Looks like japan is taking some footsteps and some inspirations on how the US was originally planned (and scrapped or canceled) their anti-piracy enforcement:
Site blocking -> SOPA. Because many websites use HTTPS, blocking individual pages is impossible, you can only have the entire site fully accessible or not at all. Because of this, and how the internet works with uploading content, the internet would've became a dead zone if this passes, effectively treating all sites that let you upload stuff the same as pirate sites, since it is possible to upload infringing content anywhere.
Warning messages -> Copyright Alert System/Six strikes program. People feared about a lack of due process system: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Alert_System .
I'ts like a difficult decision for a store to have surveillance cameras for the bathrooms as crooks use those as an escape for shoplifting.
It's one of those who tries to stretch copyright beyond limits.
Take for example, DRM, like this site (not just right-clicks, but pressing the scroll wheel also fires the message): https://dreamlandresort.com
Its copyright notes page mention “any content”, yeah, ANY content, even the home page. Yes, most of these types of measures used on a website can easily be circumvented by disabling javascript, certain plugins or just accessing the page's source code.
It just represents how overzealous these types of people are, greedy for copyright use restriction.
They don't want you to bypass paying a higher amount...legally.
They've been trying to stop reuse of their books via access code before they made this decision:
“Some textbook companies have countered this by encouraging teachers to assign homework that must be done on the publisher's website. Students with a new textbook can use the pass code in the book to register on the site; otherwise they must pay the publisher to access the website and complete assigned homework.” - wikipedia's article on textbook
Uh huh, same goes with game companies trying to make 3rd party used copy (second hand sales) to be treated the same as piracy:
The “online pass” is equivalent to the “pass code” used by textbooks. Don't even get me started on microtransactions designed to have items be “consumables” (1-time use only) like how NBA2K18's cosmetic for haircut was implemented.
And the same goes with printer inks, companies want you to use their brand only and results in a monopoly (vendor lock in).
Companies have found a way around the first sale doctrine, thanks to how the law is too slow to advance in the digital age, and sees this exploitation as a gateway towards anti-consumerism. Copyright (most software and digital stuff are prone to favoring copyright holders over the users), and lootboxes (the law is so used to slot machines and casinos that it had forgotten on digital gambling) are two prime examples companies exploit since the laws are mostly place such consumer-benefits on physical stuff.
You'd know companies are anti consumer when they have such practices they never admit this practice was unethical, using fake excuses to sound positive and not telling about their practices, like when printer companies were caught for deliberately wasting colored inks when the user want only black and white and requiring users to buy inks they don't need: https://youtu.be/AHX6tHdQGiQ?t=463 (watch from 7:43 to 8:13) and the excuse was to give it a “purer black” appearance (I mean really), to this one that marks the cherry on top of the cake: EA's “surprise mechanics”, in front of the UK parliment, for being asked about their microtransaction business model.
In their eyes, companies seeing consumers using second hand sales, bypassing DRM for non-infringing purposes, buying alternative products they don't like, as a threat to their business, despite that this is a natural right for consumers to save money.
Very shocked to see that despite being a government agency, they don't check, this is a vulnerability for anonymous works to be “stolen” by a fraudster.
“Twitter gets DMCA notices claiming infringement on the part of a rather marquis account for the Houston Rockets, does whatever review of the tweets in question it does, and then shuts down the account, ostensibly over the volume of tweets contained in the DMCA notice. In case it isn't obvious: that's crazy. Think of all the speech that got shut down that wasn't infringing when that occurred. And, yes, you might not be terribly concerned with the speech emanating from the account of an NBA team, but its more than 2 million followers did.”
Many butthurt users that abuse the DMCA use defamation claims as an attempt to (indirectly) say that “this is insulting and it should be illegal”, which is babyish. Immernant uprising (the Slaughtering Grounds dev that attacked Jim Sterling), Derek Savage (a person who developed Cool Cat Saves the kids attacked IHE until he apologizes) are just two examples. Seeing SLAPP as a gateway, this is a real concern.
The thing is, defamation is the act of making false statements to ruin someone else's reputation. If it's truthful, it's not defamation as often the person making such claims is the one who is embarrassed himself for doing it.
Imagine this: Alex Thomas Mauer, that person goes after videos containing not just music, but also critics calling him out for false DMCA'ing such videos. Alex Thomas Mauer couldn't successfully claim that those are defamation because he is the one doing bullshit to youtube, so he is to blame.
Reporting someone's actions isn't defamation. Techdirt, you deserve my donation, the EFF is constantly at war to defend freedom of speech (and other things).
