|
On April 02 2012 00:53 S_SienZ wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2012 00:51 MrTortoise wrote:
can i just say that OP is totally irresponsible for posting this.
What kind of effect do you want this post to have?
Do you want all streams to stop using music if it is illegal?
BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT WILL HAPPEN.
THINK FFS
If i worked at twitch / owned and read this and was in a position of responsibility then my hand would probably be forced. As an issue i had turned a blind eye to is now in my face and legally i have to take action or be negligent / liable. Nope. Twitch doesn't have any obligation until a copyright holder gives notice about which specific user is committing infringement of a work they hold. Mere general assertions that infringements are happening within their system will not suffice.
Are you a lawyer? Because if you are not then you really shouldn't be dispensing legal advice. You have no idea what legal cases will happen over the next few months that can totally change how things are interpreted. What was legally obvious in 1998 (which was privacy of users is paramount and was the reason why a lot of file sharing worked, copies of games etc were legally ok) has been totally re imagined in the last 2 years. The DCMA is clearly the next target, assuming your sane assumptions will hold up in the coming months is really optimistic.
What you have in this thread are examples of people who are infringing and people asking if they are infringing. THAT is not mere general allegation.
or look at it this way then ... why give copyright holders yet another handle for a bot to grab hold of? People like Twitch and Own3d will of gotten a lot of advice and will probably be getting a lot more.
There are loads of reasons why what i said is true. People need to think more about what they are asking and posting in public.
It isn't 1998 anymore - all i am saying is think. Besides in a years time the DCMA may be interpreted in a very different way.
|
On April 02 2012 00:55 DreaIVIS wrote:
Which means that you shouldn't for example in police work punish one person if you see ten people doing the same thing, but you can't punish them at that point.
Shows just how much you know about how IP law works.
First of all, police are almost never involved.
Copyright law gives the creator optional but not mandatory protection. If rights holder sees A and B both infringing but decides to only make a claim against B, tough shit for B. Such is life.
EDIT:small typo
|
I apologize if this was said before since I don't feel like reading through nearly 14 full pages of posts:
I think it shouldn't matter. I know that streams are actually a really good way to advertise music, and a lot of my friends have gotten music specifically BECAUSE they saw it on a stream. I mean, unlike YouTube, it's much more difficult to use the stream to go back and listen to a song that you want to.
|
On April 02 2012 00:58 MrTortoise wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2012 00:53 S_SienZ wrote:On April 02 2012 00:51 MrTortoise wrote:
can i just say that OP is totally irresponsible for posting this.
What kind of effect do you want this post to have?
Do you want all streams to stop using music if it is illegal?
BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT WILL HAPPEN.
THINK FFS
If i worked at twitch / owned and read this and was in a position of responsibility then my hand would probably be forced. As an issue i had turned a blind eye to is now in my face and legally i have to take action or be negligent / liable. Nope. Twitch doesn't have any obligation until a copyright holder gives notice about which specific user is committing infringement of a work they hold. Mere general assertions that infringements are happening within their system will not suffice. Are you a lawyer? Because if you are not then you really shouldn't be dispensing legal advice. You have no idea what legal cases will happen over the next few months that can totally change how things are interpreted. What was legally obvious in 1998 (which was privacy of users is paramount and was the reason why a lot of file sharing worked, copies of games etc were legally ok) has been totally re imagined in the last 2 years. The DCMA is clearly the next target, assuming your sane assumptions will hold up in the coming months is really optimistic. or look at it this way then ... why give copyright holders yet another handle for a bot to grab hold of? There are loads of reasons why what i said is true. People need to think more about what they are asking and posting in public. It isn't 1998 anymore - all i am saying is think. Besides in a years time the DCMA may be interpreted in a very different way.
Dude, we're discussing this on a public forum. None of us ( I presume ) are affiliated with Twitch in any way, so how could this amount to even legal advice? It's a statement of the law as it is, which is fact. Your entire argument is reliant on the speculation of the possibilities in cases that have NEVER HAPPENED YET. When it happens and actually is worth something as legal authority, then we'll talk about it.
|
On April 02 2012 01:06 Cycle wrote:
I apologize if this was said before since I don't feel like reading through nearly 14 full pages of posts:
I think it shouldn't matter. I know that streams are actually a really good way to advertise music, and a lot of my friends have gotten music specifically BECAUSE they saw it on a stream. I mean, unlike YouTube, it's much more difficult to use the stream to go back and listen to a song that you want to.
yes this is true for me also. But that is also true of software i have downloaded and then bought later. Sadly that doesn't matter when lawyers are involved. The good news is that it means that music by greedy bastards stops getting played everywhere wheras music by the newcomers in the last 5 years who had the sense not to sign with the big companies and used more open agreements will be highly publicised and hopefully those artists will become highly successful and rich as a result.
