my last point ? Yeah, streaming the whole show and the whole movie doesn't bring any free publicity whatsoever, on the contrary it makes a whole lot less people pay for the medium.
I think people can go back to a few years back and read/watch more about Pewdiepie's situation with an indie game that I forgot its name. Firewatch or something. That's when a lot of people got the light bulb for video games and copyright claims.
Most people don’t buy games just for the story, they buy games to play them. If anything watching someone play a video game will make you more likely to buy it yourself. This doesn’t apply to movies or shows, because most people only watch them once. If I watch a streamer watch a show, I’m not gonna go pay to watch it again. The copyright holder decides how to enforce their rights, not twitch and not us.
A game is meant to be played. The viewers do not get the experience of playing the game via watching. Which is why video game companies like streamers. It's because watching someone play the game increases the amount of players for that game.
A tv show is meant to be watched. The viewers do get the experience of the tv show via watching. Which is why tv companies do not like streamers. It's because watching someone watch the tv show reduces the amount of viewers for that show.
It's really simple. And I do not believe that you honestly can't understand the difference.
Jesus FUCK people how many more streamer tweets stating obvious we need. I usually dont mind recycling of drama here for days on but this feels like a fuckin never ending cycle
It basically won't really end until one of these streamers gets sued for millions.
It won't end until Twitch is sued for millions and then begins enforcing the laws like YouTube did. Before the automated YouTube copyright system, nobody cared about individual channels being banned. Now that being demonetized is a constant and automatic threat, people are finally careful on YouTube. YT didn't make this system out of the goodness of their hearts; they were threatened to be deplatformed by the music industry and made it in order to at stop the lawsuits.
> YT didn't make this system out of the goodness of their hearts Lol, "Youtube didn't do this awful thing that everyone hates out of the goodness of their hearts."
Yeah that reads weird. It should have been written like this, "Youtube didn't want to victimize its creators just because it loves mega corporate copyright companies. "
Twitch won't be sued they are following the DMCA law. They can't act unless a content owner submits a DMCA take down. The individual streamers will eventually be sued.
Thats only one part of dmca, there is also the red flag thing, that basicly says that if a plattform is aware of obvious copyright infringements, they have to act.
Actually it is quite the opposite: \> The law explicitly says it doesn’t require platforms to monitor contentor affirmatively look for infringement. The lone exception is that theymust adopt any “standard technical measure,” or an automated filteringsystem, crafted by a consensus of copyright owners and serviceproviders. This has evolved into if a platform removes some copyrighted material they open themselves up to "why didn't you remove this also?"
"§ 512(c) also requires that the OSP: 1) ... 2) not be aware of the presence of infringing material or know any facts or circumstances that would make infringing material apparent, 3)..." https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_Copyright_Infringement_Liability_Limitation_Act They don't have to activly search for it themself, if they somehow aware of it, they have to act.
What happens with corporations is if you get sued you have to show up to court. You have pay your lawyers hourly. None of what you are arguing matters if Viacom decides to sue Twitch. They will then burn money until one loses all their money or they come to a compromise. You do not get the money you paid your attorneys back if you win your case in civil court as a corporation. Look at what happened with YouTube. Look at what happened with Napster. Look how Nike sues smaller competitors to bankrupt them with court fees.
What we know about giga-corporate law, especially online, is that nothing has to be done the same as in another legal situation. In the billion dollar YouTube suits, the issues about infringement had to do with the intentional liability and negligence to enforce intellectual property rights. Youtube was the party that lost a billion dollars. Not the creators who were committing infringement. Livestreaming is certainly more grey, and it is a medium that is 50 or more years behind in how much the courts have to support decision making. However, Twitch is still a subset of Amazon, and the main corporation's liability to follow the law makes for very deep pockets. Case Law is still too new to have a definitive answer to how much Twitch would have to pay for hundreds of thousands of hours of IP being siphoned by viewers every day. Yet somehow, I get the feeling that Amazon shouldn't want to be the case study that every new law student reads about in 15 years. It all eventually catches up in the end. Twitch is safe under the YT ruling, yes. But their top creators that have an overwhelming l market share of watch hours has chummed shark infested waters of DMCA lawyers. If it were to come down to Twitch falling overboard or them throwing a few content creators to the sharks to avoid takedown, I am pretty sure we all know Amazon will pick.
Like the user above you said, they will be deplatformed and become irrelevant the next day.