Enforcing mandatory updates like this is worse than what happened to sony in 2005-2007 (known as the “Sony Rootkit”). Looking at the consumer complaints on Amazon:
by Brendan Ribera:
“4. You must install any and all updates, or else lose the music on your computer. The EULA immediately terminates if you fail to install any update. No more holding out on those hobble-ware downgrades masquerading as updates.”
Agreed, using scare tactics and such. Mostly what I'm saying on my last lines is those made by individuals. Childish and paranoid users. On the trolls side, It is concerning especially the “CASE Act”.
It's quite rare but inconvenient to see users act like this.
While hotlinking or direct linking is nobody wants because of bandwith sapping, but just banning linking to their work for copyright is absurd. I've seen some places like gamefaqs on tutorials/guides made by overzelous users saying such things:
“do not even link to my work without my permission”
Then why upload your work to the site then? Everything has a URL on them, not to mention, the internet is a public place where people can share things by pointing to where it is, which linking is essentially was. Just because people point to your work does not mean it is stolen and copyright infringement. Again, butthurt users trying to enforce restrictions that copyright cannot do, especially fair use.
I would agree if it isn't copyright-related, like a lawsuit for sapping their bandwith. If you are trying to make that illegal, then try ban ad-blockers, because simply visiting a site also saps bandwith, both the HTML and everything associated with it, not just the image.
I really hope that vigilante-ware is illegal, not just piracy
Weaponizing DRM to spy on users is not how you enforce copyright. Anti-piracy, more like anti-privacy. I don't care if the DRM is 100% false positive free or not, anytime there is an exploit that real hackers use, they will abuse it. Just to warn you, hackers can do *anything*, and often rely on exploits and how sensitive the DRM is. Say a hacker can do stuff that can trigger the DRM and reroute the personal information to the hackers.
Even if that wasn't possible, no consumer would like (over the) maximum surveillance on their system under the excuse of “oh just in case if someone pirates our things”. Really? That is like having security cameras hidden in the bathroom (even inside the toilet) for people doing anything suspicious.
Vigilante-ware should be illegal and shouldn't be used at all. I'm not pro-piracy, I'm saying maximum surveillance and hidden methods to enforce copyright without being officially disclosed should be abolished.
This user is absolutely a criminal. I mean, with the crimes in 2016, why did imagos softworks and other people would hire this person? If Nintendo found this out when he tries to fill out a job application, would Nintendo immediately reject this person as a worker of Nintendo?
His full name is Alex Thomas Mauer, said in the legal document. Email: Alexmauermusic@gmail.com, as found on kiwifarms. This user doesn't deserve having those information private anymore. SOPA was the tip of the iceberg on how destructive copyright is in general (so fuck off, MPAA, RIAA and other big corporations). Its now to the point where it is used for non-copyright-related subjects as to serve inconveniences or excuses to all users of protected works. An example of that was when a user posted a picture of Alex mauer on youtube that got nuked, assuming to keep his identity hidden rather than using copyright as if he is making money off of it. It went from a simple "no unauthorized copies" to "do not even mention a company name, a person's name, etc, also no criticisms".
The ONLY GOOD thing about this is that we learned that at least we know how abusive copyright really is. Useful in case MPAA tries to create another SOPA clone under a different name in the future.
It should've called anti-consumer, not anti-piracy. Somebody who develop this DRM needs to be fired AND the next time they implement another DRM, they should test it.
This is what anti-piracy fails to live up to its name...
On the post: Oops: Japan Anti-Piracy Proposals Probably Violate Its Constitution
Anti-piracy leads to anti-privacy
Looks like japan is taking some footsteps and some inspirations on how the US was originally planned (and scrapped or canceled) their anti-piracy enforcement:
Site blocking -> SOPA. Because many websites use HTTPS, blocking individual pages is impossible, you can only have the entire site fully accessible or not at all. Because of this, and how the internet works with uploading content, the internet would've became a dead zone if this passes, effectively treating all sites that let you upload stuff the same as pirate sites, since it is possible to upload infringing content anywhere.
Warning messages -> Copyright Alert System/Six strikes program. People feared about a lack of due process system: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Alert_System .
I'ts like a difficult decision for a store to have surveillance cameras for the bathrooms as crooks use those as an escape for shoplifting.
On the post: Elsevier Says It's Infringing To Link To Sci-Hub; Hypocrite Elsevier Links To Sci-Hub All The Time
It's one of those who tries to stretch copyright beyond limits.
Take for example, DRM, like this site (not just right-clicks, but pressing the scroll wheel also fires the message): https://dreamlandresort.com
Its copyright notes page mention “any content”, yeah, ANY content, even the home page. Yes, most of these types of measures used on a website can easily be circumvented by disabling javascript, certain plugins or just accessing the page's source code.
