3 ms·

"Vocal coach reacts!" I, for one, will be glad if these go away. (Plus, get them out of my feed, youtube. I don't watch them.) Apparently they're so successfu

by mod 6y ago

"Vocal coach reacts!" I, for one, will be glad if these go away. (Plus, get them out of my feed, youtube. I don't watch them.) Apparently they're so successful that other people are doing it now. I saw someone totally unrelated to music reacting to amateur music songs.

Kranar 6y ago
Well those videos on Youtube won't be impacted by this. This law doesn't go after individuals who upload infringing content, rather it goes after the platform itself. It's unlikely Youtube will be affected by it.
- btown 6y ago
  While that may indeed be the intent, an aggressive prosecutor could make a strong argument that individual streamers dancing or singing unlicensed karaoke are providing a digital service (the word "platform" never appears in the text) that "is intentionally marketed by or at the direction of that person to promote its use in publicly performing works." Which would now be a freaking felony.
  - dllthomas 6y ago
    Going by the quoted portion of the bill up thread, "platform" doesn't appear in the relevant portions text but neither does "digital service" - it says "digital transmission service". I am not certain whether that makes a difference.
    - dllthomas 6y ago
      From the definitions section of the bill as linked above: > the term ‘digital transmission service’ means a service that has the primary purpose of publicly performing works by digital transmission; So it probably makes less of a difference than we might hope.
- belltaco 6y ago
  A YouTube channel can be considered a 'digital service'. I don't see 'platform' in the text, where did you get that from?
- jmull 6y ago
  > This law doesn't go after individuals who upload infringing content, rather it goes after the platform itself. Be careful. That's not what the law actually says. It doesn't mention "platform". The term used is "digital transmission service", which is defined in terms of the undefined term "service". Perhaps there is some established narrow legal definition of the term "service" that will keep this law from being abused? Let's all hope so!
  - dllthomas 6y ago
    I would read "digital transmission service" as a service offering digital transmission, but that's not what the bill says. It says "the term ‘digital transmission service’ means a service that has the primary purpose of publicly performing works by digital transmission;" which to my eyes does not clearly restrict it to platforms as opposed to, at, a YouTube channel. Unless, as you say, there is a restriction somewhere unspecified on what can be meant by "service".
ryder9 6y ago
nobody is forcing you to watch those, stop acting like a child

by mod 6y ago

Kranar 6y ago

Well those videos on Youtube won't be impacted by this. This law doesn't go after individuals who upload infringing content, rather it goes after the platform itself. It's unlikely Youtube will be affected by it.

btown 6y ago
While that may indeed be the intent, an aggressive prosecutor could make a strong argument that individual streamers dancing or singing unlicensed karaoke are providing a digital service (the word "platform" never appears in the text) that "is intentionally marketed by or at the direction of that person to promote its use in publicly performing works." Which would now be a freaking felony.
- dllthomas 6y ago
  Going by the quoted portion of the bill up thread, "platform" doesn't appear in the relevant portions text but neither does "digital service" - it says "digital transmission service". I am not certain whether that makes a difference.
  - dllthomas 6y ago
    From the definitions section of the bill as linked above: > the term ‘digital transmission service’ means a service that has the primary purpose of publicly performing works by digital transmission; So it probably makes less of a difference than we might hope.
belltaco 6y ago
A YouTube channel can be considered a 'digital service'. I don't see 'platform' in the text, where did you get that from?
jmull 6y ago
> This law doesn't go after individuals who upload infringing content, rather it goes after the platform itself. Be careful. That's not what the law actually says. It doesn't mention "platform". The term used is "digital transmission service", which is defined in terms of the undefined term "service". Perhaps there is some established narrow legal definition of the term "service" that will keep this law from being abused? Let's all hope so!
- dllthomas 6y ago
  I would read "digital transmission service" as a service offering digital transmission, but that's not what the bill says. It says "the term ‘digital transmission service’ means a service that has the primary purpose of publicly performing works by digital transmission;" which to my eyes does not clearly restrict it to platforms as opposed to, at, a YouTube channel. Unless, as you say, there is a restriction somewhere unspecified on what can be meant by "service".

ryder9 6y ago

nobody is forcing you to watch those, stop acting like a child