I think that's the negative part of it. Scanning user's DNS and doing something with it is a massive red flag today in post-Snowden world. Even though you told us what you're doing with it, as a US based company, we know that US companies that harvest data are basically nothing but NSA fronts when it comes to spying and your trustworthiness in things like "scanning user's machine for private data" is in negative by default in today's world and no there's nothing you or us can do about it other than start financing people who would be against it into US legislative and executive branch. It's not even up to you as CEO - as a big company you have NSA moles who will do it without you ever knowing it or intending it.
As a result, I would argue that purging less than a thousand cheaters out of pool of tens of millions of players is far too little of a benefit for such a draconian measure. The medicine is far more destructive than the amount of disease it helps to cure.
To reiterate the point: Read youtube TOS. It's exceptionally unlikely that court will throw entire TOS out and force a private service to host a video it does not want to host. There's little to no legal leg to stand on in that claim.
If there were, it would have been tried. Some of the bigger channels hit by this have entire crews behind them and make six and even seven digits a year. They would have taken the legal route if it was available to them, as this is an existential matter to them.
The process is exactly the same for both. The only difference is that content ID allows automatic matching, whereas claims are done manually. Both the process of making the claim and rejecting it remain largely the same.
I'm guessing you simply were facing someone who caved or wasn't serious about their claims. If someone makes a serious claim and can provide proof that they do indeed own the copyright, the only tool available to you as a poster is to stir up negative publicity and hope that is enough to make the claimant withdraw the claim or not reject your counter claim. Otherwise, you're out of luck, as claimant will simply reject your counter claim and copyright strike and takedown on your account and video will remain in force.
This has been and will continue to function as an excellent tool for censorship on youtube. It functioned this way before contentid was ever introduced on youtube, and will likely continue to function this way for foreseeable future. In fact, a lot of "personalities" that make money off youtube have been banging the drums about this problem for a long time now with no effect. Google simply doesn't give a damn.
To be specific. They will follow the counter claim. But counter claim is reviewed by the one who made the claim, who can simply reject the counter claim. Poster of the video has no legal leg to stand on, as youtube is a private service that claims a right to remove any video for any reason it deems necessary. It has not obligation whatsoever to the poster to keep their videos up.
DMCA "compliant" means that it's protected from copyright holders. Not that it grants rights to people posting videos. You appear to think that "DMCA compliant" means "follows DMCA to the letter, including all the rights granted to consumers". You could not be more wrong on the matter.
What it actually means is "it satisfies the party that can actually try to remove safe harbour status and sue for damages based on lack of it". I.e. copyright holders. People who are posting videos on youtube are not a part of the "protected" group in any way shape or form as they are not ones who are involved in status of "safe harbour". The only people against whom "safe harbour" protection matters after all, are copyright holders.
So it is indeed DMCA compliant as to maintain its safe harbour status, while being against both letter and spirit of DMCA when it comes to protection of video posters.
You're quite clueless on the topic I see. Youtube's policy on takedowns goes above and beyond DMCA in an effort to placate large copyright holders. Complaint maker is in fact the person evaluating the counter claim and he can simply deny it. There is no recourse other than to sue after that, and even that would not be a guarantee of getting your video back on youtube - you could only sue for damages. Youtube itself is a private entity that has a right to take down anyone's video at any time for any reason it pleases.
When nintendo filed a wholesale bunch of claims on bigger "let's play" channels a few months ago, nothing saved those channels. They were killed regardless of counter claims because nintendo as the one who made the claim simply denied all the counter claims.
Bleaching the turd and it's still brown. We know that they are tapping into backbones, but they still also have inside access to already sorted information rather than raw one.
Unfortunately we are not talking about DMCA, but youtube TOS, which is notorious for not giving a damn about users and only being interested in covering its own ass against potential liability.
"The only thing" marks the VAST majority of data. You are either utterly stupid and blatantly shilling. Considering that you're posting as AC, I'm going to guess it's latter.
