Vancouver Rioters Trying To Abuse Copyright To Avoid Being Identified, Which Only Helps Identify Them
from the admission-of-guilt dept
IshmaelDS was the first of a few of you to submit variations on this story of how some of those involved in the Vancouver riots are trying to stymie attempts by people to identify who they are through the abuse of copyright law. Some folks have set up sites with pictures and videos from the riots, trying to crowdsource the identity of people involved. However, some of those in the videos are making bogus copyright claims to get the content taken down:"What criminals are now doing is they're claiming that they have copyright notice, or they're the copyright holder of the video because they appear in the video. So YouTube has been taking down videos in the last couple of days."Of course, this is doubly stupid. Not only is it an abuse of copyright law, but it is basically people identifying themselves in the video, since they have to give their name to YouTube, and YouTube passes that info along:
Texeria uploaded the video on behalf of a friend. He says if criminals were hoping they might be able to hide by making copyright claims they're actually making themselves easier to find because YouTube notifies whoever uploaded the video.
"Basically what it says is, this person, and it lists his name, complained and so I actually have the personal information of the people complaining, and I will then be turning that info over to the police as well."
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Mr. B.R. Bank Robber: Yeah, my business models is pretty simple: I steal money from banks and try not to get caught. It's a real no brainer.
But major financial institutions complained about the patent saying that there is already loads of prior art:
Scumbag-uh-Economist: Did you see all those economic meltdowns in the past few years? We've been doing this for ages and getting away with it, so there's plenty of prior art. The USPTO should carefully consider this, because this patent could ruin an entire industry that is based around generating money out of doing absolutely nothing other than move other people's money around - the very basis of our economy!
Stay tuned for more developments.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Economists had NOTHING to do with the meltdown. It was analysts and investors practicing varying amounts of deceit and doublethink.
Economists are all about modelling, it's much more abstract. They don't get to play with actual money (unless they start a highly succesful blog, then mansions, lamborghinis and lingerie models).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So the agenda of encouraging hatred towards copyright must be on the right path, correct?
Yea. Oh, and everything should be free. Like, go make me a sandwich. And stop complaining about it. If you don't like working on a sandwich that I want to consume right now, then clearly you have a problem with your business model. ok, fine.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
2) My business model doesn't involve making sandwich's. So your demands seem strangely out of place. Unless... are you a Troll sir (or madam as the case may be)?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl122.html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
At least get on the topic.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Abuse of copyright law? yes. Stupid? I see no reason to assume so... more info required.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
As an aside - just curious - is there a legal issue with singling out some people for a more thorough vetting than others based on a name? I mean, what constitutes a fake name is somewhat subjective, isn't it? And some people are going to take offence if their real name triggers a you-must-be-joking type response. Even if it's not a genuine concern, you've still gotta watch the legal trolls, right? Won't somebody please think of Randy Baumgardner!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sci-Fi Future!
And, given the really-o truly-o inability of DRM to work perfectly, it would enable some lower class people, who bear a weird, not-always-humanly-discernable resemblance to a Rightsholder, to almost magically disappear from images. Including Police Cameras. Which would lead a small fraction of them, the Ghosts in the Machine, to live a life of crime.
There, great book plot idea, yours for free!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Sci-Fi Future!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[citation needed]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
be careful
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Out of curiosity
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
triply stupid
[ link to this | view in chronology ]