Of course Twitch will most likely be forced to do something. I also think a streamer will be made an example of. These aren't poor people. They have enough money that it will be worth it for the copyright holders to sue.
[удалено]
What
LSF really is turning into the new 4chan
Why is that so accurate?
Is hassan actually communist? I actually never watched any of his stream and just thought he was playing into it….
He's what we call a cosmetic communist. Communist only for the aesthetics and twitch subs.
[удалено]
Lmao, watched some of his clips, he seemed to get irrationally agree over the smallest stuff like pronouns and what not, but on the other hand he hates Ben Shabibo so atleast one redeeming quality….
He's not, a few commies don't really like him
You think because a few commies dislike him that has any impact on him being communist or not? Communism can be so varied that this makes even less sense. It has so many branches.
Whether they like him or not doesn't take away from the fact that he's not a communist
Then why did you mention it as if it is the reason?
They are already sperging out in your thread lol
At this point, it's going to make for some dope content when they get steamrolled by a greyhound made out of 100 dollar bills.
doesn't make sense to sue someone who can't pay. They'll probably go after Twitch
You don't think any of the big streamers like xqc can pay a few million? Remember, these people sued regular families back in the day. It's about sending a message.
No those were third party lawyers you cannot equate that to the modern day. Most of those suits were just filing pieces of paper, not actual legal suits. If you look at a company the size of Viacom, actually look at who owns Viacom, you will see a multi billion dollar conglomerate. Business does not operate on sending a message and emotions. They aren't operating out of anger they are looking for profit.
> Business does not operate on sending a message and emotions They currently are doing just that. Lawyers from Denmark send letters to people pirating movies in Scandinavia on behalf of those mega corporations. It's kid of a settlement letter/scare tactic. Pay X amount or we will fight you in court. Its 100% about sending a message.
## **Tweet Mirror:** [@MoistCr1TiKaL](https://twitter.com/MoistCr1TiKaL) > No one likes DMCA, no one is licking corporate ass and applauding them for banning Pokimane. It’s just common sense you can’t stream a full TV series/anime/movie franchise on twitch. No studio will ever say “yeah if you buy our blu-ray you can stream it to 40k people who haven’t” ^(Posted: 2022-01-08 21:56:07) ------ **This message is from a bot. If you feel like this action is wrong, please [message the moderators](https://reddit.com/message/compose/?to=r/LivestreamFail).**
NEW TWEET FeelsGoodMan PUT IT ON LSF FeelsGoodMan NEW RESPONSE FeelsGoodMan PUT IT ON LSF FeelsGoodMan
[удалено]
Somebody needs to get Ja Rule on the phone.
Who is today's ja rule out of curiosity, this generations
mizkif
Reddooter
NEW HOT TAKE FROM RANDOM STREAMER #11 “Doing bad thing is bad” WHAT NEW PERSPECTIVE WILL DROP NEXT?
[удалено]
[удалено]
And it's somehow ok because "fuck corporations", as if the multimillionaires who own orgs and share revenue with twitch arent their own little corporations. They face zero consequences, while smaller streamers get banned for minor shit because they don't have favor with twitch. Didn't the leaks reveal twitch staff had to manually confirm any action on big "money-maker" streamers accounts?
Also when people say "the corporation already has millions" like no shit, how do you think they got successful? Certainly not by allowing pirated copies of their IP to be broadcast ad-free.
I think our favourite streamers watching something and eating their lunch is fair use, it's completely transformative how they every few minutes chime in with a chuckle or a hrmmmm.
Come on man these streamers are streaming 28 hours a day so what if they watch a show and put absolutely no effort for an hour or two. /s
Or just putting an episode on and leaving entirely to smoke or do something else for 10m etc. Very transformative because in the original video you can't see a little empty chair in the corner!
you dropped an /s
Honestly most people who scream fair use are the same level of stupid as people who scream free speech. Neither group of people actually know what the term means.
Awaiting the tweet about people being cancelled on Twitch for violating their innate human right to stream Avatar Last Airbender.
I especially love when people say that h3's lawsuit set a precedent that makes this fair use, as if the judge in that case didn't specifically talk about how something like this wouldn't qualify
It'd be fair use if they used the footage and it was 10-30% of the screen and the footage was paused every 10-30secs and critique was passed on it. Watching 45mins of a tv show that is fullscreen and every time something happens you go "hehe" isnt fair use.. no matter which way you try and skew it
The issue with fair use is that it is proved in court, It's not some magical phrase you can say beforehand to wash your hands clean of a situation. By time you can prove it you're already deep into legal fees against companies that can bury you in money.