Difference being that these states listen to each other and agree to abide by one another's rules when caught. Not to mention they don't do it on anywhere near the same scale.
But you can keep trying to bleach the turd in hopes it will look white. Good luck.
What are you foaming at the mouth for? I never said anything of what you just tried to shove into my mouth.
I stated that US intentions toward EU are clearly evil, and in spite of many attempts to get US to stop, it clearly indicated that it will continue with these efforts. Therefore the only options left to EU are to firewall or to surrender.
Fact is, I like most people accept that my state will spy on me. I do not accept another state spying on me, and I fully support aggressive measures towards a state that is willing to use its intelligence apparatus to actively sabotage our economy and independence. US is currently guilty of all of the above. Issue is that EU simply does not know how to get US to stop without massive damage to both economies in the process. US is clearly counting on this and power of bilateral ties to suppress the response.
It appears that this approach is quickly approaching its end of useful life however.
False. It's well known by now that NSA also taps intercontinental cables. Whatever area you are trying to protect, you'll have to do it from inside, not attempt to surround the source from outside.
For Europe, the biggest problem is that US has an inside mole known as UK.
When you are threatened by a great evil that wants all data you have, your choices are to firewall yourself off or surrender.
This is true on both micro or macro scale, and we have discussions on how to protect our data on micro scale here on slashdot all the time. It's quite sad that when people view it as "well it's our evil guy" suddenly massive theft of data becomes completely justified and counter measures undesirable.
He wasn't talking about speed skaters but figure skaters. Completely different breed. In figure skating, if you have boobs, you're out pretty much always. They NEED low centre of gravity on body.
At that level, placebo effect plays an important, often deciding role, as these are people who push human body to the very limits. That's why they use anything from snake oil to kinesio tape to tap into the "110% potential" as the trainers often call it.
In this case, it may have been that one or two athletes performed badly at the start of the games while wearing these suits, and then blamed the suits along their peers, causing negative placebo effect. In other words skaters started to believe that suits are in fact slowing them down, which affected them.
Correct. A few years ago high tech swim suits were used that gave swimmers using them a massive advantage. They were banned after the games.
Effectively you can't really ban what you haven't seen yet, unless you want to go the way of formula 1, and even them people will find ways around the rules.
Slashdot Mirror
I think that's the negative part of it. Scanning user's DNS and doing something with it is a massive red flag today in post-Snowden world. Even though you told us what you're doing with it, as a US based company, we know that US companies that harvest data are basically nothing but NSA fronts when it comes to spying and your trustworthiness in things like "scanning user's machine for private data" is in negative by default in today's world and no there's nothing you or us can do about it other than start financing people who would be against it into US legislative and executive branch. It's not even up to you as CEO - as a big company you have NSA moles who will do it without you ever knowing it or intending it.
As a result, I would argue that purging less than a thousand cheaters out of pool of tens of millions of players is far too little of a benefit for such a draconian measure. The medicine is far more destructive than the amount of disease it helps to cure.
You would be arguing that both US and EU should be selectively applied in your favour, with EU law being somewhat vague and unclear on the matter.
You are extremely unlikely to win such an argument in court of law.
To reiterate the point: Read youtube TOS. It's exceptionally unlikely that court will throw entire TOS out and force a private service to host a video it does not want to host. There's little to no legal leg to stand on in that claim.
If there were, it would have been tried. Some of the bigger channels hit by this have entire crews behind them and make six and even seven digits a year. They would have taken the legal route if it was available to them, as this is an existential matter to them.
At this point in time, not a single such case has been known to exist, much less be won.
The process is exactly the same for both. The only difference is that content ID allows automatic matching, whereas claims are done manually. Both the process of making the claim and rejecting it remain largely the same.
I'm guessing you simply were facing someone who caved or wasn't serious about their claims. If someone makes a serious claim and can provide proof that they do indeed own the copyright, the only tool available to you as a poster is to stir up negative publicity and hope that is enough to make the claimant withdraw the claim or not reject your counter claim. Otherwise, you're out of luck, as claimant will simply reject your counter claim and copyright strike and takedown on your account and video will remain in force.
