5 ms·
Luanti removed from Google Play due to baseless AI copyright notice
- conartist6 1mo agoSue them for tortious interference
- tyzoid 1mo agoI suspect the TOS say google can remove or deny apps for any reason. If in the EU, there might be a DMA claim though.
- skywal_l 1mo agoCan a TOS waive any rights? Surely there are some unalienable rights.
- Borealid 1mo agoI, personally, don't feel that "making money by doing business in a particular market" should be a right it is illegal to waive. If it were inalienable, things like regional distribution agreements would be void, since you could sign away your ability to sell in a certain country and then compete with your distributor anyway. Let's keep some perspective here - there is no "inalienable right to sell apps to smartphone users via a private commercial storefront".
- iamnothere 1mo ago> Let's keep some perspective here - there is no "inalienable right to sell apps to smartphone users via a private commercial storefront". This is unacceptable in a world where governments and businesses are increasingly gating services behind those same marketplaces. Something’s got to give here. We can’t allow people to create a captive, gatekept marketplace and then create/allow significant pressure that herds people into that same marketplace. IMO, break up all the gatekeepers using antitrust and require that critical infrastructure and businesses (government, banking, utilities, payments, etc) allow alternate access paths that don’t require a smartphone.
- skywal_l 1mo agoImagine the landlord of a library were to close the store just because someone complained that the library was selling stolen books. Would you consider this acceptable? And we are talking about a landlord that basically own the city here. I don't know in this particular case of Luanti, but this could be people's livelihood we are talking about, there should be some sort of legal due process. It really feels like middle-ages kind of justice.
- ekianjo 1mo agoat the same time google is moving to forbid other app stores so...
- matheusmoreira 1mo agoAll rights should be inalienable, simply because if they are not then all corporations will put "you waive all your rights" into their standard legal boilerplate. The consequences do not matter. Voiding regional distribution agreements is a small price to pay for actually having rights.
- Borealid 1mo agoIf all rights were inalienable, an employment contract would not mean I need to pay my employee, because I would have an inalienable right to keep my own property (cash). Also nobody would offer the contract in the first place because the employee would keep their inalienable right to choose how they spend their own time (not working). EVERY contract is about giving something up in exchange for getting something. In most legal systems a contract is void if either party gives nothing. So in a world where nothing can be signed away, no contracts exist at all.
- horsawlarway 1mo agoI think this take holds up very poorly when the reality boils down to: "Government policy and critical services have made it so there are functionally two markets for mobile software, each owned by the manufacturers and developers of the mobile OS and hardware" This isn't like physical sales, where I can open up a store anywhere. This also isn't like classic software sales for windows/mac desktops, where I can sell you a program from any website or physical store. --- Functionally - this is like these private companies revoking your business license at their whim. I don't find it a tenable position.
- account42 27d ago> If it were inalienable, things like regional distribution agreements would be void, since you could sign away your ability to sell in a certain country and then compete with your distributor anyway. Good. These are responsible for a lot of awfulness around media distribution and actively harm competition resulting in a wore result for consumers.
- limagnolia 1mo agoSue Microsft, not Google. It was Microsoft who filed the DMCA notice, Microsft is the responsible party.
- conartist6 1mo agoThe TOS isn't a defense against purposely trying to ruin someone else's business by lying
- ncr100 1mo agoI don't know, if Google offers a service and a contract via license and you pay the service which is the developer fee, then Google violates their own contract, isn't that fraud committed upon the client who in this case is the app developer?
- deleted 1mo ago[deleted]
- mysterydip 1mo agoCould the sequence of events be: 1) open source project publishes source 2) AI scrapes source 3) AI generates code for proprietary game similar to that of the source 4) AI tool scans jar files and finds similar code, triggers copyright violation
- puskavi 1mo agoIt probably just looks at pictures
- clort 1mo agoCould be, but unfortunately (3) can generate the code but it is not copyrightable (Thaler v. Perlmutter)
- sidewndr46 1mo agoNo, that isn't what that case ruled at all. It ruled that the program generating the code cannot be the author.
- em-bee 1mo agointeresting interpretation. most other articles on the topic have a different interpretation. if the AI can not be the author, then who can? is writing the prompt enough to establish being the creator? i think we need a few more cases to get an answer to that.
- Joel_Mckay 1mo agoA company does NOT have rights to copy/mimic other works without legal license outside fair use like satire. https://www.bbc.co.uk/future/article/20260414-the-monkey-selfie-that-predicted-the-ai-age https://www.bbc.co.uk/future/article/20260414-the-monkey-sel... The owner of the Camera in this case lost copyright ownership claim, as did the rights-group representing the monkey. =3
- codedokode 1mo ago
- matheusmoreira 1mo agoIt's just the usual corporate censorship via "good faith" DMCA notices that nobody but other corporations can afford to actually fight.