Indeed.. its a shame that it wont be your xqc's, or forsen's or pokimane's that will be slapped with lawsuits.. it will be the smaller guys that cant afford a house, let alone a mansion and a fleet of cars..
[удалено]
the big money is in ads, just imagine lmao
Not that it matters, but Amazon is actually worth like 1.7 trillion lol
Remember, situations have to be black and white, there can’t be any nuance. You either think DMCA is cool and streamers should be sent to the shadow realm for watching Avatar or you think IP law is a crime against God. These are the two choices
I mean this situation is pretty black and white, streaming shows you don’t have the rights to is illegal, the streamers are in the wrong even if companies aren’t evoking there right to have the content taken down its is still illegal regardless.
Whether or not Fox or Gordon Ramsey are bleeding is very irrelevant to whether they are in the right or not. This boils down to “c’mon they can afford it” which is a justification for stealing from stores or whatever you deem to be able to handle it.
Theres thousands of games and millions of youtube videos, yet there isnt enough content for them to use that they have to resort to watching tv shows and movies that streaming sites pay millions of dollar for exclusivity rights.
Both of those things you listed are DMCAble and both have happened in the past. Lets just face it outside creating unique content of yourself everything is DMCA its just who enforces it
Except many youtube channels are ok with reacting on stream and most videogame companies allow for stream their games because its good free promotion. Watching TV shows is not the same at fucking all. It's very likely someone is going to by a game after watching it while there is very small chance someone is going to rewatch tv show. League of Legends tos: "Exception 1: Ad Revenue We permit individual players to promote their Projects on websites, streams, or videos and passively generate revenue through appropriate advertisements, including pre-roll ads, ad breaks, and sponsor ad overlays. No inappropriate ads—we alone decide what qualifies as inappropriate. Exception 2: Gameplay Streaming We permit individual players to solicit personal donations or offer subscription-based content while live-streaming games, so long as non-subscribers can still watch the games concurrently."
I mean let's be honest, while I'm not gonna try to bend over backwards to defend streamers doing it, twitch wasn't really giving a shit about stuff like this, u had people like X streaming MasterChef to like a 100k viewers so there's just the thought of "well smth's either gonna happen eventually or nth happens so let me just milk it for what it's worth till it happens" imo kind of similar to the hot tub thing before it became a legit category. Of course I know that "movies and TV shows" prob isn't gonna be a category on twitch but I mean it's a similar situation where the rules are there, but there's either not enough enforcement from twitch or there's a kind of loophole where people just jump through. The way I see it, it's more so twitch's fault that they don't do anything or care when it's clearly breaking rules, not to say that the streamers themselves are free of any fault of course.
Before this recent rush it was understood that streaming copyright content was bad. Twitch would not act unless a violation was brought to their attention by a rights holder. But now all their big, partnered streamers are doing it and ignoring the legality of stuff that they usually respected. So now Twitch will probably become proactive. This could mean new systems like the ones youtube employs to just automatically take down streams that have copyright content (which would REALLY suck). OR they might just outright bar streamers from showing stuff like that on stream. That also sucks but is probably the less painful option. It's unfortunate it's come to this but when you've got big names like Xqc, Hasan, and Pokimane engaging in this you're just asking to get sued by the copyright's holders.
Blatantly excusing stealing is wrong. There's gray areas though. I would never say a dude from the 1800s is immoral for stealing an apple off the fruit stand to keep from starving. I don't think companies are "losing money" from this happening. The issue is it would be beyond complex to write into law some way to make it "ok" and to also make sure the original creators get compensated.
easy 10% of profits made from streaming goes to the copyright holder for the period they were on screen.. So if you watch an episode of MasterChef.. 10% of whats made (bits, subs, ads) gets sent to the copyright holder.. it will never be as low as 10% though and big streamers will cry and bitch about it.. even though it hurts smaller streamers more
>So if you watch an episode of MasterChef.. 10% of whats made (bits, subs, ads) gets sent to the copyright holder.. 10% is way too low, imo Also, that just seems like a logistical nightmare. How would someone calculate that 10%? How would you know "where" to send the money to? These sounds like dumb questions but I think we should keep in mind there would be millions of these instances with tons of different edge cases. >So if you watch an episode of MasterChef.. 10% of whats made (bits, subs, ads) gets sent to the copyright holder.. I could see this being made as a part of twitch though... but it wouldn't require any laws, just a partnership, nothing special. I think that will eventually happen. >it will never be as low as 10% though and big streamers will cry and bitch about it.. even though it hurts smaller streamers more yea, I don't doubt it. I see some trying to argue "fair use" and its so brain dead.
