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.
2021/09/04 20:10:46
Subject: Games Workshop Hiring Infringement Assistants
I just don't understand the inability to parse this as potentially a mistake or accident.
I don't know how these forms are completed or applied. If you copy and paste the url of the video or apply it to an open tab, of course it is possible to insert the wrong url by accident.
To be a mistake, if it's some poor soul tired and with a quota and stack of a few hundred videos to plough through. They either don't fully understand what they're doing, or make an error of judgement on the grounds of what they see. It could be a training error.
Human error is always a risk and I don't think branding them with aims of abusing a system to deprive people of income, or only changing tact as a part of a PR backlash is fair here.
If it happens repeatedly, sure, but as a one off? Likely some tired admin guy who gets a slap on the wrist and feels bad for a week or two.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/09/04 20:28:40
2021/09/04 20:37:08
Subject: Games Workshop Hiring Infringement Assistants
Dudeface wrote: I just don't understand the inability to parse this as potentially a mistake or accident.
I don't know how these forms are completed or applied. If you copy and paste the url of the video or apply it to an open tab, of course it is possible to insert the wrong url by accident.
To be a mistake, if it's some poor soul tired and with a quota and stack of a few hundred videos to plough through. They either don't fully understand what they're doing, or make an error of judgement on the grounds of what they see. It could be a training error.
Human error is always a risk and I don't think branding them with aims of abusing a system to deprive people of income, or only changing tact as a part of a PR backlash is fair here.
If it happens repeatedly, sure, but as a one off? Likely some tired admin guy who gets a slap on the wrist and feels bad for a week or two.
.
Games Workshop- Changes their IP policies.
Games Workshop- Begins to pursue a wider variety of creators for IP usage.
Games Workshop- Hires additional staff to hunt for IP usage.
Games Workshop- Strikes a YouTube video.
You- Why can't everyone just give them the benefit of the doubt?!
2021/09/04 20:39:11
Subject: Games Workshop Hiring Infringement Assistants
Dudeface wrote: I just don't understand the inability to parse this as potentially a mistake or accident.
I don't know how these forms are completed or applied. If you copy and paste the url of the video or apply it to an open tab, of course it is possible to insert the wrong url by accident.
To be a mistake, if it's some poor soul tired and with a quota and stack of a few hundred videos to plough through. They either don't fully understand what they're doing, or make an error of judgement on the grounds of what they see. It could be a training error.
Human error is always a risk and I don't think branding them with aims of abusing a system to deprive people of income, or only changing tact as a part of a PR backlash is fair here.
If it happens repeatedly, sure, but as a one off? Likely some tired admin guy who gets a slap on the wrist and feels bad for a week or two.
Sure, great, but here's the thing, YT strikes/claims can threaten people's livelihood. It's not an innocent whoopsie.
2021/09/04 20:41:11
Subject: Games Workshop Hiring Infringement Assistants
As someone who has moderated on forums and see new mods join teams (and been one myself), I can totally see how mistakes happen; and also how new people can make miss-informed actions either because they didn't get enough guidance or perhaps they interpreted what they got slightly differently than was intended.
So yes even if it wasn't done by accidental clicking (which can easily be done if you're processing a batch of things in one go); then the person might well have seen GW content or a flag/report for it and didn't check enough or interpreted their duties wrongly and took the wrong action
GW is VERY unlikely to be paying a lawyer to do most of the actual mechanics of this, a lot of this is going to be overseen by someone from legal ,but likely done by someone much lower down the rankings and perhaps someone who isn't a core gamer or legal person etc...
So chances are they can make mistakes.
That's why for me the key isn't just that a strike was issued; its the resolution and fallout from that. An error was found, GW resolved that error and things moved forward. Hopefully whoever and however the strike was issued would be reviewed and experience/training/new working practice imposed to reduce the chances of this happening again.
In the end GW gains no benefit shutting down reviews like that and even enters into grounds where they could be legally challenged and lose. There's no gain for them in the long nor short term.
