Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Last 10 years and more taught me that if you're not angry at the entertainment industry, they just keep piling feth on. Better to cause a stink and make GW retract the "mistaken" claim than not.

 Gert wrote:

Cronch wrote:
Does it hurt GW in any noticeable, measurable way, and if yes, why do you care?

Maybe I'm just sick of the constant aggro and negativity, as well as the attempts to maintain the momentum of said aggro and negativity.
By all means, be annoyed for a variety of reasons. But made-up stuff or stuff that has been blown out of proportion? Come on, it's not neccesary.

Ignore button, makes threads a lot quicker to read as well.

 Gert wrote:

Cronch wrote:
Does it hurt GW in any noticeable, measurable way, and if yes, why do you care?

Maybe I'm just sick of the constant aggro and negativity, as well as the attempts to maintain the momentum of said aggro and negativity.

I would argue that the Ignore button is there for a reason. Don't like to see stuff? Ignore it.

EDIT: What endlesswaltz123 said

Cronch wrote:
Last 10 years and more taught me that if you're not angry at the entertainment industry, they just keep piling feth on. Better to cause a stink and make GW retract the "mistaken" claim than not.

They already retracted it
We don't need to raise a stink, the situation has already resolved before we even got to talking about it.

Nobody forced GW to copyright strike Midwinter Minis. Blaming people for reacting to that is genuinely hilarious. The seamless pivot of defenders of the action in this thread from "it was fine to strike him!" to "it was an error to strike him!" brings to mind the scene in 1984 where the braying mob seamlessly transitions from being at war with Eurasia and allied to Eastasia to the reverse without batting an eye.

If you are tired of GW being criticized for doing ridiculous things, perhaps the best thing to do would be to come around to the position that GW shouldn't be doing ridiculous things in the first place, rather than blame the people reacting to said ridiculous things.

"They retracted it" doesn't fix the situation. They never should have issued the strike in the first place, and the claim that it was an error is not credible as a claim it was not intentional. This was a manual copyright strike. You can't do those "by mistake." Now was it an error in the sense that it was completely legally unjustified? Definitely. But that's the problem: GW is behaving in an irresponsible and legally indefensible way. Walking it back after the fact after it blew up in their faces doesn't change what they did, any more than someone who performs a meritless citizen's arrest on you can just say "oh, oops, I guess that was an error" and then get all huffy if you're still angry about having been wrongfully detained.

 Overread wrote:

Cronch wrote:
Last 10 years and more taught me that if you're not angry at the entertainment industry, they just keep piling feth on. Better to cause a stink and make GW retract the "mistaken" claim than not.

They already retracted it
We don't need to raise a stink, the situation has already resolved before we even got to talking about it.

Yeah and since they retracted it (after it made waves) we should absolve them of all responsibility!!

If y’all could just sit back and listen to yourselves for just one minute. First it was, this was an accident so it’s not a big deal. Then, when that didn’t work it was well probably it was just someone low in the company (literally the subject of my original post). And NOW, it’s well it was on purpose but they took it back so it’s not bad.

Come on. What will it take? When GW decides to exercise the part of their policy that says anything that brings discredit to GW? You think Dakkadakka or B&C will survive that? Even your site Overread, even with the excessive moderating there, I guarantee you will not be unscathed.

I do ignore some who I consider being the worst offenders but at the same time I also see worth in discussing views that are different from mine and challenging those that are, in a diplomatic sense, adverse to others.

 Overread wrote:

Cronch wrote:
Last 10 years and more taught me that if you're not angry at the entertainment industry, they just keep piling feth on. Better to cause a stink and make GW retract the "mistaken" claim than not.

They already retracted it
We don't need to raise a stink, the situation has already resolved before we even got to talking about it.

They already did, but they didn't go "oops, that's a mistake" and did it right away, did they? For all you know, if no one reacted to it, it'd just stay there. It's possible it was a genuine mistake, but...it's a business, they never fix their mistakes unless they feel something is at stake. Businesses are basically 5yo's with even worse grasp of object permanence.