- shevy-java 1mo agoThey created the perfect mafia system here. It is fascinating to see how easily democracies can be undermined.
- Ohentis 1mo agoIn general DMCA notices are actually very cheap to fight. You just submit a counter notice. The lawsuit that can follow (but very unlikely here) can be expensive to fight.
- sam_lowry_ 1mo agoOne can still install Luanti from F-Droid. It's great little tool to teach coding.
- vintermann 1mo ago> We received a similar notice from the same company in 2023 and successfully appealed against it. This company also filed a similar notice this year against an indie game with similar voxel art style by the name of Allumeria. They'll backtrack and apologize - again. At some point, the pathway for Microsoft to regain some of the goodwill associated with Minecraft is to fire the senior lawyer most responsible for sending out these notices.
- ezoe 1mo agoWell, Microsoft is busy firing real game developers. No chance. Unless corpo heads are prosecuted for copyright infringement(false DMCA claim IS copyright infringement) and jailed or sentenced to death, no change.
- Sweepi 1mo ago> At some point, the pathway for Microsoft to regain some of the goodwill associated with Minecraft is to fire the senior lawyer most responsible for sending out these notices. Why would anyone with brain give them any good will for that? I might believe them if they would give Luanti 2x the damages and gave in writing that they will pay 10x damages the next time this happens.
- account42 27d agoConsumers, in aggregate, do have less than one brain.
- ncr100 1mo agoHey, it looks like this is a ripe opportunity for countersuit, because it's bad faith. I am not a lawyer, but this seems like harassment on a matter that has been previously settled.
- culi 1mo agoWell they said it was filed by Tracer.AI Minecraft does indeed have a lot of knockoffs that sometimes even use official imagery (e.g. the creeper). It seems Microsoft is using this AI tool to automatically detect these and submit DMCA requests If anything, this problem would be fixed by hiring MORE lawyers. Not firing them.
- Hnrobert42 1mo agoThere is no cost to Tracer.ai for false positives. There is a cost to them for false negatives, if only just lost revenue. The beatings will persist until morale improves.
- testing22321 1mo agoIf there are no consequences for filing a false DMCA takedown, what stops people or companies filing them all the time to take apps from Apple or Microsoft offline?
- benjiro29 1mo agoYou will notice that DMCA claims are often against smaller parties. You rarely see those DMCA claiming companies go after somebody like Microsoft because those companies can fight back. Its a system that mostly benefits large companies. Just about everybody else hates the system.
- kg 1mo agoApple and Microsoft have speed-dial access to the relevant legal departments to get their apps put back online
- Aerroon 1mo agoHow do the lawyers filing these bogus claims not end up in prison? How is it not fraud?
- shevy-java 1mo agoThese de-facto monopolies such as "Google Play", must be forced open by governments. It can not be that they continue to turn a blind eye to these vile, ruthless and - most importantly - extremely evil action by the giant that was formerly known as Google (now known as adMonster).
- em-bee 1mo agothe DMCA would still apply. they could file a DMCA against f-droid too. while f-droid is more likely to fight back, if the DMCA is upheld, they would have to comply. you are not wrong, and that's why apple is being forced to allow alternative app stores. forcing them to abandon checks is not what the majority would want. instead eventually there should be ab appstore choice just like the browser choice that was pushed for some time.
- gumby271 1mo agoWhat should be forced is allowing device owners to install software without the say of Google or Apple. This has been possible on Android for ages, but Google recently decided that they need to collect the ID of any dev that wants to build an apk, independent of distributing it through Google's own store. Google and Apple can have whatever app storefronts they want, but they shouldn't have a say in what software I can run.
- whizzter 1mo agoSomeone should copyright the American flag and popular advertised variants of blue/white/red and something alike and start DMCA'ing politicians, maybe that would wake them up to how bad the law is?
- VWWHFSfQ 1mo ago> Someone should copyright the American flag You're someone
- Hasnep 1mo agoThat's not how you get copyright, the creator of a work automatically gets the copyright. You can sue someone for violating your copyright, but if you tried to claim copyright of the US flag your case would get thrown out immediately.
- anigbrowl 1mo agoYou have to register copyright to claim statutory damages. You can claim actual damages (lost sales) but statutory damages are where the money is at.