Sadly we do not yet live in that world. Blame your parents.
|
you are protected by the fact that it can be considered a preformance art. That simple.
|
On April 02 2012 01:07 S_SienZ wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2012 00:58 MrTortoise wrote:On April 02 2012 00:53 S_SienZ wrote:On April 02 2012 00:51 MrTortoise wrote:
can i just say that OP is totally irresponsible for posting this.
What kind of effect do you want this post to have?
Do you want all streams to stop using music if it is illegal?
BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT WILL HAPPEN.
THINK FFS
If i worked at twitch / owned and read this and was in a position of responsibility then my hand would probably be forced. As an issue i had turned a blind eye to is now in my face and legally i have to take action or be negligent / liable. Nope. Twitch doesn't have any obligation until a copyright holder gives notice about which specific user is committing infringement of a work they hold. Mere general assertions that infringements are happening within their system will not suffice. Are you a lawyer? Because if you are not then you really shouldn't be dispensing legal advice. You have no idea what legal cases will happen over the next few months that can totally change how things are interpreted. What was legally obvious in 1998 (which was privacy of users is paramount and was the reason why a lot of file sharing worked, copies of games etc were legally ok) has been totally re imagined in the last 2 years. The DCMA is clearly the next target, assuming your sane assumptions will hold up in the coming months is really optimistic. or look at it this way then ... why give copyright holders yet another handle for a bot to grab hold of? There are loads of reasons why what i said is true. People need to think more about what they are asking and posting in public. It isn't 1998 anymore - all i am saying is think. Besides in a years time the DCMA may be interpreted in a very different way. Dude, we're discussing this on a public forum. None of us ( I presume ) are affiliated with Twitch in any way, so how could this amount to even legal advice? It's a statement of the law as it is, which is fact. Your entire argument is reliant on the speculation of the possibilities in cases that have NEVER HAPPENED YET. When it happens and actually is worth something as legal authority, then we'll talk about it.
Tell that to any of the file sharing sites that have been shut down and shut themselves down for safety.
But yeah i over react to things like this because a lot of people are very naive and self assured.
Its not paranoia when all evidence points to them actively hunting.
|
On April 02 2012 00:55 DreaIVIS wrote:
It's funny to watch some people criticizing from Ivory Tower without actually looking at the arguments. Most constitutions mention that everyone should be treated fair in front of the law. Which means that you shouldn't for example in police work punish one person if you see ten people doing the same thing, but you can't punish them at that point.
And I should have known that they can remove my stream entirely without a warning from playing a one song? Give me a break. The more you write it gives just an impression of a troll with the ultimatum's little bit of truth mixed in.
Well if you read their terms you would have known that they can remove your stream and before you use a service, you should read the terms. So again you should have known and it's probably not one song that is the issue.
Even your example about police work is totally wrong cause you dont know if, in your case WB (lets call it WB cause i dont know which organization does this stuff for WB) have seen other streams. Maybe a 1000 other streamers have received the same thing after a request from WB, you dont know.
Maybe WB hasn't seen other streams? Again you dont know.
It's the same thing when police gives a person a ticket for speeding, but a day later at same the time and place/road there is no police around and you dont get a ticket even your also driving too fast. You think you should get a ticket as well then when you find out some other guy got a ticket for speeding as the same road? No of course not, thats not how it works.
Stop blaming other people for your own mistake dude. You took a risk and you were unlucky that your streaming provider got a complaint about you, and thats it.
|
On April 02 2012 01:12 MrTortoise wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2012 01:07 S_SienZ wrote:On April 02 2012 00:58 MrTortoise wrote:On April 02 2012 00:53 S_SienZ wrote:On April 02 2012 00:51 MrTortoise wrote:
can i just say that OP is totally irresponsible for posting this.
What kind of effect do you want this post to have?
Do you want all streams to stop using music if it is illegal?
BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT WILL HAPPEN.
