4 ms·

There's still the issue of the people receiving the content freely when they should have payed (even though it's not their fault).

meowface 11y ago
Udemy isn't producing the pirated content themselves. Their only responsibility is to quickly respond to valid DMCA complaints in those cases. I think they handled Hunt's case appropriately. While there is certainly some lost revenue in terms of opportunity cost, there isn't really any more you can expect them to do. The problem is at least one other person claimed their course was up for a considerable amount of time, and took in substantial revenue (thousands of dollars). In those cases, Udemy should remove the material and transfer the money to the content holder once they prove that they own it and that it was infringing.
- tombrossman 11y ago
  Here is another angle to consider. How many of the viewers of Troy's 'free' plagiarized courses saw them and were impressed enough to convert to paying customers? Difficult to measure but Udemy will have a pretty good idea. For Udemy to say that no money changed hands is a bit myopic, but perhaps this is unintentional. Money likely did change hands, but it was abstracted from the original transaction and only Udemy knows that figure.
  - peteretep 11y ago
    So what's your recommendation here? What's your utopian vision for how Udemy should have handled this?
    - tombrossman 11y ago
      I don't really have any utopian visions because by definition they are impossible to achieve. We have to be realistic and I think Udemy will get away with this and my comment above was basically me calling bullshit on their public statements. They didn't seem sincere to me, that's all.
      - codecamper 11y ago
        I agree with you Tom. Udemy is not Youtube. Udemy could easily verify each of their instructors. However it is not in their best interest to do so. At this moment Udemy wants users. If it gets those users because people copy course content & display it on their site, then this is good for them. It makes it look like Udemy is the go to place for courseware. Lets not forget there is a lot of potential money at stake. What did Adobe pay for Lynda.com? My mention of Youtube was not accidental. Youtube created a strategy for getting big fast. Was it the dog videos that made youtube big? Or was it that you can see almost any piece of copy written stuff in one place. You either see it for a short time before it is taken down. Or you see it for a while because the original copyright holder no longer cares.
  - briantakita 11y ago
    Sounds like the $ that changed hands is minuscule.
tombrossman 11y ago
Exactly. Imagine I ripped a MPAA film DVD and distributed via free coupon codes to users of this service. Think any lawyers would have an issue or would they go 'oh, no money changed hands' and give it a pass? Also, they used the boilerplate 'taking it seriously' twice, including the second sentence. Can corporate PR people please stop with this silliness? It seems like it is in every press release ever.
- ps4fanboy 11y ago
  The MPAA would most likely go after supplier not the store, the MPAA would have to prove the store knew the products where duplicated/reproduced.
- justaaron 11y ago
  um that's essentially the argument any software copier er "pirate" (i have a real problem with that term) uses. to call the forced redistribution of someones software or content "theft" is also intellectually dishonest, as the original has not be altered, nor have any physical goods been taken. there may be a case made for debasement of value of the original item, with which counterfeits would also be included... but yes, i think this particular issue strikes me as passionate personal illogical over-reaction due to being the victim, which is why victims don't often get to mete out punishments: they are biased. i read the original thread yesterday, and while i sympathize with the victim/claimant, I find this letter from the CEO to sufficiently address concerns of deliberate malfeasance. now, i have no problem with the suggestion that perhaps he could lay bare the financial details of those roughly 150 takedowns they deal with annually.

meowface 11y ago

Udemy isn't producing the pirated content themselves. Their only responsibility is to quickly respond to valid DMCA complaints in those cases. I think they handled Hunt's case appropriately. While there is certainly some lost revenue in terms of opportunity cost, there isn't really any more you can expect them to do. The problem is at least one other person claimed their course was up for a considerable amount of time, and took in substantial revenue (thousands of dollars). In those cases, Udemy should remove the material and transfer the money to the content holder once they prove that they own it and that it was infringing.

tombrossman 11y ago
Here is another angle to consider. How many of the viewers of Troy's 'free' plagiarized courses saw them and were impressed enough to convert to paying customers? Difficult to measure but Udemy will have a pretty good idea. For Udemy to say that no money changed hands is a bit myopic, but perhaps this is unintentional. Money likely did change hands, but it was abstracted from the original transaction and only Udemy knows that figure.
- peteretep 11y ago
  So what's your recommendation here? What's your utopian vision for how Udemy should have handled this?
  - tombrossman 11y ago
    I don't really have any utopian visions because by definition they are impossible to achieve. We have to be realistic and I think Udemy will get away with this and my comment above was basically me calling bullshit on their public statements. They didn't seem sincere to me, that's all.
    - codecamper 11y ago
      I agree with you Tom. Udemy is not Youtube. Udemy could easily verify each of their instructors. However it is not in their best interest to do so. At this moment Udemy wants users. If it gets those users because people copy course content & display it on their site, then this is good for them. It makes it look like Udemy is the go to place for courseware. Lets not forget there is a lot of potential money at stake. What did Adobe pay for Lynda.com? My mention of Youtube was not accidental. Youtube created a strategy for getting big fast. Was it the dog videos that made youtube big? Or was it that you can see almost any piece of copy written stuff in one place. You either see it for a short time before it is taken down. Or you see it for a while because the original copyright holder no longer cares.
- briantakita 11y ago
  Sounds like the $ that changed hands is minuscule.

tombrossman 11y ago

Exactly. Imagine I ripped a MPAA film DVD and distributed via free coupon codes to users of this service. Think any lawyers would have an issue or would they go 'oh, no money changed hands' and give it a pass? Also, they used the boilerplate 'taking it seriously' twice, including the second sentence. Can corporate PR people please stop with this silliness? It seems like it is in every press release ever.

ps4fanboy 11y ago
The MPAA would most likely go after supplier not the store, the MPAA would have to prove the store knew the products where duplicated/reproduced.
justaaron 11y ago
um that's essentially the argument any software copier er "pirate" (i have a real problem with that term) uses. to call the forced redistribution of someones software or content "theft" is also intellectually dishonest, as the original has not be altered, nor have any physical goods been taken. there may be a case made for debasement of value of the original item, with which counterfeits would also be included... but yes, i think this particular issue strikes me as passionate personal illogical over-reaction due to being the victim, which is why victims don't often get to mete out punishments: they are biased. i read the original thread yesterday, and while i sympathize with the victim/claimant, I find this letter from the CEO to sufficiently address concerns of deliberate malfeasance. now, i have no problem with the suggestion that perhaps he could lay bare the financial details of those roughly 150 takedowns they deal with annually.