- VCFundedGenYer 1mo agoOutsider here. The screenshots are literally Minecraft screenshots. It's a clone, and not a subtle one either. To call this "Baseless" is hilarious.
- danaris 1mo agoThat's...straight-up false. Unless you have some source for this, you're just lying here. Yes, it's inspired by Minecraft. The screenshots are of voxel-based survival crafter games you can build with their platform. The textures are not Minecraft textures. They are similar in style, sure, but that's not remotely the same thing. You can't copyright a general visual style, nor can you copyright a game genre. To call this anything but "baseless" would be hilarious.
- stronglikedan 1mo ago> Yes, it's inspired by Minecraft. More likely that Minecraft was inspired by Luanti since Luanti was released first. (at least, formally released)
- jamilton 1mo agoWell no, Minecraft was already wildly popular while it was in beta. Luanti was explicitly inspired by Minecraft, as stated in the article it was named Minetest up until a few years ago.
- danaris 1mo agoDo you understand what the difference between "creation" and "release" is? And which one actually involves inspiration...?
- Supermancho 1mo agoAlso outsider (like it matters). > The screenshots are literally Minecraft screenshots. Irrelevant to the DMCA claim. > It's a clone, and not a subtle one either. You are incorrect. Luanti is not a minecraft clone. It's more akin to Godot. I can import Minecraft assets into Godot, but it does not make Godot a copyright violator because of my actions. > To call this "Baseless" is hilarious. I would say it's justified.
- hnea3ekp5i 1mo agoConcise and useful, rare combo
- peri-cl 1mo agoI'm confused why the DMCA sender, Tracer AI, claims Vanuatu jurisdiction in the linked DMCA claim[0]. In separate recent claims, they have claimed US jurisdiction[1]. Is this possibly fraud? [0] https://lumendatabase.org/notices/93778051 https://lumendatabase.org/notices/93778051 [1] https://lumendatabase.org/notices/80387573 https://lumendatabase.org/notices/80387573
- tag2103 1mo agoThis is starting to establish a bad actor pattern.
- benjiro29 1mo agoThe problem with DMCA claims is that there are no consequences on misuse. It places all the work on the affected parties to prove their innocence. And suing the fake claim, is years of work and cost. This is why companies like Tracer.AI, ... get away with it. And how the system even gets misused to remove competitors or flat out blackmail. Even worse is when we have hosting companies in Europe, who simply take American DMCA claims for granted because investigating them costs time and money. The entire system is broken (by design?). /Edit: what is with the downvotes? Did i write something that is incorrect?
- hexator 1mo agoThere needs to be some sort of penalty for filing frivolous DMCA notices.
- ethin 1mo agoThere is. 17 U.S.C. 512(f) explicitly provides penalties. The problem is that this subsection is so rarely enforced it might as well not exist.
- duskwuff 1mo agoThe subsection requires that the person "knowingly materially misrepresent [...] that material or activity is infringing". Proving that the misrepresentation was made knowingly can be extremely difficult.
- culi 1mo agoYeah how are we ever gonna possibly prove that against an AI-powered tool. It's the same with why police so readily embraced bad AI tech. It's all about shifting the liability and diffusing individual responsibility
- Ohentis 1mo agoI mean there definitely are penalties, but they only exist if you actually go to court. DMCA essentially serves as game of chicken with no one actually wanting to go to court.
- somenameforme 1mo agoPenalties and counter-suits require intentional misrepresentation by the claimant, which is so painfully unprovable that the existence of penalties for malicious claims may as well not exist. I mean I suppose it can stop some rando guy from sending out claims for lols, but stuff like what Microsoft and a number of other corps do is extremely predictable and certainly malicious in nature.
- wafflemaker 1mo agoFollowing that logic, A server containing a replica of Darth Vader and Millennium Falcon should be reason enough to ban Minecraft everywhere.
- SwellJoe 1mo agoI know this isn't the point but this post is a master class in how to inform readers when you expect people from outside your community to read it. It explains what every element is, concisely but clearly. I now know exactly what Luanti is, who all the actors are in this conflict, and what the conflict is about. It clearly conveys the who, what, when, where and why of the situation. Also, DMCA is a damned mess, with the worst people in the world profiting from it and bullying small creators. There really should be better mechanisms to defend oneself from spurious claims.
- account42 27d agoMost of all, there need to be serious consequences for wanton DMCA abuse. As in lawyers disbarred and the company that hired them having to pay significant fines level.