THINK FFS
If i worked at twitch / owned and read this and was in a position of responsibility then my hand would probably be forced. As an issue i had turned a blind eye to is now in my face and legally i have to take action or be negligent / liable. Nope. Twitch doesn't have any obligation until a copyright holder gives notice about which specific user is committing infringement of a work they hold. Mere general assertions that infringements are happening within their system will not suffice. Are you a lawyer? Because if you are not then you really shouldn't be dispensing legal advice. You have no idea what legal cases will happen over the next few months that can totally change how things are interpreted. What was legally obvious in 1998 (which was privacy of users is paramount and was the reason why a lot of file sharing worked, copies of games etc were legally ok) has been totally re imagined in the last 2 years. The DCMA is clearly the next target, assuming your sane assumptions will hold up in the coming months is really optimistic. or look at it this way then ... why give copyright holders yet another handle for a bot to grab hold of? There are loads of reasons why what i said is true. People need to think more about what they are asking and posting in public. It isn't 1998 anymore - all i am saying is think. Besides in a years time the DCMA may be interpreted in a very different way. Dude, we're discussing this on a public forum. None of us ( I presume ) are affiliated with Twitch in any way, so how could this amount to even legal advice? It's a statement of the law as it is, which is fact. Your entire argument is reliant on the speculation of the possibilities in cases that have NEVER HAPPENED YET. When it happens and actually is worth something as legal authority, then we'll talk about it. Tell that to any of the file sharing sites that have been shut down and shut themselves down for safety. But yeah i over react to things like this because a lot of people are very naive and self assured. Its not paranoia when all evidence points to them actively hunting.
They shut themselves down coz of what happened to MegaUpload, not some random thread on the netz lol.
Do I think lobbyists in general are money faced and batshit crazy? Of course. But I don't see how unnecessary music in a gaming stream could possibly be allowed as fair use. It's just too straightforward a case.
EDIT to address something you edited in:
What you have in this thread are examples of people who are infringing and people asking if they are infringing. THAT is not mere general allegation.
It doesn't work that way. The rights holders have to be the ones to bring it up.
|
On April 01 2012 15:45 WolfintheSheep wrote:Show nested quote +On April 01 2012 13:16 Ghost.573 wrote:On April 01 2012 10:52 WolfintheSheep wrote:On April 01 2012 10:50 Rockztar wrote:
I don't know if this counts in Starcraft, but I used to watch a lot of Rock Band/Guitar Hero vids. Obviously this is known copyrighted music being published in video, but there was some sort of rule that if the music was disrupted by something(such as drumming on the Rock Band drum kit) it would be allowed, so that the music wasn't sounding like "originally". I guess it could be like this as well in SC2 that as long as you can hear the SC2 game sounds over the music it could be allowed. I'm not entirely sure who decides this however. ...that rule does not exist. It sounds like something a highschool kid made up. Rock Band and Guitar Hero videos are also copyright infringing, they're just overlooked. Unless the videogame licenses actually allow 3rd party broadcasting, but that's extremely doubtful. No its true lmao... thats why on youtube people slightly slow down or speed up a song. Its not the original and thus the artist does not own it. Uh...no, it's not. Even if slowing down a song to 0.999 of it's original speed actually makes it a new song, Copyright includes the creation of Derivative works. If you can't play a song (with your own singer and band) without getting a license and explicit permission, you sure as hell can't add a keyboard tapping and pretend that what you're doing is legal. Stop making up rules that don't exist. Ignorance of the law will not protect you from the consequences.
I didn't state that it was a rule. Was being very clear on that I wasn't entirely sure how it worked, but fact is I saw a lot of Rock Band vids, where the publisher would write he had been told to change this or this in order for Youtube to allow the video. That is all I'm saying, you don't have to act so condescending, was just trying to contribute to a way to get around any copyright issues there may be with streaming music.
|
It more or less comes back down to the idea that you should be able to record yourself utilizing your own property and show that recording to other people, because the copyrighted material which is supposedly being infringed upon constitutes a mere incidental piece of the entire composite which is your broadcast. Unfortunately, the DMCA holds that people aren't even allowed to make a face on camera without someone getting uppity about it.
Yeah, I know the legalese puts it much more delicately than that, but so long as you actually own the music to begin with, and so long as you don't sell the music, you should be allowed to broadcast it. If the recording companies don't like it (and they don't) tough shit. That's the way the world is gonna go sooner or later, anyway.
|
On April 02 2012 04:08 Shiori wrote:
Yeah, I know the legalese puts it much more delicately than that, but so long as you actually own the music to begin with, and so long as you don't sell the music, you should be allowed to broadcast it. If the recording companies don't like it (and they don't) tough shit. That's the way the world is gonna go sooner or later, anyway.