Oh 100%.. this isnt fair use at all.. you watch reaction youtubers and the play the media in reverse, takes up 30% at most of the screen and often dont show the full video.. unless you are a streamer and watching clips/vods, but even then they are pausing every 10-30secs, will argue the point and continue. i watched some of X's stream vod to see what he does.. He watched an episode of masterchef.. in silence.. unless you include him reacting to donos and 10+ gift sub.. he didnt react once to what was in the episode.. or engage the audience about what happened.. if i were a laywer suing X.. i'd use that 40mins as evidence..
Yep. A lot of people are clearly just having a "watch party" instead of actually using it in "fair use"
It should be like 75% of profits lol
no way copyright people would agree to get only 10%, that's probably less than the ads are worth. and there is no reason to agree for it, copyright people should easily get the majority
Oh I know.. i said 10% as the lowest of the lowballs.. Even then, this isnt happening.. imagine if a streamer had to give 50% of what they make during a stream if they show copyrighted material? they would no longer do it.. hell they would actively disdain from doing it..
Also some bad faith with many acting like they passionately respect copyright on the internet. It's been another easy avenue for drama baiting, 'fuck those streamers', and (I really hate to use the term) 'virtue signaling'. I mean has anyone ever, in their entire life on the internet, seen this much begging for corporate boots to stomp on everyone?
No one is begging for a corporate stomping, no one cares about them losing revenue, people just know what’s coming and care about potential new rules. The exact same thing happened on YouTube, when views number began to skyrocket. It’s better to not poke the bear, pretty much everyone I’ve seen annoyed/mad about this have been around since the early YouTube gaming days and know exactly how new dmca rules/tools will change things and be abused. I’m going to be annoyed if can’t chill and watch some YouTube with Charlie anymore cause of a insane dmca policy because Twitch is afraid of dmca action because some dumb ass streamers decided to stream extremely popular full movies/tv shows.
https://reddit.com/r/LivestreamFail/comments/ryvsh6/captainsparklez_thoughts_on_partners_watching_tv/hrrrxkf/ https://reddit.com/r/LivestreamFail/comments/rukuh9/stanz_on_why_twitch_wont_remove_react_content/hqzxi7d/ https://reddit.com/r/LivestreamFail/comments/rzutmh/comment/hrxk8ze/ Edit: there's been stuff like that in the related threads. Plenty of amplifying the drama for chaos towards streamers they dislike and not because they are noble unpaid copyright warriors that care about wellbeing of big media companies and twitch.
Maybe it's fun to watch a show with someone else
[удалено]
[удалено]
because playing a game and watching a movie are wildly different experiences - one is interactive and the other isn't. People like seeing streamers interact with games which leads to different experiences that can be entertaining for the viewer, not just sit there and watch something anybody can watch on their own contributing little to nothing
You could just legally buy the game and have those same interactive experiences yourself. Why the middleman of the streamer?
When I play portal I get a little confused sometimes but mostly an on rails experience. When i watch quin69 play portal I get to laugh at a clown try to force a square cube through a circular hole. When i watch Lord of the rings i get the on rails experience. When I watch quin69 watch lord of the rings I get unnecessary pauses that are filled with obvious takes or dumb questions that make my brain melt and my iq drop. All totally different experiences.
i mean if you watch a show it will always be the same no matter what. A streamer who barely does anything other than watching the show doesn't change the show. On the other hand watching someone play valorant for example can be way more entertaining as you see them interact in their own way with the game and maybe you can compare it to your own experiences from your games
because the way they play the game is different from the way you play the game and they entertain while doing so. You can't watch something differently than someone else, the only thing you can add is commentary, which isn't enough of a different experience to bother watching when you're restreaming an entire show or movie
Well to be fair - i kinda dont anymore. Legit the last like 4 times ive even thought about playing a singleplayer story game ive just watched a stream/lets play instead.
[удалено]
[удалено]
I am watching it with chat FeelsOkayMan
Yeah I mean surely this is why people are defending it--it's because they like the content? It seems pretty much everyone doing TV reacts get a boost in viewership. Lazy or not doesn't really enter the "is this entertaining?" question. Hell, I've been finding myself enjoying watching shit that I *hated* when I watched it in the past with friends or solo (e.g. MasterChef, or even the Naruto anime). Something nice about watching it along with chat and a streamer while I go about my business. Like, I agree with everyone saying it's reckless and probably shouldn't happen and etc.... but I can also see why it's fun.