It just represents how overzealous these types of people are, greedy for copyright use restriction.
On the post: The Death Of Ownership: Educational Publishing Giant Pearson To Do Away With Print Textbooks (That Can Be Resold)
They don't want you to bypass paying a higher amount...legally.
They've been trying to stop reuse of their books via access code before they made this decision:
“Some textbook companies have countered this by encouraging teachers to assign homework that must be done on the publisher's website. Students with a new textbook can use the pass code in the book to register on the site; otherwise they must pay the publisher to access the website and complete assigned homework.” - wikipedia's article on textbook
Uh huh, same goes with game companies trying to make 3rd party used copy (second hand sales) to be treated the same as piracy:
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120420/06310918579/video-game-developers-continue-to-ignorantly -attack-used-game-sales.shtml
https://youtu.be/ecpkOvx4FVY?t=575
The “online pass” is equivalent to the “pass code” used by textbooks. Don't even get me started on microtransactions designed to have items be “consumables” (1-time use only) like how NBA2K18's cosmetic for haircut was implemented.
And the same goes with printer inks, companies want you to use their brand only and results in a monopoly (vendor lock in).
Companies have found a way around the first sale doctrine, thanks to how the law is too slow to advance in the digital age, and sees this exploitation as a gateway towards anti-consumerism. Copyright (most software and digital stuff are prone to favoring copyright holders over the users), and lootboxes (the law is so used to slot machines and casinos that it had forgotten on digital gambling) are two prime examples companies exploit since the laws are mostly place such consumer-benefits on physical stuff.
You'd know companies are anti consumer when they have such practices they never admit this practice was unethical, using fake excuses to sound positive and not telling about their practices, like when printer companies were caught for deliberately wasting colored inks when the user want only black and white and requiring users to buy inks they don't need: https://youtu.be/AHX6tHdQGiQ?t=463 (watch from 7:43 to 8:13) and the excuse was to give it a “purer black” appearance (I mean really), to this one that marks the cherry on top of the cake: EA's “surprise mechanics”, in front of the UK parliment, for being asked about their microtransaction business model.
In their eyes, companies seeing consumers using second hand sales, bypassing DRM for non-infringing purposes, buying alternative products they don't like, as a threat to their business, despite that this is a natural right for consumers to save money.
On the post: Chinese Border Agents Now Installing Malware On Foreigners' Cellphones
They have done it again
Remember IJOP (see here: https://www.hrw.org/report/2019/05/01/chinas-algorithms-repression/reverse-engineering-xinjiang-poli ce-mass-surveillance )? It stands for Integrated Joint Operations Platform. It was a chinese spyware app for any muslims and such forigners entering china to be required to have this surveillance camera installed on your phone.
On the post: Copyright Office Weighs In After Wannabe Satoshi Craig Wright Registers Copyright On Original Bitcoin Paper
This can lead to plagerism.
Very shocked to see that despite being a government agency, they don't check, this is a vulnerability for anonymous works to be “stolen” by a fraudster.
On the post: Several Pro And College Sports Teams Suspended From Twitter Over Mystery DMCA Notices
Widespread takedowns
“Twitter gets DMCA notices claiming infringement on the part of a rather marquis account for the Houston Rockets, does whatever review of the tweets in question it does, and then shuts down the account, ostensibly over the volume of tweets contained in the DMCA notice. In case it isn't obvious: that's crazy. Think of all the speech that got shut down that wasn't infringing when that occurred. And, yes, you might not be terribly concerned with the speech emanating from the account of an NBA team, but its more than 2 million followers did.”
Sounds like Warner Bros (https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/09/eff-wins-release-warner-bros-documents) and Nintendo's move that they would rather nuke instead of pointing their crosshairs to ONLY things they enforce against unauthorized distributions (that they have their rights to).
That, combined with not all sites publish DMCA takedown notices, very common that the takedown is to only be notified to the poster.
I believed that all take down notices should have a public record.
On the post: Our Legal Dispute With Shiva Ayyadurai Is Now Over
This is shocking
Many butthurt users that abuse the DMCA use defamation claims as an attempt to (indirectly) say that “this is insulting and it should be illegal”, which is babyish. Immernant uprising (the Slaughtering Grounds dev that attacked Jim Sterling), Derek Savage (a person who developed Cool Cat Saves the kids attacked IHE until he apologizes) are just two examples. Seeing SLAPP as a gateway, this is a real concern.
The thing is, defamation is the act of making false statements to ruin someone else's reputation. If it's truthful, it's not defamation as often the person making such claims is the one who is embarrassed himself for doing it.