 Gert wrote:
I do ignore some who I consider being the worst offenders but at the same time I also see worth in discussing views that are different from mine and challenging those that are, in a diplomatic sense, adverse to others.

Well, fair enough

They only retracted it after Midwinter protested it, and after it became a huge PR black eye. Even after all that, it was only retracted based on his challenge, it's not like they even did it on their own initiative once they realized what a snafu it was.

It's not possible it was a genuine mistake in the sense that they didn't intend to strike him. It's not possible to accidentally manually copyright strike someone on youtube. It's not like you can just get fat fingers and oops, you hit Midwinter by mistake instead of some other youtuber. The only sense in which it could be an "error" is in the sense that it was legally unjustified. In other words, GW abused the Youtube copyright strike process and is now trying to spin that as just an "error."

Cronch wrote:

 Overread wrote:

Cronch wrote:
Last 10 years and more taught me that if you're not angry at the entertainment industry, they just keep piling feth on. Better to cause a stink and make GW retract the "mistaken" claim than not.

They already retracted it
We don't need to raise a stink, the situation has already resolved before we even got to talking about it.

They already did, but they didn't go "oops, that's a mistake" and did it right away, did they? For all you know, if no one reacted to it, it'd just stay there. It's possible it was a genuine mistake, but...it's a business, they never fix their mistakes unless they feel something is at stake. Businesses are basically 5yo's with even worse grasp of object permanence.

I mean that's the same as most people. If they make a mistake and don't notice the mistake and its not flagged up they will leave it as is.
By all means if GW, or any firm/person, makes a mistake it deserves flagging up. At which point the resolution and speed of resolution are what's important and what I judge them on. So in this case it was flagged up fairly fast and resolved pretty fast in a positive way. No revenue was lost, no video was lost, no one outside of GW was punished or penalised.

I prefer to judge on the whole thing not just the first act.

Again, it's not possible they did it "by mistake." You cannot mistakenly manually copyright strike someone on Youtube. You can't just fat finger a button accidentally and boom, it happens. You need to fill out a detailed form and go through several confirmations.

By "error" they mean "there was no legal basis for what we did," not "we accidentally did it without meaning to." Though they're certainly happy if you're confused into thinking it was the latter - that's why they chose those words in the first place.

GW has effectively admitted there was no legal basis for their action. They abused the Youtube copyright strike process, were called on it, and had to walk it back. Now did they abuse it intentionally in bad faith, or are they instead simply so clueless about copyright laws that they genuinely thought it was infringing? Who knows, that's impossible to say for certain without inside info. But either alternative is frightening in terms of what it says about the company's professionalism and competence.

Mistake - An act or judgement that is misguided or wrong (noun). To be wrong about (verb).
Yup, "mistake" fits the bill.

Mistakes and accidents are different things. Accidents are the example above with fat thumbs, mistakes you can make knowingly by misinformation or other factors that cause you to have an error of judgement.

 endlesswaltz123 wrote:
Mistakes and accidents are different things. Accidents are the example above with fat thumbs, mistakes you can make knowingly by misinformation or other factors that cause you to have an error of judgement.

Yes, basically. Issuing the copyright claim was "a mistake". But I fail to see how they could have done it "by mistake".

Right. So we're all on the same page then that they intentionally issued a copyright strike against Midwinter, which they have now admitted they had no legal basis for issuing. So they were either acting maliciously in bad faith, or they don't understand what copyright protections are in the first place, and genuinely thought his video was infringing.

Both possibilities are really bad. It's not something GW can just say "oh, oops, on reflection, that was an error." It's not acceptable for a billion-dollar company to be striking people without any legal basis. In the best case scenario, this shows the people they have doing IP enforcement don't understand the IP laws in very basic ways. That's a massive problem, whether or not they walk things back after being called out on it.

