3 ms·
If I'm totally honest, I never thought of it this way, but humour me this: if OF and the like are considered distributors in the traditional sense of the entert
by jszymborski 5y ago
If I'm totally honest, I never thought of it this way, but humour me this: if OF and the like are considered distributors in the traditional sense of the entertainment world, would they typically be responsible for engaging in legal disputes over unauthorized distribution?
My feeble understanding of the law is that it would be more appropriate for copyright holders to sue in instances of illegal distribution. I understand why this isn't an option for most people (they don't have the resources a studio does), but I'm just trying to trace back who has the right to press for charges.
- dfxm12 5y agoIf a company gets revenue from exclusive content, they should do whatever it takes to make sure that content is exclusive. If a company gets revenue from content creators, they should do what it takes to attract and retain content creators. Whether or not the company owns the copyright in this case, based on these premises, whether that the company has the right to do it themselves, or on behalf of their content creators when they've been asked for this help, it's in the company's best interest to do it.
- Dracophoenix 5y agoIf we're discussing this from a "best interest" standpoint, then the studio is no longer obtaining revenue if it's being asked to delete all the content of a specific person on its own sites and thus any obligations of keeping content out of reach from other service providers cease. It's not in the studio's best interests to spend money litigating or issuing DMCA notices on behalf of a former associate.
- XCSme 5y agoI highly doubt that, I used to sell software on Envato marketplaces (ThemeForest/CodeCanyon) and even Envato can't do much as you are still the copyright holder, unless you give away all your rights to the seller.