Slashdot Mirror
Free Game Company Sues 14-Year-Old Over 'Cheats' Video -- Claiming DMCA Violation (bbc.co.uk)
Bizzeh shared this report from the BBC:
A mother has written a letter in defense of her 14-year-old son who is facing a lawsuit over video game cheats in the US. Caleb Rogers is one of two people facing legal action from gaming studio Epic Games for using cheat software to play the free game Fortnite. The studio says it has taken the step because the boy declined to remove a YouTube video he published which promoted how to use the software... "This company is in the process of attempting to sue a 14-year-old child," she wrote in the letter which has been shared online by the news site Torrentfreak.
Ms. Rogers added that she had not given her son parental consent to play the game as stated in its terms and conditions, and that as the game was free to play the studio could not claim loss of profit as a result of the cheats... In a statement given to the website Kotaku, Epic Games said the lawsuit was a result of Mr. Rogers "filing a DMCA counterclaim to a takedown notice on a YouTube video that exposed and promoted Fortnite Battle Royale cheats and exploits... Epic is not OK with ongoing cheating or copyright infringement from anyone at any age," it said.
Cory Doctorow counters that the 14-year-old "correctly asserted that there was no copyright infringement here. Videos that capture small snippets of a videogame do not violate that game creator's copyrights, because they are fair use..."
Ms. Rogers added that she had not given her son parental consent to play the game as stated in its terms and conditions, and that as the game was free to play the studio could not claim loss of profit as a result of the cheats... In a statement given to the website Kotaku, Epic Games said the lawsuit was a result of Mr. Rogers "filing a DMCA counterclaim to a takedown notice on a YouTube video that exposed and promoted Fortnite Battle Royale cheats and exploits... Epic is not OK with ongoing cheating or copyright infringement from anyone at any age," it said.
Cory Doctorow counters that the 14-year-old "correctly asserted that there was no copyright infringement here. Videos that capture small snippets of a videogame do not violate that game creator's copyrights, because they are fair use..."
Is worse than Hitler.
The attorneys for Epic games just filed a document with the court saying they did not know he was 14.
Fast Federal Court and I.T.C. updates
Not sure if it went anywhere, but Blizzard was trying to sue a cheat producer a while back. Basically, the logic was "the EULA is a license to use this copyrighted work, if you break the EULA then you no longer have a license, thus cheaters are pirates". So making a video on how to cheat could very well be some kind of contributory copyright infringement. Not saying I agree with it or that it's not an overreaction, but I'm certainly not going to rush to defend an avowed cheater, 14 y/o or otherwise.
To add one more important detail to this rant, the PVE edition of the game in question - Fortnite - costs 150 Dollars to buy: https://www.epicgames.com/fort... So much for "free to play". No wonder young kids addicted to "achieving something" in these games are looking for ways to cheat.
Why did the chicken cross the road? Because Elon Musk put an AI chip in its head.
The studio is suing b/c the kid refused to comply with their DMCA notice. While there is a legitimate debate over whether the DMCA notice was justified, the age (or health, political views, sexual preference, etc) of the alleged defender is not an issue.
Depends on contract law. I some places a person under a certain age cannot enter into a legal contract and thus any language in an EULA that prohibits publishing cheat codes might be unenforceable since no contract existed. Even if it was, snippets would be fair use and not a copyright violation. My guess they want dto scare the kid but just experienced an epic fail.
I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
Instead of legal action they should taking coding action to prevent these sorts of abuses from being possible...
I learnt as a kid if you don't want someone to take something don't leave it where it can be taken... leave your bike on the street it will be stolen... write shitty code it will be hacked..
PSA on behalf of "the internet"...
Thank the kid and close the holes....
This is a link to his video talking about the Lawsuit. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
PlanetVulkan.com
Many moons ago, software industry lobbyists went to court in the U.S. claiming that software "cannot be bought or owned" by the paying customer. They claimed that the buyer can only attain a "limited LICENSE to USE a software product under CERTAIN conditions". The legal argument behind the whole LICENSE aspect was that because CODE is copied from one component in a computer to another during use - from floppy disk to RAM to CPU for example - the software user is essentially making a COPY of the software just by running it on a computer, and thus needs a LICENSE to do so. Somehow this resulted in today's EULAs, where, basically, the software manufacturer has all the RIGHTS in the world, and the paying software buyer has does not even - legally - OWN the copy of the software he or she paid hard cash for.
Why did the chicken cross the road? Because Elon Musk put an AI chip in its head.
The game costs $40 to buy.
