4 ms·

Consider the following: I make a form of parody that is known as a Youtube Poop. It was all the rage last decade, but now it's a dying art. In part because of

Consider the following: I make a form of parody that is known as a Youtube Poop. It was all the rage last decade, but now it's a dying art. In part because of these stupid DMCA rules preventing people like me from expressing their creativity. I can appeal the strikes, but every time I do so I risk losing my channel forever. I don't monetize, and I only make parodies of stuff that came out over 10 years ago. So I've already accepted that the existence of my channel is ephemeral and that one day it will probably disappear forever. But I don't have any other platform to go to if I want to share my 5-10 minutes long edits with more than 4 people. Why am I not allowed to continue an art form that owes its name to the platform that spawned it? Is protecting the copyright of some random anime adaptation or cartoon (that no one gives a shit about anymore) seriously more important than creating novel art? Copyright lasts WAY too much. And no, I don't really want to go to court over this bullshit. But I am firmly convinced that it's in my rights to produce it. It's just that what counts as "my rights" depends entirely on the jurisdiction, because the law is a joke meant to protect people who can afford good lawyers -- it's not meant to actually enforce justice. Or rather, the concept of justice is so malleable that it basically means nothing in a globalized world. Also, I'm from Europe. Which court should I go to when I infringe on an american dub copyright for a japanese cartoon, exactly?

mulmen 2y ago
Nobody has a right to an audience. > Also, I'm from Europe. Which court should I go to when I infringe on an american dub copyright for a japanese cartoon, exactly? Well the copyright and the site are American so probably America.
- Vampiero 2y ago
  > Nobody has a right to an audience. That's literally what copyright is
  - FireBeyond 2y ago
    No, it's literally not. Copyright is that you have the right to potentially benefit from your work. You can broadcast it. You don't have any kind of right to an audience to watch it. I don't even know what that would look like.
    - AnthonyMouse 2y ago
      A plausible interpretation of "you don't have a right to an audience" is that people don't have to watch your dross if they don't want to, and this is the meaning which is normally meant to be implied (the motte in the motte and bailey). Then people want to use it in the sense of, you don't have a right against someone else interfering with your interaction with your willing audience, i.e. you don't have a right not to be censored by a government or corporate oligopoly. But that is a far less defensible proposition.
      - FireBeyond 2y ago
        Exactly. Or even "you don't have a right to a platform". You can speak your mind. That doesn't mean YouTube is obligated to broadcast it for you, nor does it mean your speech is being suppressed if they choose not to.
        strken 2y ago
        On a factual level, your speech is being suppressed every time someone refuses to broadcast it for non-commercial reasons. YouTube isn't obligated to broadcast it, and in some cases it's debatable whether they're the ones suppressing it, but it is still being suppressed.
        FireBeyond 2y ago
        That isn't accurate. Unless they are physically stopping you from speaking, they are not suppressing it. They're just not amplifying it.
        2y ago
- marcosdumay 2y ago
  > Nobody has a right to an audience. The GP isn't asking for an audience. (Except if you mean "with the king", because that's exactly what the comment is asking for.) > Well the copyright and the site are American so probably America The GP didn't tell you who the copyright owner is. And Google is present in more than one country. That said, yes, your last paragraph is a good hint. The world should just think very hard about blocking every large US business.
- bingaweek 2y ago
  Comments like yours are why ycombinator has a horrible reputation. It's a worthless dismissive truism to shut down a legitimate complaint from a creator who is being screwed around by bad laws and bad applications of bad laws. Yes, we know we don't have rights, that's why we're complaining.
- RecycledEle 2y ago
  > Nobody has a right to an audience. If you are an American citizen, the 1st Amendment to the United States Constitution mentions your God-given right to any audience that wants to listen to you.
BlueTemplar 2y ago
But here it's not so much even about DMCA, as about YouTube's own para-legal system and trolls abusing it. At this point, if you are still using YouTube (or another platform), you're part of the problem (we've already been talking about this specific issue for 15 years already !!), use something like PeerTube instead ! Even more so if you're in Europe, heck, we even have the example of VLC basically violating DMCA and US patent laws for decades and they are still online - notably because they're not under US jurisdiction : https://wiki.videolan.org/Frequently_Asked_Questions/#What_about_personal.2Fcommercial_usage.3F https://wiki.videolan.org/Frequently_Asked_Questions/#What_a...
- Vampiero 2y ago
  My audience is not on PeerTube, duh. Normal people don't know and they don't care

mulmen 2y ago

Nobody has a right to an audience. > Also, I'm from Europe. Which court should I go to when I infringe on an american dub copyright for a japanese cartoon, exactly? Well the copyright and the site are American so probably America.

Vampiero 2y ago
> Nobody has a right to an audience. That's literally what copyright is
- FireBeyond 2y ago
  No, it's literally not. Copyright is that you have the right to potentially benefit from your work. You can broadcast it. You don't have any kind of right to an audience to watch it. I don't even know what that would look like.
  - AnthonyMouse 2y ago
    A plausible interpretation of "you don't have a right to an audience" is that people don't have to watch your dross if they don't want to, and this is the meaning which is normally meant to be implied (the motte in the motte and bailey). Then people want to use it in the sense of, you don't have a right against someone else interfering with your interaction with your willing audience, i.e. you don't have a right not to be censored by a government or corporate oligopoly. But that is a far less defensible proposition.
    - FireBeyond 2y ago
      Exactly. Or even "you don't have a right to a platform". You can speak your mind. That doesn't mean YouTube is obligated to broadcast it for you, nor does it mean your speech is being suppressed if they choose not to.
      - strken 2y ago
        On a factual level, your speech is being suppressed every time someone refuses to broadcast it for non-commercial reasons. YouTube isn't obligated to broadcast it, and in some cases it's debatable whether they're the ones suppressing it, but it is still being suppressed.
        FireBeyond 2y ago
        That isn't accurate. Unless they are physically stopping you from speaking, they are not suppressing it. They're just not amplifying it.
        2y ago
marcosdumay 2y ago
> Nobody has a right to an audience. The GP isn't asking for an audience. (Except if you mean "with the king", because that's exactly what the comment is asking for.) > Well the copyright and the site are American so probably America The GP didn't tell you who the copyright owner is. And Google is present in more than one country. That said, yes, your last paragraph is a good hint. The world should just think very hard about blocking every large US business.
bingaweek 2y ago
Comments like yours are why ycombinator has a horrible reputation. It's a worthless dismissive truism to shut down a legitimate complaint from a creator who is being screwed around by bad laws and bad applications of bad laws. Yes, we know we don't have rights, that's why we're complaining.
RecycledEle 2y ago
> Nobody has a right to an audience. If you are an American citizen, the 1st Amendment to the United States Constitution mentions your God-given right to any audience that wants to listen to you.

BlueTemplar 2y ago

But here it's not so much even about DMCA, as about YouTube's own para-legal system and trolls abusing it. At this point, if you are still using YouTube (or another platform), you're part of the problem (we've already been talking about this specific issue for 15 years already !!), use something like PeerTube instead ! Even more so if you're in Europe, heck, we even have the example of VLC basically violating DMCA and US patent laws for decades and they are still online - notably because they're not under US jurisdiction : https://wiki.videolan.org/Frequently_Asked_Questions/#What_about_personal.2Fcommercial_usage.3F https://wiki.videolan.org/Frequently_Asked_Questions/#What_a...

Vampiero 2y ago
My audience is not on PeerTube, duh. Normal people don't know and they don't care