The most charitable reading of it being 'mistake' was that they were going through a ton of content about people sharing WH+ stuff illegally and issued a bunch of strikes and a legit review got hit in the process.

 Overread wrote:
No revenue was lost, no video was lost, no one outside of GW was punished or penalised.

...if the video in question was demonetised for X period of time, surely revenue has been lost? Or does GW running away mean this MWM character will get the ad earnings he would otherwise have gotten for that period, whatever that may be?

 Crimson wrote:
The most charitable reading of it being 'mistake' was that they were going through a ton of content about people sharing WH+ stuff illegally and issued a bunch of strikes and a legit review got hit in the process.

\

Correct, and that's totally unacceptable, because the whole process is set up to make that impossible by making you have to fill out a different form for each strike, attesting that you've reviewed that specific case. If they were just going through the motions, that itself is an abuse of the copyright strike process.

In a just world, GW would be punished by Youtube for this abuse of the process by having their copyright strikes flagged for pre-review before execution for some period of time, to make sure they are taking the process seriously.

 Dysartes wrote:

 Overread wrote:
No revenue was lost, no video was lost, no one outside of GW was punished or penalised.

...if the video in question was demonetised for X period of time, surely revenue has been lost? Or does GW running away mean this MWM character will get the ad earnings he would otherwise have gotten for that period, whatever that may be?

The second: YT stores the money until the resolution of the claim.

Had it been taking down it would have been different, of course.

 Dysartes wrote:

 Overread wrote:
No revenue was lost, no video was lost, no one outside of GW was punished or penalised.

...if the video in question was demonetised for X period of time, surely revenue has been lost? Or does GW running away mean this MWM character will get the ad earnings he would otherwise have gotten for that period, whatever that may be?

Depends on what exactly happened. He said he the video was demonetized, and in that case, no, you don't get your money back if you've been actually wrongfully demonetized, on the theory that Youtube can't calculate what your lost revenues would have been. Yes, that's bogus, but unless they've changed their policy very recently, that's still the case.

If he wasn't actually demonetized but the video was instead flagged and the revenues sequestered pending a dispute as to whom they should be paid to, he would be able to receive those revenues now that the accuser has withdrawn their complaint.

yukishiro1 wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
The most charitable reading of it being 'mistake' was that they were going through a ton of content about people sharing WH+ stuff illegally and issued a bunch of strikes and a legit review got hit in the process.

\

Correct, and that's totally unacceptable, because the whole process is set up to make that impossible by making you have to fill out a different form for each strike, attesting that you've reviewed that specific case. If they were just going through the motions, that itself is an abuse of the copyright strike process.

In a just world, GW would be punished by Youtube for this abuse of the process by having their copyright strikes flagged for pre-review before execution for some period of time, to make sure they are taking the process seriously.

Yes. But this is not such a world. Youtube strike system is massively abusable, and big companies use it against content creators all the time and Youtube doesn't care.

yukishiro1 wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:

 Overread wrote:
No revenue was lost, no video was lost, no one outside of GW was punished or penalised.

...if the video in question was demonetised for X period of time, surely revenue has been lost? Or does GW running away mean this MWM character will get the ad earnings he would otherwise have gotten for that period, whatever that may be?

Depends on what exactly happened. He said he the video was demonetized, and in that case, no, you don't get your money back if you've been actually wrongfully demonetized, on the theory that Youtube can't calculate what your lost revenues would have been. Yes, that's bogus, but unless they've changed their policy very recently, that's still the case.

If he wasn't actually demonetized but the video was instead flagged and the revenues sequestered pending a dispute as to whom they should be paid to, he would be able to receive those revenues now that the accuser has withdrawn their complaint.

Better explained

yukishiro1 wrote:
He said he the video was demonetized, and in that case, no, you don't get your money back if you've been actually wrongfully demonetized, on the theory that Youtube can't calculate what your lost revenues would have been. Yes, that's bogus, but unless they've changed their policy very recently, that's still the case.