When you broadcast music then you are selling it, maybe not in a direct way but you entertain/attract your audience/customers with it. Or do you really think radio stations and for example clubs/bars should be able to play copyrighted music for free cause well their are not selling the music.....
Lets have all the benefits without paying for anything... right, never gonna happen.
|
On April 02 2012 03:43 Rockztar wrote:Show nested quote +On April 01 2012 15:45 WolfintheSheep wrote:On April 01 2012 13:16 Ghost.573 wrote:On April 01 2012 10:52 WolfintheSheep wrote:On April 01 2012 10:50 Rockztar wrote:
I don't know if this counts in Starcraft, but I used to watch a lot of Rock Band/Guitar Hero vids. Obviously this is known copyrighted music being published in video, but there was some sort of rule that if the music was disrupted by something(such as drumming on the Rock Band drum kit) it would be allowed, so that the music wasn't sounding like "originally". I guess it could be like this as well in SC2 that as long as you can hear the SC2 game sounds over the music it could be allowed. I'm not entirely sure who decides this however. ...that rule does not exist. It sounds like something a highschool kid made up. Rock Band and Guitar Hero videos are also copyright infringing, they're just overlooked. Unless the videogame licenses actually allow 3rd party broadcasting, but that's extremely doubtful. No its true lmao... thats why on youtube people slightly slow down or speed up a song. Its not the original and thus the artist does not own it. Uh...no, it's not. Even if slowing down a song to 0.999 of it's original speed actually makes it a new song, Copyright includes the creation of Derivative works. If you can't play a song (with your own singer and band) without getting a license and explicit permission, you sure as hell can't add a keyboard tapping and pretend that what you're doing is legal. Stop making up rules that don't exist. Ignorance of the law will not protect you from the consequences. I didn't state that it was a rule. Was being very clear on that I wasn't entirely sure how it worked, but fact is I saw a lot of Rock Band vids, where the publisher would write he had been told to change this or this in order for Youtube to allow the video. That is all I'm saying, you don't have to act so condescending, was just trying to contribute to a way to get around any copyright issues there may be with streaming music.
It's just a way to get around the automatic detection algorithms that Youtube uses. It doesn't change anything legally.
|
On April 02 2012 00:58 MrTortoise wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2012 00:53 S_SienZ wrote:On April 02 2012 00:51 MrTortoise wrote:
can i just say that OP is totally irresponsible for posting this.
What kind of effect do you want this post to have?
Do you want all streams to stop using music if it is illegal?
BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT WILL HAPPEN.
THINK FFS
If i worked at twitch / owned and read this and was in a position of responsibility then my hand would probably be forced. As an issue i had turned a blind eye to is now in my face and legally i have to take action or be negligent / liable. Nope. Twitch doesn't have any obligation until a copyright holder gives notice about which specific user is committing infringement of a work they hold. Mere general assertions that infringements are happening within their system will not suffice. Are you a lawyer? Because if you are not then you really shouldn't be dispensing legal advice. You have no idea what legal cases will happen over the next few months that can totally change how things are interpreted. What was legally obvious in 1998 (which was privacy of users is paramount and was the reason why a lot of file sharing worked, copies of games etc were legally ok) has been totally re imagined in the last 2 years. The DCMA is clearly the next target, assuming your sane assumptions will hold up in the coming months is really optimistic. What you have in this thread are examples of people who are infringing and people asking if they are infringing. THAT is not mere general allegation. or look at it this way then ... why give copyright holders yet another handle for a bot to grab hold of? People like Twitch and Own3d will of gotten a lot of advice and will probably be getting a lot more. There are loads of reasons why what i said is true. People need to think more about what they are asking and posting in public. It isn't 1998 anymore - all i am saying is think. Besides in a years time the DCMA may be interpreted in a very different way.
I could say the same to you. Are you a lawyer?
The DMCA provides Safe Harbour to any third person party as long as they are compliant with the takedown requests that are issued by the rightsholders. This is specific. It is also supported by Case Law, after the Viacom vs Youtube.
If I phoned up Twitch support and said "Ban Destiny, he's infringing!" they wouldn't do shit about it, because I'm not the rightsholder.
In another few years, completely different laws may be written. But as long as the DMCA is the current law, then posting on some random forum has absolutely no repercussions for the third party or for the streamer.
|
On April 02 2012 07:33 WolfintheSheep wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2012 00:58 MrTortoise wrote:On April 02 2012 00:53 S_SienZ wrote:On April 02 2012 00:51 MrTortoise wrote:
can i just say that OP is totally irresponsible for posting this.