There is a $150 edition, but that's actually THREE copies of the game, plus some other crapola.
If they don't like either the product/service or the price and terms under which it is being offered, then they shouldn't play it. Find another product or work on their own. Is that so hard to understand? It's not like Epic has a monopoly on some basic platform that everyone uses.
>>> Along with the thousands of cookie cutter titles that look like they belong in the 90's Those titles were actually INNOVATIVE in the 1990s. The mechanics were new. The graphics and sound were new. Today's "cookie cutter" copies are trying to sell old game concepts to new teens and tweens who were not around in the 1990s and thus often do not realize that they are being sold an OLD car posing as a NEW car. Sad.
Why did the chicken cross the road? Because Elon Musk put an AI chip in its head.
Except that kids under the age of 18 are not adults often DO NOT have the good sense to recognize that they are being sold shit in a nice package. These games are essentially software TOYS sold to kids who pay for those toys with their parents' money.
Why did the chicken cross the road? Because Elon Musk put an AI chip in its head.
Calling things 'Hitler' or 'nazi' that you do not like is in fashion. As is using it to mock those who use it as a fashion statement it is fashionable. They do not think through the idea of what Hitler was and the Nazi party he created. They think if they can label someone with that stain they can devalue what they have to say. They really do not understand they devalue the lesson from WW2 with cheap talk and sweeping generalizations.
Would play a game you could get sued for. Yeah, yeah. Don't cheat. But whose to say they won't Sue you anyway?
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
You work for the video game industry, don't you, AC? ;-)
Why did the chicken cross the road? Because Elon Musk put an AI chip in its head.
Of course the age is part of the issue. You cannot expect a child to read and understand a takedown notice.
Except that the kid effectively filed a counterclaim to the takedown notice. How could he have done that if he didn't understand it? He also posted a Youtube video where he discusses the case, and seems to have a pretty solid understanding of what is going on.
I hope he wins, but his age does not reduce the legitimacy of Epic's lawsuit. The law applies to everyone.
Also, why is an American legal case about an American law only being reported on by a British website?
If it were legal, then I myself could use the same logic copyright holders use, right?
So when I get hired by a couple of poor sods who pay me with money that they worked for, I can then make copies of that money, and "pay" some morons with those mere copies (aka fraud|theft|...), who, in return, must give me real actual goods, where they had to actually work for every single good. And I will have a law forbidding anyone else from making copies of that specific money (aka artificial scarcity). If anyone does it anyway, will I harass him with letters demanding outrageous amounts of goods and work (aka racketeering), and I'll call him a sea-faring rapist thug in large public advertisements that children can see.
Err, wait, I meant:
So when I hire a couple of poor sods to work for me, and create some information (data/software), I can then make copies of that information, and "sell" those mere copies to some morons (aka fraud|theft|...), who, in return, must give me real actual money, where they had to actually work for every single dollar bill. And I will have a law forbidding anyone else from making copies of that specific information (aka artificial scarcity). If anyone does it anyway, will I harass him with letters demanding outrageous amounts of money (aka racketeering), and I'll call him a sea-faring rapist thug in large public advertisements that children can see.
The game engine itself actually lets you build just about any game mechanic you can write out in code. But the bar of what constitutes "clever game mechanics" has been set so low in recent years by trashy AAA games that repeat 90s crap over and over again that these "millenial developers" probably have no clue that BETTER MECHANICS are actually possible. What game can you show me in 2017 that has mechanics so new and brilliant that young developers can actually learn from the mechanics?
Why did the chicken cross the road? Because Elon Musk put an AI chip in its head.
The lawsuit itself is actually a result of a huge problem with YouTube's DMCA takedown system.
Youtube tries to stay out of taking sides itself in any DMCA claim, to avoid liability. Here's what happens when you use the DMCA takedown system on YouTube, which I have done so myself to remove clear infringements using my content:
You are someone who thinks there is an infringing video on youtube. You submit a DMCA takedown claim via an automated interface on YouTube.
If the claim is not responded to, the video in question is taken down. HOWEVER, if the recipient of the takedown claim files a counterclaim, the ONLY way you can counter that counter claim is to provide YouTube with evidence that you have taken legal action against the recipient, i.e. FILED A LAWSUIT.
So basically, for little guys like me with no money for legal action, you are basically up a creek. Most of the time when I file a takedown notice for clear infringement (someone just re-uploaded my video in its entirety) it's gone and doesn't come back. But one time someone decided to submit a counter claim making arguments for fair use that would assuredly fail in a court of law, but youtube again will not take sides and will leave the video up unless I provide evidence to YouTube that I have taken legal action against the counter-claimer.