Like I said before I try to look at the whole event not just the initial strike. I also note that this is a strike issued in isolation, not part of a coordinated campaign of strikes or a big series of them.
Dysartes wrote: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).
Ad rates differ by ad, demand, target audience and all kinds of other factors. They probably have data on who watched the video, who they are, for how long (how many and what type of ad slots there would be in a video), and all that but not what ads would have played (and thus paid). So if an ad is not shown they are missing the whole advertiser side of that ad acution (and how much they'd pay for it) and these rates would vary each time as they also depend on multiple factors that they do not know about (surprising but Google can't yet predict alternative futures).
Youtube creators can't even be sure they'll make a certain amount of money based on whatever views/month they get due to the dynamic nature of how ads and ad prices are allotted. They can guess based on historic data (and what type of audience they have) but if I remember correctly even the same ad can be worth different rates depending on all kinds of factors. The general google ad auction system:
https://support.google.com/google-ads/answer/6366577?hl=en
The amount you’ll ultimately pay for your ads will depend on how much you’ve bid per view or 1,000 impressions. Keep in mind that your bid per view isn’t always the price you’ll pay—it’s the maximum price you’re willing to pay. Your actual cost will be 1 penny above the second-lowest price someone else is willing to pay. An example might help. Let’s say you set your CPV at $0.30, but the next highest bid is $0.20, you’ll be charged only $0.21 per view.
Also if the ad wasn't shown (despite it being enabled on the creator side) then nobody paid for it and there's simply no cut to give to the creator in the first place. That's just a fundamental thing about youtube not wanting to give away their own money.
2021/09/04 20:45:20
Subject: Games Workshop Hiring Infringement Assistants
Dudeface wrote: I just don't understand the inability to parse this as potentially a mistake or accident.
I don't know how these forms are completed or applied. If you copy and paste the url of the video or apply it to an open tab, of course it is possible to insert the wrong url by accident.
To be a mistake, if it's some poor soul tired and with a quota and stack of a few hundred videos to plough through. They either don't fully understand what they're doing, or make an error of judgement on the grounds of what they see. It could be a training error.
Human error is always a risk and I don't think branding them with aims of abusing a system to deprive people of income, or only changing tact as a part of a PR backlash is fair here.
If it happens repeatedly, sure, but as a one off? Likely some tired admin guy who gets a slap on the wrist and feels bad for a week or two.
.
Games Workshop- Changes their IP policies.
Games Workshop- Begins to pursue a wider variety of creators for IP usage.
Games Workshop- Hires additional staff to hunt for IP usage.
Games Workshop- Strikes a YouTube video.
You- Why can't everyone just give them the benefit of the doubt?!
Dudeface wrote: I just don't understand the inability to parse this as potentially a mistake or accident.
I don't know how these forms are completed or applied. If you copy and paste the url of the video or apply it to an open tab, of course it is possible to insert the wrong url by accident.
To be a mistake, if it's some poor soul tired and with a quota and stack of a few hundred videos to plough through. They either don't fully understand what they're doing, or make an error of judgement on the grounds of what they see. It could be a training error.
Human error is always a risk and I don't think branding them with aims of abusing a system to deprive people of income, or only changing tact as a part of a PR backlash is fair here.
If it happens repeatedly, sure, but as a one off? Likely some tired admin guy who gets a slap on the wrist and feels bad for a week or two.
If you don't know how the forms work that probably explains why you don't understand.
As you can see, when you copy the URL, it brings up the video for you to confirm it's the correct link. You must then provide more detailed info about the alleged infringement - timestamps, links to the material being infringed, etc. And you must also state under penalty of perjury that you're submitting a valid claim.
If someone is tired and not paying attention to what they're doing and violating the law in the process by submitting a false claim, that's on GW for employing overworked, inattentive people. If someone doesn't understand what they're doing, that's on GW for delegating its IP enforcement to incompetent people who don't know what they're doing. If it's a "training error," that's on GW for using a live complaint as a training exercise and failing to property supervise the training.