I've not looked into how YT calculates this, but they'll have the data for views, etc, so surely this could be reverse-engineered? Maybe not if there's a click-through element, but certainly for "completed watches" during the period of time the strike was in place for (depending on how this is calculated, anyway - but Big Data is called Big Data for a reason).

 Dysartes wrote:

yukishiro1 wrote:
He said he the video was demonetized, and in that case, no, you don't get your money back if you've been actually wrongfully demonetized, on the theory that Youtube can't calculate what your lost revenues would have been. Yes, that's bogus, but unless they've changed their policy very recently, that's still the case.

I've not looked into how YT calculates this, but they'll have the data for views, etc, so surely this could be reverse-engineered? Maybe not if there's a click-through element, but certainly for "completed watches" during the period of time the strike was in place for (depending on how this is calculated, anyway - but Big Data is called Big Data for a reason).

Yeah, but that'd mean YT would be paying them for ads that weren't actually shown. I.e. YT would be eating the costs of the lost revenue. Which they should, don't get me wrong. But YT isn't exactly known for being charitable.

I mean really what should happen is YT should pay him what he would have earned, and bill GW for it, maybe with a 5x penalty for abuse of the process. YT makes money, the creator makes money, the bad actor gets punished, everybody's happy. But that doesn't actually happen because YT is notorious for taking the side of the big guy.

 phandaal wrote:

 Gert wrote:

 phandaal wrote:

People said that Games Workshop would probably be taking more action with respect to copyright, we were told that we were irrational fear monger haters, and now Games Workshop is doing the thing we said they would do.

You mean like this? Blowing a single incident out of proportion.
The topic has been brought up and I am pre-empting the arguments that have already been made elsewhere.

No, I don't mean like that. I mean, who has said "Games Workshop is coming for YOU" as you claim.

You are preempting arguments that you are making up in your own head. You know this, of course. Anything to avoid thinking about the fact that Games Workshop is doing just what we said they would. Must be exhausting.

You are both exaggerating past and present arguments into hyperbolic exclamations that do not accurately represent what the other side actually said.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
You are both exaggerating past and present arguments into hyperbolic exclamations that do not accurately represent what the other side actually said.

Are you new here?

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

 phandaal wrote:

 Gert wrote:

 phandaal wrote:

People said that Games Workshop would probably be taking more action with respect to copyright, we were told that we were irrational fear monger haters, and now Games Workshop is doing the thing we said they would do.

You mean like this? Blowing a single incident out of proportion.
The topic has been brought up and I am pre-empting the arguments that have already been made elsewhere.

No, I don't mean like that. I mean, who has said "Games Workshop is coming for YOU" as you claim.

You are preempting arguments that you are making up in your own head. You know this, of course. Anything to avoid thinking about the fact that Games Workshop is doing just what we said they would. Must be exhausting.

You are both exaggerating past and present arguments into hyperbolic exclamations that do not accurately represent what the other side actually said.

If you cared to, you could find examples of everything he said on the first page of the News and Rumors section. But, only if you wanted to, and weren't trying to make a clever point.

yukishiro1 wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
You are both exaggerating past and present arguments into hyperbolic exclamations that do not accurately represent what the other side actually said.

Are you new here?

I've actually never changed my avatar; when I joined it was a normal pig but over time the foul energies of the ruinous internet have corrupted the image much as they have done to my soul.

But more seriously, they seem reasonable and I think if they started looking for common ground they'd find it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

caladancid wrote:
If you cared to, you could find examples of everything he said on the first page of the News and Rumors section. But, only if you wanted to, and weren't trying to make a clever point.

I don't think dredging up a bunch of examples as a hit against both of them would push the discussion in a positive direction. I think they are reasonable enough to understand that we humans do tend to hyperbolize things online and that they really aren't that far apart. And I didn't feel it was clever, I just know in the past I have been helped by people pointing out what was obvious to everyone else but I was missing due to being focused in on an argument, but I do thank you for the compliment.

Nothing I said was hyperbole.