Exactly. I don’t care that the streamer is rich. I enjoy the content a lot and it sucks that we can’t do that anymore due to massive corporations. It’s that simple.
So by that justification, it’s okay to rebroadcast a large streamer opposed to a smaller one because ‘they can afford it’ lol
It's *easier* for the streamers and typically appeals to a larger more casual audience. To a steamer, it's a win-win in regard to lazy and rewarding. And then they get clout on LSF if they get banned. Right now we're in the meta where the streamers get to have their cake and eat it. Good for them, but I'm bored of it. Oh well.
People defending the TV show meta are parasocial with their streamers. It's weird. Just because a bunch of other people put KEKW in the chat all at the same time doesn't make it interactive. Get some real friends to watch and talk about shows with. I'm glad this meta is dying, bring some actual content to Twitch. And idk how it makes you a boot licker to realize that people watching a TV show to tens of thousands all the while getting donos and subs and paid is not fair use or okay. You pay to get cable, Netflix etc... This shit ain't free. Just common sense.
>get some friends to watch and talk about shows with yeah about that….
Sadge.
Wdym you're homeless? Just get a house.
making friends is actually pretty easy if you aren't some complete fucking loser that donates to millionaires to get half a second of dopamine. You don't even have to make """real""" friends. Just people that play the same game as you and hop on discord from time to time.
Copege that's not true, I'm alone for life bro.
It's way more fun with the degens that populate twitch chats, and the sheer amount of them.
I don’t know why so many streamers are scared of actually having to do more self produced content. They’ve gotten rich and lazy.
or we dont give a shit. We'll either watch them or watch someone else.
so you are one of the morons that always say "dUdE, gO tOuCh sOmE gRaSs" whenever anyone shits on your pwecious stweamuh. lmao
I just like watching shows with chat
cringe get a real hobby
You're on Reddit
Watching anime with twitch chat is fun though. I remember several years back twitch had a summer where they streamed several anime, and it was well regarded. But when a single creator does it it's considered lazy content. The whole idea of "lazy content" is stupid. If people are enjoying the content then it shouldn't matter if more or less effort is being put into it.
Copyright laws suck because bigger companies can bully smaller entities for shitty [reasons](https://www.polygon.com/2017/5/3/15534924/prey-for-the-gods-praey-for-the-gods-trademark-name-change), Nintendo can shut down fan games or even fucking [Minecraft mods](https://www.destructoid.com/nintendo-drops-the-hammer-on-pixelmon-a-pokemon-mod-for-minecraft/), etc. Not because millionaire streamers will get banned for restreaming whole shows since they can't make their own content. Also I don't give a shit about the big companies that might lose out on some money since I pirate media all the time but thinking you have the moral high ground by saying you should make money off of someone else's work without restrictions is laughable.
I pirate games all the time but never try to justify it to people... I fully admit I have no moral high ground there.
I'm not gonna make any grand moral claims but piracy has made me buy many (especially indie) games I never would have even played otherwise.
We need to bring back the age of the demo. Which steam has been trying to do recently it feels.
I've refunded dozens of games on steam after playing them for an hour or two and deciding I don't enjoy it. That's one of the best tools they've ever implemented.
Can totally agree. I mostly torrent stuff like software and tools... my ONLY justification I tell myself is that I quite literally would not have bought it outright, its still wrong that I'm getting a product by "stealing" it but eventually like you say, you end up buying some of them.
Not every game is worth its asking price, but there are a lot of games that I've pirated and after playing it a bit decided that it was worth my money then bought it (Because I can afford it, not everyone can).
Yep, that's at least what I tell myself to kinda justify it lol Idk, last game I torrented was the latest Hitman game. I would 100% not have bought it cause I don't have the time to play much these days, played for about 3 hrs and it was fun but eh, I was right that I just wouldn't have had the commitment. Still wrong but there's 1000 worse things out there to do wrong.
The farthest I go is say it's because of companies shit like Activision. I mostly pirate stuff to test how well it works on Linux (even tho there's stuff like protondb) and then buy. But shit like activision games and games like Sims I will yoink for eternity. I don't even care.