It's completely fair to hold GW responsible for what it did. Nobody was holding a gun to anyone's head forcing them to file a complaint. This is someone's life they were messing with. When you do that, the responsibility is on you to make sure you're messing with them for a valid reason, not that your employees are exhausted and/or incompetent and/or malicious. A company is responsible for the actions of its employees.
It's like saying "oops I filed a false police report and someone got wrongly arrested, oh well, I was tired, nobody died or got hurt, no harm no foul right? What's the big deal?"
I mean, GW hasn't even come out and said why the "error" happened - and I guarantee you it will not. There is zero reason to give them the benefit of the doubt here when they haven't even given their side of the story, and never will.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/09/04 20:53:01
2021/09/04 20:51:00
Subject: Games Workshop Hiring Infringement Assistants
I don't think anyone is absolving GW of their responsibility for what they did. They are just giving reasonable justification for why an abnormal action was taken, an action which GW did revoke.
Anything else - reasoning, compensation etc... is all honestly a private matter between the youtube creator and GW themselves; or between the creator and youtube
Who is suggesting GW gets the benefit of the doubt? All I see is people suggesting that what GW says was a mistake was, in fact, a mistake. Not that all is forgiven, not that their recent moves mean nothing, not even that they shouldn't be criticized for making a mistake, just that the company which makes mistakes all the time made another one.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/09/04 20:53:17
GW hasn't said anything directly at all about why it happened. Midwinter said he was told the claim was submitted "in error." This is lawyerly language which carefully makes no real representations as to what actually occurred. It would be "in error" if it was truly accidental, it would be "in error" if it was based on a faulty understanding the law, and it would also be "in error" even if it was submitted with knowledge that there was no basis for it.
More fundamentally...there is no reasonable justification for submitting a false copyright claim. There is no way this happens reasonably, in a "eh, everybody makes mistakes" kind of way. It doesn't fundamentally matter why it happened, it is never acceptable behavior. If GW is treating the whole process so cavalierly that the result is "oh well, errors happen" that itself is not reasonable.
That doesn't mean I'm saying GW should have its corporate character revoked and all the management put into the stocks. But this isn't a mistake it's ok to make. This is someone's livelihood they were messing with. We should take this stuff seriously. It's a big deal.
Overread wrote: I don't think anyone is absolving GW of their responsibility for what they did.
I was responding to a specific post that treated the issue as something to "slap an admin guy on the wrist" over. That is very much absolving GW of responsibility in my book. I don't see how it could be possibly read as anything other than absolving GW of responsibility, as well as dismissing the seriousness of the error.
It just shows such a misunderstanding of the importance and gravity of submitting a copyright complaint. I think a lot of people see something on the internet and assume it doesn't really matter, it's not "IRL." But this is "IRL" - it is someone's job that is at stake here. The fact that in practice YT allows big companies like GW to get away with these sorts of "errors" by turning a blind eye doesn't make it less of a big deal for the person on the receiving end.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/09/04 21:21:38
2021/09/04 21:03:47
Subject: Games Workshop Hiring Infringement Assistants
Dudeface wrote: I just don't understand the inability to parse this as potentially a mistake or accident.
I don't know how these forms are completed or applied. If you copy and paste the url of the video or apply it to an open tab, of course it is possible to insert the wrong url by accident.
To be a mistake, if it's some poor soul tired and with a quota and stack of a few hundred videos to plough through. They either don't fully understand what they're doing, or make an error of judgement on the grounds of what they see. It could be a training error.
Human error is always a risk and I don't think branding them with aims of abusing a system to deprive people of income, or only changing tact as a part of a PR backlash is fair here.
If it happens repeatedly, sure, but as a one off? Likely some tired admin guy who gets a slap on the wrist and feels bad for a week or two.
.
Games Workshop- Changes their IP policies.
Games Workshop- Begins to pursue a wider variety of creators for IP usage.
Games Workshop- Hires additional staff to hunt for IP usage.