What kind of effect do you want this post to have?
Do you want all streams to stop using music if it is illegal?
BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT WILL HAPPEN.
THINK FFS
If i worked at twitch / owned and read this and was in a position of responsibility then my hand would probably be forced. As an issue i had turned a blind eye to is now in my face and legally i have to take action or be negligent / liable. Nope. Twitch doesn't have any obligation until a copyright holder gives notice about which specific user is committing infringement of a work they hold. Mere general assertions that infringements are happening within their system will not suffice. Are you a lawyer? Because if you are not then you really shouldn't be dispensing legal advice. You have no idea what legal cases will happen over the next few months that can totally change how things are interpreted. What was legally obvious in 1998 (which was privacy of users is paramount and was the reason why a lot of file sharing worked, copies of games etc were legally ok) has been totally re imagined in the last 2 years. The DCMA is clearly the next target, assuming your sane assumptions will hold up in the coming months is really optimistic. What you have in this thread are examples of people who are infringing and people asking if they are infringing. THAT is not mere general allegation. or look at it this way then ... why give copyright holders yet another handle for a bot to grab hold of? People like Twitch and Own3d will of gotten a lot of advice and will probably be getting a lot more. There are loads of reasons why what i said is true. People need to think more about what they are asking and posting in public. It isn't 1998 anymore - all i am saying is think. Besides in a years time the DCMA may be interpreted in a very different way. I could say the same to you. Are you a lawyer? The DMCA provides Safe Harbour to any third person party as long as they are compliant with the takedown requests that are issued by the rightsholders. This is specific. It is also supported by Case Law, after the Viacom vs Youtube. If I phoned up Twitch support and said "Ban Destiny, he's infringing!" they wouldn't do shit about it, because I'm not the rightsholder. In another few years, completely different laws may be written. But as long as the DMCA is the current law, then posting on some random forum has absolutely no repercussions for the third party or for the streamer.
and again, with what you are saying,....since people seem to have missed my earlier post, what country you are streaming in matters. DMCA is US law, streamers in UK aren't bound by it, twitch can base itself out of say, sweden, and not be bound by it.
|
On April 02 2012 06:19 TheSir wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2012 04:08 Shiori wrote:
Yeah, I know the legalese puts it much more delicately than that, but so long as you actually own the music to begin with, and so long as you don't sell the music, you should be allowed to broadcast it. If the recording companies don't like it (and they don't) tough shit. That's the way the world is gonna go sooner or later, anyway. When you broadcast music then you are selling it, maybe not in a direct way but you entertain/attract your audience/customers with it. Or do you really think radio stations and for example clubs/bars should be able to play copyrighted music for free cause well their are not selling the music..... Lets have all the benefits without paying for anything... right, never gonna happen.
If you buy the music, sure.
|
On April 02 2012 10:59 polysciguy wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2012 07:33 WolfintheSheep wrote:On April 02 2012 00:58 MrTortoise wrote:On April 02 2012 00:53 S_SienZ wrote:On April 02 2012 00:51 MrTortoise wrote:
can i just say that OP is totally irresponsible for posting this.
What kind of effect do you want this post to have?
Do you want all streams to stop using music if it is illegal?
BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT WILL HAPPEN.
THINK FFS
If i worked at twitch / owned and read this and was in a position of responsibility then my hand would probably be forced. As an issue i had turned a blind eye to is now in my face and legally i have to take action or be negligent / liable. Nope. Twitch doesn't have any obligation until a copyright holder gives notice about which specific user is committing infringement of a work they hold. Mere general assertions that infringements are happening within their system will not suffice. Are you a lawyer? Because if you are not then you really shouldn't be dispensing legal advice. You have no idea what legal cases will happen over the next few months that can totally change how things are interpreted. What was legally obvious in 1998 (which was privacy of users is paramount and was the reason why a lot of file sharing worked, copies of games etc were legally ok) has been totally re imagined in the last 2 years. The DCMA is clearly the next target, assuming your sane assumptions will hold up in the coming months is really optimistic. What you have in this thread are examples of people who are infringing and people asking if they are infringing. THAT is not mere general allegation. or look at it this way then ... why give copyright holders yet another handle for a bot to grab hold of? People like Twitch and Own3d will of gotten a lot of advice and will probably be getting a lot more. There are loads of reasons why what i said is true. People need to think more about what they are asking and posting in public. It isn't 1998 anymore - all i am saying is think. Besides in a years time the DCMA may be interpreted in a very different way. I could say the same to you. Are you a lawyer? The DMCA provides Safe Harbour to any third person party as long as they are compliant with the takedown requests that are issued by the rightsholders. This is specific. It is also supported by Case Law, after the Viacom vs Youtube. If I phoned up Twitch support and said "Ban Destiny, he's infringing!" they wouldn't do shit about it, because I'm not the rightsholder. In another few years, completely different laws may be written. But as long as the DMCA is the current law, then posting on some random forum has absolutely no repercussions for the third party or for the streamer. and again, with what you are saying,....since people seem to have missed my earlier post, what country you are streaming in matters. DMCA is US law, streamers in UK aren't bound by it, twitch can base itself out of say, sweden, and not be bound by it.