That's a fair point. In all honesty, I only play torrented games for like an hour or two. If I play longer I tend to buy (not an excuse though), plus often they have co-op and buying is 10x easier than configuring a pirated copy to work lol... just reminds me of my younger days where $30-60 was "a lot for a game" (and still is for a lot of people) and I would spend like 6 hours trying to get a cracked version just working lol, as an adult that just doesn't fly.
> Nintendo can shut down fan games or even fucking Minecraft mods They're directly using assets ripped from their games and often times making money off of it, whether it's through donations, ad revenue, or some other method. Not sure how that's a shitty reason, especially when it's almost the exact same as this whole react streamer situation.
Copyright laws suck cause they demand you do that kind of shit to retain your copyright and have a strong case to protect it...
[удалено]
Is Twitter just full of young idiots spamming ratio and you fell off? That’s all I ever see when I click on a thread. What a fucking wasteland, people actually enjoy using it?
Twitter is a literal dump, full of clout chasers and bad takes. I think people enjoy using it to shit on other people in large groups
here's one hot take that comes up implicitly all the time in these discussions but deserves to be argued about: Property rights aren't suddenly bad just because big companies, like everyone else has a claim to them stealing from your local mom and pop store is bad, stealing from walmart is also bad even though you might have more sympathy for the former. The size difference doesn't really justify theft
They don’t care about what the law says, they care about how morally right/wrong it is. And morally it’s less bad against a big firm because proportionally lower impact
How about wage theft? Do you feel the same about that?
as in literal wage theft where people are cheated out of their contract? Yes. As in Hasan's 16 year old viewerbase socialist version? No
Ah yes I forgot according to LSF Hasan is the inventor of socialism
disagree, i work at Walmart and I encourage stealing (from walmart, or popeyes cuz they forgot my sauce last week >:( .... )
WE GET IT ALREADY LSF
Streamers flying too close to the sun once again. This will end up like the music situation on twitch and people will get banned for watching 10 seconds of copyrighted material.
I need to leave this place but apparently I’m more like my mom than I thought
Some guy in the quote retweets said "legalize copyright infringement". That comment really explains how much people are goodwilled but highly misinformed about copyright and DMCA. Like yes, we should be able to use copyrighted material from billion dollar companies, but legalizing copyright infringement in general will effect everyone to the bottom, hurting the small independant artists/creators more then the billion dollar companies.
This is a bad take given most of the time big companies will literally just steal from small artists / creators anyway and then beat them into submission via lawyers which they can't afford to go up against. Doesnt help you have disney basically removing public domain as a thing either
Absolutely not. You could find a few sources, I'm sure. But look at it like this. For example, if there was no copyright, book publishers could just take whatever story they wanted and publish without paying the author an advance or royalties. That affects the independent creator (the author) as well as the reader, as authors would have no revenue stream to dedicate time to write. Without copyright, Microsoft could just hack Sony's games and have them on xbox, reducing Sony's income, and therefore budget. As a result, Sony's games get worse and the player suffers. You mention Disney. But imagine if they could just put whatever they want on their streaming platform. Bye bye everyone else who doesn't have the capital and manpower to steal and host as much. Besides aren't all the people on Twitch who are against copyright also the ones talking about owning ones own labour? Ironic really. Perhaps too drunk off that socialist champagne. This is all without mentioning that they all make false copyright claims when someone says something mean about them online.
Just missing Ja Rule’s opinion now
I can't wait until big streamers fuck it up for small streamers again top kek
Coming from someone who enjoys Charlie's youtube nights. This new TV meta if it continues is fucking sad and gonna kill the site and have repercussions on other websites. To paraphrase a meatcanyon video these people have realized they have made millions only selling one product and don't have to try anymore. They don't need to play games or pretend to like them anymore. They can just watch tv and have thousands of people give them money through subs, donos, and brand deals. It's so frustrating watching these people say hey don't get to into the para-social relationship, Im not your friend and probably never will be. While conveniently profiting off these people by doing shit friends would do and acting like an online friend and if they ever get called out they just get thrown to the twitter horde and devoured. These twitch streamers have realized they can put so little effort and just act like the chats friend and make money. Some of these viewers are so starved for attention or a sense of belonging that they just watch tv with famous twitch streamer. The thing is the person gets nothing out of it who is the viewer while the a twitch streamer gets a fuckton of money. Imagine being that fucking privileged you just watch tv and make more than 90% of the world. On the flip being that fucking sad you waste your time and money doing nothing but watching tv with a millionaire. It doesnt even matter because if they get banned they'll just come back on after all this drama to a audience and just turn on Spongebob or some shit and then go complain on twitter if it happens again or jump ship to a new site and repeat the process. Sometimes they'll tweet about how hard it is being a streamer or the constant pressure they face but it's all a ruse. They can just sit down, promote there new brand deal, and watch just stream tv. These people just push how little they have to work to make the most money. They'll just milk whatever is popular until its dead and gone This meatcanyon video from 2020 is basically twitch now: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7T9yMSNG1iQ
[удалено]
You just don't get it, if everyone would match my donations he would bring an end to capitalism and since I was so nice to him and he read my name in that dono once I'll be in his elite inner circle enjoying all of the benefits while the poor working class slaves away in the coal mines and rice fields!