Games Workshop- Strikes a YouTube video.
You- Why can't everyone just give them the benefit of the doubt?!
That is quite clearly not what he said.
He/she asked a question/expressed confusion as to why a number of people didn't put stock in this being a simple mistake. I responded to said question with a demonstration, that though reductive (a bit), adequately answered the question.
It is a rhetorical tool that can be very effective, though sometimes not with people who have replaced logical thinking with emotional attachment to a company.
2021/09/04 21:41:50
Subject: Games Workshop Hiring Infringement Assistants
Dudeface wrote: I just don't understand the inability to parse this as potentially a mistake or accident.
I don't know how these forms are completed or applied. If you copy and paste the url of the video or apply it to an open tab, of course it is possible to insert the wrong url by accident.
To be a mistake, if it's some poor soul tired and with a quota and stack of a few hundred videos to plough through. They either don't fully understand what they're doing, or make an error of judgement on the grounds of what they see. It could be a training error.
Human error is always a risk and I don't think branding them with aims of abusing a system to deprive people of income, or only changing tact as a part of a PR backlash is fair here.
If it happens repeatedly, sure, but as a one off? Likely some tired admin guy who gets a slap on the wrist and feels bad for a week or two.
.
Games Workshop- Changes their IP policies.
They didn't, actually. The claim of them changing their IP rules to not allow animations that keeps being touted is hyperbole, as the IP rules that have been in place for at least have a decade also didn't allow animations and similar such things. It's not a new rule.
They updated the guidelines to shorten it all and re-word parts, but beyond those wording changes what the guidelines cover is the same with the updated guidelines as it was before.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2021/09/04 22:05:57
2021/09/04 22:13:44
Subject: Games Workshop Hiring Infringement Assistants
Dudeface wrote: I just don't understand the inability to parse this as potentially a mistake or accident.
I don't know how these forms are completed or applied. If you copy and paste the url of the video or apply it to an open tab, of course it is possible to insert the wrong url by accident.
To be a mistake, if it's some poor soul tired and with a quota and stack of a few hundred videos to plough through. They either don't fully understand what they're doing, or make an error of judgement on the grounds of what they see. It could be a training error.
Human error is always a risk and I don't think branding them with aims of abusing a system to deprive people of income, or only changing tact as a part of a PR backlash is fair here.
If it happens repeatedly, sure, but as a one off? Likely some tired admin guy who gets a slap on the wrist and feels bad for a week or two.
.
Games Workshop- Changes their IP policies.
They didn't, actually. The claim of them changing their IP rules to not allow animations that keeps being touted is hyperbole, as the IP rules that have been in place for at least have a decade also didn't allow animations and similar such things. It's not a new rule.
They updated the guidelines to shorten it all and re-word parts, but beyond those wording changes what the guidelines cover is the same with the updated guidelines as it was before.
They did change the guidelines. You can call it updating, but it was a change- that led to different enforcement than was taking place before the change/updating.
I feel like maybe you wrote this without looking at it, and then read it and came back and made edits.
2021/09/04 22:31:36
Subject: Games Workshop Hiring Infringement Assistants
Dudeface wrote: I just don't understand the inability to parse this as potentially a mistake or accident.
I don't know how these forms are completed or applied. If you copy and paste the url of the video or apply it to an open tab, of course it is possible to insert the wrong url by accident.
To be a mistake, if it's some poor soul tired and with a quota and stack of a few hundred videos to plough through. They either don't fully understand what they're doing, or make an error of judgement on the grounds of what they see. It could be a training error.
Human error is always a risk and I don't think branding them with aims of abusing a system to deprive people of income, or only changing tact as a part of a PR backlash is fair here.
If it happens repeatedly, sure, but as a one off? Likely some tired admin guy who gets a slap on the wrist and feels bad for a week or two.
.
Games Workshop- Changes their IP policies.
Games Workshop- Begins to pursue a wider variety of creators for IP usage.
Games Workshop- Hires additional staff to hunt for IP usage.