Imagine this: Alex Thomas Mauer, that person goes after videos containing not just music, but also critics calling him out for false DMCA'ing such videos. Alex Thomas Mauer couldn't successfully claim that those are defamation because he is the one doing bullshit to youtube, so he is to blame.
Reporting someone's actions isn't defamation. Techdirt, you deserve my donation, the EFF is constantly at war to defend freedom of speech (and other things).
On the post: Adobe Warns Users Someone Else Might Sue Them For Using Old Versions Of Photoshop
Re: That's messed up
Thank god for the internet archive: https://web.archive.org/web/20051103052303/http://www.sysinternals.com/blog/sony-eula.htm
On the post: Adobe Warns Users Someone Else Might Sue Them For Using Old Versions Of Photoshop
That's messed up
Enforcing mandatory updates like this is worse than what happened to sony in 2005-2007 (known as the “Sony Rootkit”). Looking at the consumer complaints on Amazon:
by Brendan Ribera:
“4. You must install any and all updates, or else lose the music on your computer. The EULA immediately terminates if you fail to install any update. No more holding out on those hobble-ware downgrades masquerading as updates.”
and the info about the EULA on the EFF: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2005/11/now-legalese-rootkit-sony-bmgs-eula
So you are flagged as a pirate for simply using outdated software.
On the post: Higbee Tries To Shake Down Forum For Deep Linked Photograph
Re: trolls
Agreed, using scare tactics and such. Mostly what I'm saying on my last lines is those made by individuals. Childish and paranoid users. On the trolls side, It is concerning especially the “CASE Act”.
On the post: Higbee Tries To Shake Down Forum For Deep Linked Photograph
Re: It's quite rare but inconvenient to see users act like this.
I mean linking to THEIR WORK uploaded BY THEM, not linking to content copied by “pirates” or theives.
On the post: Higbee Tries To Shake Down Forum For Deep Linked Photograph
It's quite rare but inconvenient to see users act like this.
While hotlinking or direct linking is nobody wants because of bandwith sapping, but just banning linking to their work for copyright is absurd. I've seen some places like gamefaqs on tutorials/guides made by overzelous users saying such things:
“do not even link to my work without my permission”
Then why upload your work to the site then? Everything has a URL on them, not to mention, the internet is a public place where people can share things by pointing to where it is, which linking is essentially was. Just because people point to your work does not mean it is stolen and copyright infringement. Again, butthurt users trying to enforce restrictions that copyright cannot do, especially fair use.
I would agree if it isn't copyright-related, like a lawsuit for sapping their bandwith. If you are trying to make that illegal, then try ban ad-blockers, because simply visiting a site also saps bandwith, both the HTML and everything associated with it, not just the image.
On the post: Game Studio Found To Install Malware DRM On Customers' Machines, Defends Itself, Then Apologizes
I really hope that vigilante-ware is illegal, not just piracy
Even if that wasn't possible, no consumer would like (over the) maximum surveillance on their system under the excuse of “oh just in case if someone pirates our things”. Really? That is like having security cameras hidden in the bathroom (even inside the toilet) for people doing anything suspicious.
Vigilante-ware should be illegal and shouldn't be used at all. I'm not pro-piracy, I'm saying maximum surveillance and hidden methods to enforce copyright without being officially disclosed should be abolished.
On the post: Ecuador Continues To Use US Copyright Law To Censor Critics
Ares Rights? More like Arse Rights
On the post: Game Music Composer Goes On DMCA Blitz Against Innocent YouTubers Over Contract Dispute With Game Publisher
She have done more than just DMCA abuse
This user is absolutely a criminal. I mean, with the crimes in 2016, why did imagos softworks and other people would hire this person? If Nintendo found this out when he tries to fill out a job application, would Nintendo immediately reject this person as a worker of Nintendo?
His full name is Alex Thomas Mauer, said in the legal document. Email: Alexmauermusic@gmail.com, as found on kiwifarms. This user doesn't deserve having those information private anymore. SOPA was the tip of the iceberg on how destructive copyright is in general (so fuck off, MPAA, RIAA and other big corporations). Its now to the point where it is used for non-copyright-related subjects as to serve inconveniences or excuses to all users of protected works. An example of that was when a user posted a picture of Alex mauer on youtube that got nuked, assuming to keep his identity hidden rather than using copyright as if he is making money off of it. It went from a simple "no unauthorized copies" to "do not even mention a company name, a person's name, etc, also no criticisms".
The ONLY GOOD thing about this is that we learned that at least we know how abusive copyright really is. Useful in case MPAA tries to create another SOPA clone under a different name in the future.
On the post: Apple Adds HDCP To New Laptops; Piracy Continues, Legit Users Get Annoyed
Why is this called anti-piracy?
This is what anti-piracy fails to live up to its name...
Next >>