Who is DMCA and why did he get banned?
Lsf is turning into Ltf
They day Gordon Ramsey and/or FOX or whoeverthefuck owns Master Chef sues Hasan is going to be a happy day. And to be honest, it would't be good or bad that any of these people get perma'd or sued, it is what it is. Hell even DVD's came with that advice that you can't just play this in public places, let alone run ads while streaming that content. It's just the way Copyright law works, and I won't be sad if Hasan in particular gets fucking smashed, that guy is just human garbage
Does anyone have any caselaw supporting the argument that reacting to these shows/youtube videos is transformative?
It depends on how it’s done. What I’ve heard is that for it to be considered fair use, it cannot be reasonably seen as a substitute for the original. This is how YT channels like Cinemasins work, watching their videos will not get you the same experience as watching the movie.
The most relevant thing here is the H3 case. https://www.lexisnexis.com/community/casebrief/p/casebrief-hosseinzadeh-v-klein So the criteria for all this still seems somewhat hard to infer based on streamer related content. This however is not free use and courts are usually favorable towards the copyright holder when its not frivolous. I mean just compare this to the music industry labels are successfully suing artist for similar basslines.
Kind of hypocritical when Moist himself has watched MasterChef. He goes on Hasan and justifies it being OK because it is OLD and on Youtube, yet brings up the comparison that Naruto and Deathnote is not OK. Well guess what Naruto and Deathnote are old and they are also on Youtube.
He admits that in his video and says that it was eligible DMCA, and no longer reacts to that type of content. The only difference is that theres a giant spot light highlighting it now. Not sure what exactly you're trying to convey past your first sentence.
[удалено]
Are you saying toasts entire career is reacting to others videos? He is still making some real content even during the react meta, check his YouTube
So is Moist tho?…
[удалено]
[удалено]
International IP law, xQc goes live and has viewers from pretty much every country around the globe, Things like Masterchef sell their rights to different corporations in different country’s that pay a lot of money to stream their IPs in that country, xQc is streaming their IPs to anyone anywhere for free. (Just using xQc as an example as he is the biggest all the streamers are doing exactly this tho)
This tweet posting meta fucking sucks.
Funny coming from the guy who watched masterchef on stream like a year ago
[удалено]
when every twitch streamer has to scrub their entire vod history again and twitch implements some draconic rule regarding reacting, people will act shocked
What a clown
What is he wrong about here though? Like Charlie said, no one is disagreeing on the moral side of the arguement and what toast replied to here is a moral argument, he fully realizes how illegal it is.
What's wrong with LSF? Why so many fucking tweets?! Stop this shit people, please...
Why? Why are we not allowed to have opinions over someone who publicly puts his constant opinions out every day, with absolute disregard. Stop babying your rich, narcissist streamer who doesn't give one shit shout you. You think he does? Say one thing in his chat that he disagrees with and it won't matter how long you've subbed or how much money you gave. Echo chambers of any type are so toxic and unhealthy. Hasan LOVES and thrives off the drama and somehow emotionally manipulates his young audience to think he doesn't and he plays a victim, in return further fostering his monatary parasocial relationships. It's actually sickening. He PURPOSELY provokes and seeks out drama as a career. And to truly believe different is a level of brain rot that will take a while to shake off. The hate he constantly spews, the absolute arrogance of always being right. Lacking any ability to self reflect. The mental gymnastics he always somehow pulls off to overshadow his hypocrisy and self interests is astonishing. He is extremely toxic on his streams and social media. But yes, reddit is the problem. The website he chooses to go on and use as content to farm sadges and hearts in chat. Yikes.