Games Workshop- Strikes a YouTube video.
You- Why can't everyone just give them the benefit of the doubt?!
That is quite clearly not what he said.
He/she asked a question/expressed confusion as to why a number of people didn't put stock in this being a simple mistake. I responded to said question with a demonstration, that though reductive (a bit), adequately answered the question.
It is a rhetorical tool that can be very effective, though sometimes not with people who have replaced logical thinking with emotional attachment to a company.
People are trying very, very hard not to think about the fact that Games Workshop is doing exactly what people said they would do.
Don't connect the dots. That would be hyperbole.
2021/09/04 23:04:14
Subject: Games Workshop Hiring Infringement Assistants
Mentlegen also said it was "absurd" to suggest there was no valid basis for the copyright claim GW made against Midwinter that GW itself has now withdrawn because there was, in fact, no valid basis for it. Soo...
2021/09/04 23:11:42
Subject: Games Workshop Hiring Infringement Assistants
Dudeface wrote: I just don't understand the inability to parse this as potentially a mistake or accident.
I don't know how these forms are completed or applied. If you copy and paste the url of the video or apply it to an open tab, of course it is possible to insert the wrong url by accident.
To be a mistake, if it's some poor soul tired and with a quota and stack of a few hundred videos to plough through. They either don't fully understand what they're doing, or make an error of judgement on the grounds of what they see. It could be a training error.
Human error is always a risk and I don't think branding them with aims of abusing a system to deprive people of income, or only changing tact as a part of a PR backlash is fair here.
If it happens repeatedly, sure, but as a one off? Likely some tired admin guy who gets a slap on the wrist and feels bad for a week or two.
.
Games Workshop- Changes their IP policies.
Games Workshop- Begins to pursue a wider variety of creators for IP usage.
Games Workshop- Hires additional staff to hunt for IP usage.
Games Workshop- Strikes a YouTube video.
You- Why can't everyone just give them the benefit of the doubt?!
That is quite clearly not what he said.
He/she asked a question/expressed confusion as to why a number of people didn't put stock in this being a simple mistake. I responded to said question with a demonstration, that though reductive (a bit), adequately answered the question.
It is a rhetorical tool that can be very effective, though sometimes not with people who have replaced logical thinking with emotional attachment to a company.
People are trying very, very hard not to think about the fact that Games Workshop is doing exactly what people said they would do.
Don't connect the dots. That would be hyperbole.
GW did the thing once and pulled out from doing it with almost no real pressure against them.
That doesn't sound like the actions of a company who want to do that, or who are planning to do it again. It sounds the exact opposite.
Again if GW had done this to multiple youtubers; if they'd required a huge amount of pushback to change their choice; if they'd put up a fight to defend their choice and if they'd been doing it over and over then yes we'd have a problem.
But we don't have that, we have one action that has been resolved for the good of the community. And without any real fight or battle or protest or anything
Again, thus far with all these copyright strikes, esp against video content, the only actual full on loss we've had was one guy being scared off the entire 40K animation concept by FANS not by GW.
Dudeface wrote: I just don't understand the inability to parse this as potentially a mistake or accident.
I don't know how these forms are completed or applied. If you copy and paste the url of the video or apply it to an open tab, of course it is possible to insert the wrong url by accident.
To be a mistake, if it's some poor soul tired and with a quota and stack of a few hundred videos to plough through. They either don't fully understand what they're doing, or make an error of judgement on the grounds of what they see. It could be a training error.
Human error is always a risk and I don't think branding them with aims of abusing a system to deprive people of income, or only changing tact as a part of a PR backlash is fair here.
If it happens repeatedly, sure, but as a one off? Likely some tired admin guy who gets a slap on the wrist and feels bad for a week or two.
.
Games Workshop- Changes their IP policies.
They didn't, actually. The claim of them changing their IP rules to not allow animations that keeps being touted is hyperbole, as the IP rules that have been in place for at least have a decade also didn't allow animations and similar such things. It's not a new rule.