In this case, since the people who submitted the takedown notice are a company with lawyer power, they CAN start a legal claim and basically MUST do so to get youtube to take down the video when the video's owner refuses to do it themselves.
There is no decision making or moderation on the part of YouTube. They just pass the buck.
Now in this case, I would be on the side of the defendant, because it appears to be a case of fair use, as is any footage of videogame play, companies trying to get you to agree to a dubious license when playing the game nonwithstanding.
But YouTube's way of handling these situations has helped bring this lawsuit upon the defendent. There is further mediation option or decision making on the part of YouTube. If you are a little guy who owns content that has been legitimately bootlegged you are screwed. If you are a big guy who owns content you have to sue. there is no moderation via youtube.
From what I gather they sued only because he filed a counter notice. I think they shouldn't have because fair use doctrine does cover such cases: he was basically showing snippets of original work for the purpose of commentary. Even if it infringes EULA, it doesn't automatically become infringement of copyright.
It would be trivial for the 14 year old to argue commentary, crticism or educational use in this case, most likely the last.
I like Fortnite, it's very much like PUBG. I don't like cheaters. If this causes concern for others so be it, maybe they will stop.
That said I've not seen any cheats/cheating in Fortnite. I shoot someone and they kill me - I'm able to see the damage I inflicted as I become a spectator at that point. And always satisfied it being a good kill.
Kids manage to do a LOT of things without understanding the implications. That's why they have a special status in legal matters.
There would be a good case for nullifying the notice (not sent to parent/guardian), the counternotice (not filed by legally competent person) and the lawsuit (incorrectly filed, arising from nullified notice and counternotice).
This is the sort of confusion that happens when law degenerates to lobbing grenades over the wall rather than first engaging with the other party and then getting the courts involved only when that fails.
As for the rest, they may be within their legal rights to sue the parent (+/- the null documents) but that doesn't make it morally right or socially acceptable.
Do I need to duck? I really can't understand why there would be a big uproar or even a little growl about video game cheats. Cheating in elections or cheating your spouse, now those to me are SERIOUS matters. Video game cheats? Meh. Note: I don't like athletes who cheat using performance-enhancing drugs not because they cheat but because they promote the pop-inject idea that there's a chemical compound that can fix any of life's problems. I don't mind an athlete who can cheat without drugs, since I considering cheating to be an art form.
The law does not apply to everyone. Now I don't know how it works in the UK but where I live you cannot take a 14-year old to court no matter what they do. This is not to say there children below the age of 15 can do what ever they like without consequences but they cannot be tried in a court of law (or a civil court).
One of the key elements of this case that people seem to be overlooking is that this kid registered an account (supposedly without the required parental consent), cheated in the game and got banned. Instead of stopping, he did it again and got banned again. He then did it again... and again... and again. He got banned 14 times (according to Epic Games; the kid admits to being banned, but says 'it was like 5 or 10 times'). It is clear he knew what he was doing was wrong, and he kept on doing it.
This kid also made multiple video streams that showed people how to perform the cheats as well as showing the cheats in action. This is the part that raised the DMCA claims, as Epic Games claimed that the cheat videos were an unauthorized derivative works. The kid's response was to file counterclaims (although it is clear from his lawsuit response video he has no clue what filing a counterclaim actually meant). He even created a second YouTube account to get around claims/bans. Again, it is clear he knew that he was doing something wrong, but kept on doing it. This left Epic Games with no other legal alternative but to sue.
The letter from the kid's mother doesn't even try to deny the claims from Epic Games, and she even admits he was cheating. Her defense boils down to "he was 14 years old so the rules don't apply". While the law states he cannot enter into a contract, that does not mean he cannot be legally liable for his actions. On top of this it is clear that the mother also has a legal responsibility here. She says she didn't consent to him installing the game, but that does not absolve her of the responsibilities for policing her son's actions. It is very clear from the kid's response videos he has absolutely no understanding of the repercussions of his actions and is just relying on mommy to leap to his defense.
I, respectfully, disagree with Cory Doctrow here that there is a fair use claim. If the kid's mother is to be believed (that she didn't give consent) then the kid was running the game in violation of the EULA and using false accounts in violation of TOS, meaning the game footage was illegitimate. He was also running cheats on the game, making the videos unauthorized derivative works. This is something very different from a 'Let's Play' video.