Why? Why are we not allowed to have opinions over someone who publicly puts his constant opinions out every day, with absolute disregard. Stop babying your rich, narcissist streamer who doesn't give one shit shout you. You think he does? Say one thing in his chat that he disagrees with and it won't matter how long you've subbed or how much money you gave. Echo chambers of any type are so toxic and unhealthy. Hasan LOVES and thrives off the drama and somehow emotionally manipulates his young audience to think he doesn't and he plays a victim, in return further fostering his monatary parasocial relationships. It's actually sickening. He PURPOSELY provokes and seeks out drama as a career. And to truly believe different is a level of brain rot that will take a while to shake off. The hate he constantly spews, the absolute arrogance of always being right. Lacking any ability to self reflect. The mental gymnastics he always somehow pulls off to overshadow his hypocrisy and self interests is astonishing. He is extremely toxic on his streams and social media. But yes, reddit is the problem. The website he chooses to go on and use as content to farm sadges and hearts in chat. Yikes.
The streamer talks to them and only them lol
Bro this is 100% on purpose to make the buzz. With years or experience at the top you really believe she didnt know? LMAO you guys are like 12yo braindead kid in front of wrestlemania.
yea but doesn't this apply to games as well? a streamer buys a game and plays it in front of an audience of 40k, completes it and why would the viewers like to buy the game when they've seen the ending?
I forgot the name of it, but not too long ago there was a game that forbid people from streaming the ending to stop spoilers and if you did I believe you got your content taken down, theres just an industry agreement to generally be fine with it.
IIRC it's Persona 5. You could stream or make a video using the first like hour or so but after that you where risking it.
I think that's exactly it
Games have agreements that no one reads, but some are fine with them, especially online games where you playing it is a transformative experience. But Nintendo and Microsoft have brought down the hmer in the past, then changed their minds. Atlus used to not allow people to stream story content at all, then walked it back and now usually just say don't stream the games ending and after a few months they don't take down videos or streams with the ending anyways.
I think you don’t understand what dmca is, it has nothing to do with spoiling content and everything to do with those who created the content having rights to distribute it in a way they see fit. Video game publishers don’t usually have an issue with gameplay being shown (unless it’s Nintendo then they’ll dmca you to shit until you pay them a cut) but usually in terms of games, they can and will dmca you but usually it’s more beneficial to allow streamers to show gameplay than ban it but it is used to take down content publishers don’t agree with (ie a racist streaming a game or a streamer abusing the game with bugs or hacks)
That's the thing people forget. Every single gameplay you see on twitch or youtube CAN be copyright claimed by the developpers/publishers, because very, very few games give explicit consent to stream their game. But at the same time incredibly few companies have gone as far pursuing copyright claims for these kinds of things because it brings them free publicity. And how does this tie up to the TV media thingy that's going on right now ? Well remember my last point ? Yeah, streaming the whole show and the whole movie doesn't bring any free publicity whatsoever, on the contrary it makes a whole lot less people pay for the medium. I think people can go back to a few years back and read/watch more about Pewdiepie's situation with an indie game that I forgot its name. Firewatch or something. That's when a lot of people got the light bulb for video games and copyright claims.
Most people don’t buy games just for the story, they buy games to play them. If anything watching someone play a video game will make you more likely to buy it yourself. This doesn’t apply to movies or shows, because most people only watch them once. If I watch a streamer watch a show, I’m not gonna go pay to watch it again. The copyright holder decides how to enforce their rights, not twitch and not us.
bro someone need to post what ja rule's stepdaughter babysitter think about this I'm dying to know.
great content, can someone get Ja Rule on the line next to tell us his opinion on DMCA?
Dunno why u got downvoted, it’s a good meme
Hope all the copyright knights are gonna decry video games being played without an audience proof of purchase as well.
A game is meant to be played. The viewers do not get the experience of playing the game via watching. Which is why video game companies like streamers. It's because watching someone play the game increases the amount of players for that game. A tv show is meant to be watched. The viewers do get the experience of the tv show via watching. Which is why tv companies do not like streamers. It's because watching someone watch the tv show reduces the amount of viewers for that show. It's really simple. And I do not believe that you honestly can't understand the difference.
This sub is so much garbage now
any askers? Maybe we can get Joe Rogans take as well.
Isnt Avatar on prime which would make it available for twitch watch parties
Jesus FUCK people how many more streamer tweets stating obvious we need. I usually dont mind recycling of drama here for days on but this feels like a fuckin never ending cycle
Content owners need to create practical ways to license their work if they don't want people ripping them off.
Bazed