They updated the guidelines to shorten it all and re-word parts, but beyond those wording changes what the guidelines cover is the same with the updated guidelines as it was before.
They did change the guidelines. You can call it updating, but it was a change- that led to different enforcement than was taking place before the change/updating.
I feel like maybe you wrote this without looking at it, and then read it and came back and made edits.
No, what the rules actually cover was not changed with the updated guidelines.
Licensing
If you think you have a winning idea and want to make a video game, an app, some merchandise, a movie or anything else that you will be distributing (either for free or at a cost) using Games Workshop’s IP then you need permission in the form of a license from Games Workshop.
2021/09/04 23:23:35
Subject: Games Workshop Hiring Infringement Assistants
We don't know who else they may have done it to; it's speculation to suggest Midwinter was the only one, just like it's speculation to suggest he wasn't. And it hasn't been resolved for the good of the community, GW got challenged for breaking the law (yes, it violates the law to submit a false DMCA claim) and backed off with a vague excuse about "an error." We can speculate about its motives for breaking the law in the first place, but the fact that it backed off doesn't mean the action has been " resolved for the good of the community," any more than it's " resolved for the good of the community" when someone falsely arrested is released without any real admission of wrongdoing. The status quo has been restored after GW did some damage to it for no good reason, but that doesn't mean GW did something good, it just means they, belatedly, backed off on something bad.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/09/04 23:34:07
2021/09/04 23:24:14
Subject: Games Workshop Hiring Infringement Assistants
yukishiro1 wrote: 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."
I wouldn't be surprised if GW was using the old "kill them all and let God sort them out" strategy when it comes to WH+ content. They clearly highly value the service right now, and it would make sense if there was some GW intern tasked with flagging every YouTube video with WH+ stuff in it, then wait for the non-infringing videos to fight the claim themselves. It's a lot less work than GW having to decide for themselves whether every single video on YouTube with WH+ stuff falls under fair use or not.
Obviously if GW actually is doing that it's a pretty gakky move, but it's an equally expected one.
If they had been striking everyone we'd know about it by now, Midwinter wouldn't have been the only big content producer to raise a stink about it.
Honestly, I think the most plausible theory is that it was done by someone who just has no idea what copyright does and doesn't protect. The difference between Midwinter's video and the other high profile reviewers is that it does contain snippets of the actual animations, which the other reviews (I only looked briefly) don't seem to. We know from past evidence that at least some people at GW in positions of power really have no clue what IP laws are at all, and we also know they're super disorganized as a company. I suspect someone without a clue about IP authorized the DMCA takedown because "it must violate copyright to show the animations we strong-armed people into handing over to us!" only to have a lawyer approach them a few days later and be like "uh no, we need to back down on this one." Or even just some intern who was given faulty, incomplete training materials that didn't have anything on fair use for purposes of review who found a video with actual animations in it, and then some lazy or overworked supervisor who just ok'd sending in the claim it without really looking at it.
The other plausible possibility in my mind is that the part about their music being eerily similar to his may have angered someone at the company who saw it as an accusation of IP theft, then went after the video because of it.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/09/04 23:58:34
2021/09/05 00:51:02
Subject: Games Workshop Hiring Infringement Assistants
yukishiro1 wrote: We don't know who else they may have done it to; it's speculation to suggest Midwinter was the only one, just like it's speculation to suggest he wasn't. And it hasn't been resolved for the good of the community, GW got challenged for breaking the law (yes, it violates the law to submit a false DMCA claim) and backed off with a vague excuse about "an error." We can speculate about its motives for breaking the law in the first place, but the fact that it backed off doesn't mean the action has been " resolved for the good of the community," any more than it's " resolved for the good of the community" when someone falsely arrested is released without any real admission of wrongdoing. The status quo has been restored after GW did some damage to it for no good reason, but that doesn't mean GW did something good, it just means they, belatedly, backed off on something bad.
What exactly do you want GW to do though? They filed a false claim - acknowledged it and removed the claim.