No. Country you're streaming from does not matter. What matters is the country that the Streaming website is based. And most of the mainstream ones are based in the US.
If they moved, then yes, the DMCA would not apply. But they haven't moved, and unless they do, they will remain under US jurisdiction.
|
On April 02 2012 12:13 WolfintheSheep wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2012 10:59 polysciguy wrote:On April 02 2012 07:33 WolfintheSheep wrote:On April 02 2012 00:58 MrTortoise wrote:On April 02 2012 00:53 S_SienZ wrote:On April 02 2012 00:51 MrTortoise wrote:
can i just say that OP is totally irresponsible for posting this.
What kind of effect do you want this post to have?
Do you want all streams to stop using music if it is illegal?
BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT WILL HAPPEN.
THINK FFS
If i worked at twitch / owned and read this and was in a position of responsibility then my hand would probably be forced. As an issue i had turned a blind eye to is now in my face and legally i have to take action or be negligent / liable. Nope. Twitch doesn't have any obligation until a copyright holder gives notice about which specific user is committing infringement of a work they hold. Mere general assertions that infringements are happening within their system will not suffice. Are you a lawyer? Because if you are not then you really shouldn't be dispensing legal advice. You have no idea what legal cases will happen over the next few months that can totally change how things are interpreted. What was legally obvious in 1998 (which was privacy of users is paramount and was the reason why a lot of file sharing worked, copies of games etc were legally ok) has been totally re imagined in the last 2 years. The DCMA is clearly the next target, assuming your sane assumptions will hold up in the coming months is really optimistic. What you have in this thread are examples of people who are infringing and people asking if they are infringing. THAT is not mere general allegation. or look at it this way then ... why give copyright holders yet another handle for a bot to grab hold of? People like Twitch and Own3d will of gotten a lot of advice and will probably be getting a lot more. There are loads of reasons why what i said is true. People need to think more about what they are asking and posting in public. It isn't 1998 anymore - all i am saying is think. Besides in a years time the DCMA may be interpreted in a very different way. I could say the same to you. Are you a lawyer? The DMCA provides Safe Harbour to any third person party as long as they are compliant with the takedown requests that are issued by the rightsholders. This is specific. It is also supported by Case Law, after the Viacom vs Youtube. If I phoned up Twitch support and said "Ban Destiny, he's infringing!" they wouldn't do shit about it, because I'm not the rightsholder. In another few years, completely different laws may be written. But as long as the DMCA is the current law, then posting on some random forum has absolutely no repercussions for the third party or for the streamer. and again, with what you are saying,....since people seem to have missed my earlier post, what country you are streaming in matters. DMCA is US law, streamers in UK aren't bound by it, twitch can base itself out of say, sweden, and not be bound by it. No. Country you're streaming from does not matter. What matters is the country that the Streaming website is based. And most of the mainstream ones are based in the US. If they moved, then yes, the DMCA would not apply. But they haven't moved, and unless they do, they will remain under US jurisdiction.
assuming they brought suite against twitch, however they couldn't touch the actual streamers DMCA also protects the third party sites such as twitch, via the safe harbor provision, as long as they comply with certain standards such as removign the content, upon request by the holder of the copyright. so unless they notify twitch and twitch does nothing, twitch is pretty much immune from liability....though that may change via the Viacom vs Youtube case, should the supreme court decide to hear it.....
|
During past 6 months ive seen TL featured SC2 pros stream movies and TV shows that theyve torrented. Also seen them restream the korean gsl broadcast in 720p.
|
it has been established in this thread that sooner or later you will going to get DMCA'd if you stream using copyrighted music... be it fair or not.
important questions what have not been answered yet:
Has a player actually gotten a license to use copyrighted music on their streams?
Anybody has any idea what the costs exactly are and how to actually get one?
Do you need multiple licenses for different music/labels?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