While I normally hate DMCA cases, there is very clear evidence for the kid's utter disregard for the rules (especially if you watch his videos in response to the lawsuit), so I think he (and his mother) deserve to have a lesson. I doubt the letter to the Judge will be very persuasive here. It is not any kind of formal Motion to Dismiss the case, and many judges don't like it when people try to sidestep process.
signed into law by a Democrat!
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
This kid puts up a video showing people how to use cheating software. Cheating software has been previously established to be a copyright circumvention tool, thus the kid was clearly committing secondary copyright infringement.
Doctorow could have pointed out that this was dumb, that this was another example of why the DMCA is bad, but instead he claims that there was no copyright infringement going on and talks a lot about how the kid is fourteen years old (as though that were important). He also makes much ado about the lawsuit - what does he expect Epic to do here? A lawsuit is the correct and appropriate legal remedy.
It would seem to me that the money spent paying their lawyers might have been better spent building anti cheat methods. Or better had been spent doing it from the start in the first place...
No; it's not because of "YouTube's DMCA takedown system," it's because the law is written with exact steps that are to be taken when a notice, and counter-notice, is filed. Youtube is simply following how the law tells them to do things.
https://www.plagiarismtoday.co...
Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
But you don't have to buy the PvE version to access the PvP version. You technically download them both, I think, but the game's logic doesn't let you access vanilla Fortnite, just Battle Royale.
So it is, in fact, free to play.
The world moves for love. It kneels before it in awe.
I kind of like that copyright claims are resolved by the courts, not Google.
Your ad here. Ask me how!
there is no moderation via youtube.
Nor should there be. The DMCA has basic requirements they have to follow in order to not be subject to liability. It does not require them to provide a pro bono dispute moderation service to the millions of youtube content producers.
When you file a DMCA takedown notice, you are claiming a violation of civil law. The remedy for that is a lawsuit. If it's not worth the time and money to you, why bother in the first place?
Part of me wonders if the CFAA is applicable in these kind of situations.
Because globalism.
People in the UK even though their great empire may be less ignorant ran people in the US I suppose if this surprise you.
Then again why is British coverage of it on an American ... whatever you want to call this site nowadays?
Dude, in the US there are states where 12 year olds can get executed for murder. ...
Other states prosecute 10 year old boys for sexual assault when they help their 8 year old sister to pee.
The ten year old in that case was brought into court with chains at the feet and hands cuffed to his back
The USA is the country of absurdities, most specially in regards to laws or court rulings.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
Humanity is not OK with suing children at any age.
Deal with cheating the way it's meant to be done, and if you really care about the public image of your company, drop that lawsuit already, instead of making up supposedly unwritten, omertà-like rules of business life in order to justify your antisocial behaviour. DMCA is not a tool for businesses to suppress things they don't like.
Someone should introduce the millenials to a SNES emulator and a stash of ROMs. Just sayin'.
-=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
That's Epic MegaGames.
You know, the ones that have been around since the 1990s. Jazz Jackrabbit, anyone? Unreal Tournament. Gears of War.
They release one free-to-play title and suddenly they're a "Free Game Company"?
"Slow Down Cowboy! It's been 58 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment" -- slashdot, driving users away.
I knew about this the other day from reporting that's in the US.
The copyright part is about the cheat, it's using code injection, something the courts have already nailed people for. The kid has very little chance of winning as there is precedence, and it's against him.
It's true I hate the cheaters, but I also don't think altering anything in memory of your own computer is a copyright violation, but the courts have declared that it is, so it's kind of not a fair use since it involves breaking the law as it is currently interpreted.
(ianal)
Epic is behaving with epic stupidity. They've just created a public relations nightmare. Because suing a member of their primary demographic just makes so much goddamned sense ....
Yes it does. Back in 1998 two boys (age 5 and 7) where determined by police to have murdered a 4 year old boy. Since they where both under the legal age or 15 the case was never tried in a court of law. Which in itself perhaps was not good considering that later research have pointed to them being completely innocent (and a court case might have been able to find that out).
I have never understood why the US have been so angry towards Iran and other such hard core sharia countries when they obviously share a lot beliefs. Or perhaps it's that very thing that creates the conflict.
What Epic did is a misuse of the dmca, and the kid is right to fight it. Epic does not own the copyright to the video nor the cheat app. I dislike cheat apps immensely but I dislike more that Epic is itself cheating by abusing their position in misusing and abusing the dmca.
You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
The millenials were born between the early 80's and the late 90's, so many of us already played the SNES and the Megadrive back when they were the hottest thing on the streets.
Doesn't that apply to 99%? ;)
"Trump!!", the new Godwin.