All done within Youtube's internal system.
There isn't really any more recourse for GW to do anything beyond that unless the person claimed against feels a need to take it to the next level and take them to court (small claims or such).
Other than that what else do you want GW to do? We can assume that internally they don't want their system to fail so they'll have taken discipline/retraining on the person who issued the false claim; we might assume that youtube has means to track false claims from specific groups and that GW now has 1 black mark on their name. Ergo that they can't just send out false claims all over the place and see what sticks.*
*even big hollywood studios have done that and been told off by youtube. In their time it was also the irony that it was often their legal wing taking down their marketing wings actual ads so it wasn't just false claims but claims against their own firm.
^This.
GW worked within YouTube's system and corrected the mistake, fairly quickly might I add, considering how bad YT is with resolving things usually.
Do people want a public apology? If so what purpose does that serve?
In terms of companies doing bad things we're talking in the realms of "GW pulled another kid's hair in the playground".
2021/09/05 01:13:18
Subject: Games Workshop Hiring Infringement Assistants
In terms of companies doing bad things we're talking in the realms of "GW pulled another kid's hair in the playground".
No, that's exactly what is wrong about your point of view and exactly what I am reacting to. It is *not* "GW pulled another kid's hair in the playground." It's "GW threatened someone's job for no good reason." Filing a false copyright infringement complaint is a serious thing. That they backed off after huge backlash should not make us overlook that they wrongly attempted to deprive someone of the income from their job. That's a big deal. Brushing it off as rough-housing on the playground is totally irresponsible and shows a real lack of understanding of the gravity of the situation.
What I hope GW does is that it doesn't treat the matter the way you have, and that it appreciates the gravity of what it did. But I don't honestly have any confidence they don't see it the same way you do, as no big deal. Wrongfully demonetizing someone is an extremely serious thing, and taking steps to deprive someone of the income from their job should only be done when the rights holder is certain their claim is valid. GW failed miserably here to behave in an even vaguely responsible manner, and I hope they recognize that and seriously reorganize the way they handle copyright infringement claims so it can't happen again, because it simply isn't good enough.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/09/05 01:16:51
2021/09/05 01:15:41
Subject: Games Workshop Hiring Infringement Assistants
^This.
GW worked within YouTube's system and corrected the mistake, fairly quickly might I add, considering how bad YT is with resolving things usually.
Do people want a public apology? If so what purpose does that serve?
Establishing goodwill and respect to the community. Also most difficult for many on this forum to parse; its just the right thing to do and basic PR that GW has no idea about
Great logic right there Gert, I punched you in the face and then told the principal of the school I had mistaken you for another kid. I guess it makes it hunky dory, right?.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/09/05 01:20:47
2010/01/02 03:20:04
Subject: Games Workshop Hiring Infringement Assistants
In terms of companies doing bad things we're talking in the realms of "GW pulled another kid's hair in the playground".
No, that's exactly what is wrong about your point of view and exactly what I am reacting to. It is *not* "GW pulled another kid's hair in the playground." It's "GW threatened someone's job for no good reason." Filing a false copyright infringement complaint is a serious thing. That they backed off after huge backlash should not make us overlook that they wrongly attempted to deprive someone of the income from their job. That's a big deal. Brushing it off as rough-housing on the playground is totally irresponsible and shows a real lack of understanding of the gravity of the situation.
What I hope GW does is that it doesn't treat the matter the way you have, and that it appreciates the gravity of what it did. But I don't honestly have any confidence they don't see it the same way you do, as no big deal. Wrongfully demonetizing someone is an extremely serious thing, and it should only be done when the rights holder is absolutely sure their claim is valid. GW failed miserably here, and I hope they recognize that and seriously reorganize the way they handle copyright infringement claims so it can't happen again, because it simply isn't good enough.
But what exactly does that MEAN. What action do you want GW to perform?
I'm sure GW take it seriously, I mean they did they resolved the matter. They didn't push back, or argue for months or contest or anything. They acknowledged the error and resolved it. That is taking it seriously.