- vorpalhex 1mo agoOne of the issues is that these aren't proper DMCA claims, instead Google/Youtube do a weird pseudo-DMCA thing where they just agree to take down your content and make you argue about it. But the DMCA allows immediate countersuit for false notice with damages. If Google/Youtube actually just forwarded strict DMCA notices and no longer did takedowns once you counter-claimed, you could sue the trolls and collect damages. At that point it's just a free lunch for some bored lawyers willing to publish public domain works, covers, etc that are protected.
- tough 1mo agoOne of the loopholes of the counter-claim, is that you accept whatever random jurisdiction of the original claimer as your jurisdiction, pulling you usually into US Sphere. It's a rigged game, its better not to engage with. the specific laws and consequences from ai: > Under 17 U.S.C. § 512(g)(3)(D), for a DMCA counter-notice to be legally valid, the person filing it must explicitly state in writing that they consent to the jurisdiction of a US Federal District Court. > If you live in the US, you consent to the federal court in your local district. > If you live outside the US, you must consent to the judicial district where the service provider (YouTube/Google) is located—which means the Northern District of California. > For a creator living in Europe, Asia, or South America, filing a counter-notice means signing a document that legally exposes them to a federal copyright lawsuit in California. Even if the creator is 100% in the right (e.g., they used public domain footage or have clear Fair Use), the sheer financial threat of having to hire a US federal defense attorney to fight a lawsuit in California is often enough to make them abandon the dispute.
- mortsnort 1mo agoThe game's own website describes it as an "open source alternative to Minecraft". Frivolous or not, MS has financial incentive to try to keep this game offline. I think this is going as intended from MS's POV.
- sterlind 1mo agoThis is the reason anti-SLAPP statutes exist in many jurisdictions.
- culi 1mo agoWhere do you read that description? Luanti has been around for many years (previously called Minetest). It's entirely built from scratch and a true FLOSS project. It's also not really a "game" so much as a "game engine" so it's not even a direct competitor to Mojang
- mortsnort 1mo agoThis is in the source article of this post: "While Luanti is popular as an open-source alternative to Minecraft (as its roots are in blocky sandbox games), it also lowers barriers to bringing creative ideas to life."
- astrobe_ 1mo agoI think you are hallucinating that quote.
- jmward01 1mo agoThe answer here is simple: If you submit a content strike you must provide a bond. If the content strike is reversed the bond is used to pay damages. The argument of 'people must review' is really just an argument of cost. The amount of content on the web makes it impractical to pay that upfront but a bond makes it manageable.
- applfanboysbgon 1mo agoThe answer is not simple. Your solution means small creators are even more disfavored than they already are by trolls stealing their work; trolls are already heavily favoured because small creators must dox themselves to file a claim, and now you're adding in payment burdens too. Any amount large enough for a corporation to care about at all will be too large for an independent creator. Now not only trolls but corporations have an incentive to steal from small creators, because small creators will not be able to defend their copyright, essentially granting it to the corp for free. The actual answer is to tear the entire fucking system down because it only exists to serve megacorporations, and start fresh, but there's nothing simple about that.
- andai 1mo agoJust make the bond a % of the entity's revenue. Like that (apocryphal?) story about how Nokia CEO got speeding ticket of several million dollars in Finland, due to the ticket being a % of income. Although I suppose a fixed % would limit how many claims you can file, which might be an issue for megacorporations who actually deal with lots of infringement -- although it would definitely reduce spurious claims. Hmm, maybe coming up with a good law is actually hard.
- yubblegum 1mo agoWondering if someone can bring a class action lawsuit against tracer.ai and/or their clients.
- 1317 1mo agooh this is minetest, i thought it was that residential proxy company at first glance
- cryptolobster 1mo agoThe situation is absurd. The fact that an AI bot from Tracer.AI filed a complaint without any real review just because Luanti uses a similar visual style to Minecraft, and Google just accepted it and removed the app is a problem of automation without oversight
- vezycash 1mo agoThey should file a monopoly lawsuit against Microsoft. They are weaponizing their size to take down a competitor.
- kdhskdh 1mo agoLuanti is available on Obtainium: https://apps.obtainium.imranr.dev/apps?categoryMode=inclusive&sort=popular&q=luanti https://apps.obtainium.imranr.dev/apps?categoryMode=inclusiv... The only sustainable solution to these kinds of problems is to diversify away from Google Play Store.
- account42 27d agoAlso F-Droid apparently: https://f-droid.org/en/packages/net.minetest.minetest/ https://f-droid.org/en/packages/net.minetest.minetest/ And installing it from there instead of the play store actually gives you some assurance that it isn't full of spyware or will be full of spyware in the next silent update.