I'm just not sure what you're really after for GW to do other than not make mistakes, which I'm sure GW doesn't want to do in the first place since, as noted, I'm sure youtube monitors false/contested claims and would hinder GW's ability to issue claims in the future if GW were issuing false/unjustified claims.
I totally get that you're angry it happened and that it shouldn't happen, but in the end it did happen.
^This.
GW worked within YouTube's system and corrected the mistake, fairly quickly might I add, considering how bad YT is with resolving things usually.
Do people want a public apology? If so what purpose does that serve?
Establishing goodwill and respect to the community. Also most difficult for many on this forum to parse; its just the right thing to do
Great logic right there Gert, I punched you in the face and then told the principal of the school I had mistaken you for another kid. I guess it makes it hunky dory.
No, because punching any kid in the face is wrong.
Also from what I can tell "good will" in the community often translates to many as "lower prices"
But what exactly does that MEAN. What action do you want GW to perform?
I'm sure GW take it seriously, I mean they did they resolved the matter. They didn't push back, or argue for months or contest or anything. They acknowledged the error and resolved it. That is taking it seriously.
I'm just not sure what you're really after for GW to do other than not make mistakes, which I'm sure GW doesn't want to do in the first place since, as noted, I'm sure youtube monitors false/contested claims and would hinder GW's ability to issue claims in the future if GW were issuing false/unjustified claims.
I totally get that you're angry it happened and that it shouldn't happen, but in the end it did happen.
/
What should anyone do when they screw up? Make sure they don't screw up again, make the person whole, apologize to everybody they let down, realize that people are going to hold it against them and not be surprised that they'll have to earn the trust back that they squandered, etc.
The onus should be on GW to demonstrate to us that it recognizes what it did and will take steps to make sure it can't happen again. The onus isn't on everyone else to just accept the "this was an error" and draw a line under it.
You're "sure" of a lot of things I see no reason to be sure of based on GW's actions here and in the past. I'm sure I would be fine with what happened if I was also sure that GW is a good, responsible actor and that this somehow "just happened" to them without it really being their fault. But I'm not sure of that at all. And I'm not going to give them the benefit of the doubt after they did something really unprofessional.
But honestly my problem isn't really with you or even necessarily with GW's handling of the fallout, it's with the people in this thread who have repeatedly acted like what happened was no big deal, at worst just a "slap on the wrist" for some supposedly rogue employee. I hope you are right that GW doesn't share their point of view.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/09/05 01:35:04
2021/09/05 01:34:28
Subject: Games Workshop Hiring Infringement Assistants
^This.
GW worked within YouTube's system and corrected the mistake, fairly quickly might I add, considering how bad YT is with resolving things usually.
Do people want a public apology? If so what purpose does that serve?
Establishing goodwill and respect to the community. Also most difficult for many on this forum to parse; its just the right thing to do
Great logic right there Gert, I punched you in the face and then told the principal of the school I had mistaken you for another kid. I guess it makes it hunky dory.
No, because punching any kid in the face is wrong.
Also from what I can tell "good will" in the community often translates to many as "lower prices"
We're talking about a company that cultivated an anti consumer stance for years; do you not remember when posting point values on forums was feared wholesale?
They still need to build their trust brick by brick. There's decades of abuse they've stacked onto consumers. The recent IP policy signals a return to their belligerent stupidity
People don't care that you're in a group that gives them a pass go collect $200
GW did the thing once and pulled out from doing it with almost no real pressure against them.
That doesn't sound like the actions of a company who want to do that, or who are planning to do it again. It sounds the exact opposite.
Sounds like inept belligerence to me
Oh don't blame them because they might be hiring someone with no knowledge of IP to strike people on IP...
You guys make me laugh
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2021/09/05 01:41:05
2021/09/05 02:44:33
Subject: Games Workshop Hiring Infringement Assistants
NinthMusketeer wrote: 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.
What are you talking about? I look at your avatar and all I see is a Porsche.