This has been and will continue to function as an excellent tool for censorship on youtube. It functioned this way before contentid was ever introduced on youtube, and will likely continue to function this way for foreseeable future. In fact, a lot of "personalities" that make money off youtube have been banging the drums about this problem for a long time now with no effect. Google simply doesn't give a damn.
To be specific. They will follow the counter claim. But counter claim is reviewed by the one who made the claim, who can simply reject the counter claim. Poster of the video has no legal leg to stand on, as youtube is a private service that claims a right to remove any video for any reason it deems necessary. It has not obligation whatsoever to the poster to keep their videos up.
DMCA "compliant" means that it's protected from copyright holders. Not that it grants rights to people posting videos. You appear to think that "DMCA compliant" means "follows DMCA to the letter, including all the rights granted to consumers". You could not be more wrong on the matter.
What it actually means is "it satisfies the party that can actually try to remove safe harbour status and sue for damages based on lack of it". I.e. copyright holders. People who are posting videos on youtube are not a part of the "protected" group in any way shape or form as they are not ones who are involved in status of "safe harbour". The only people against whom "safe harbour" protection matters after all, are copyright holders.
So it is indeed DMCA compliant as to maintain its safe harbour status, while being against both letter and spirit of DMCA when it comes to protection of video posters.
You're quite clueless on the topic I see. Youtube's policy on takedowns goes above and beyond DMCA in an effort to placate large copyright holders. Complaint maker is in fact the person evaluating the counter claim and he can simply deny it. There is no recourse other than to sue after that, and even that would not be a guarantee of getting your video back on youtube - you could only sue for damages. Youtube itself is a private entity that has a right to take down anyone's video at any time for any reason it pleases.
When nintendo filed a wholesale bunch of claims on bigger "let's play" channels a few months ago, nothing saved those channels. They were killed regardless of counter claims because nintendo as the one who made the claim simply denied all the counter claims.
The main reason we call people "thugs" is because they have authority granted to them by force that also gets them that name.
Bleaching the turd and it's still brown. We know that they are tapping into backbones, but they still also have inside access to already sorted information rather than raw one.
Good luck trying that one. Especially over youtube takedown.
Unfortunately we are not talking about DMCA, but youtube TOS, which is notorious for not giving a damn about users and only being interested in covering its own ass against potential liability.
Discussing parts of legally released copyright code on the other hand is fair use. You know, like discussing parts of legally released movie.
"The only thing" marks the VAST majority of data. You are either utterly stupid and blatantly shilling. Considering that you're posting as AC, I'm going to guess it's latter.
Sorry, I assumed that AC before you in this thread was you.
Difference being that these states listen to each other and agree to abide by one another's rules when caught. Not to mention they don't do it on anywhere near the same scale.
But you can keep trying to bleach the turd in hopes it will look white. Good luck.
What are you foaming at the mouth for? I never said anything of what you just tried to shove into my mouth.
I stated that US intentions toward EU are clearly evil, and in spite of many attempts to get US to stop, it clearly indicated that it will continue with these efforts. Therefore the only options left to EU are to firewall or to surrender.
Fact is, I like most people accept that my state will spy on me. I do not accept another state spying on me, and I fully support aggressive measures towards a state that is willing to use its intelligence apparatus to actively sabotage our economy and independence. US is currently guilty of all of the above. Issue is that EU simply does not know how to get US to stop without massive damage to both economies in the process. US is clearly counting on this and power of bilateral ties to suppress the response.
It appears that this approach is quickly approaching its end of useful life however.
False. It's well known by now that NSA also taps intercontinental cables. Whatever area you are trying to protect, you'll have to do it from inside, not attempt to surround the source from outside.
For Europe, the biggest problem is that US has an inside mole known as UK.
When you are threatened by a great evil that wants all data you have, your choices are to firewall yourself off or surrender.
This is true on both micro or macro scale, and we have discussions on how to protect our data on micro scale here on slashdot all the time. It's quite sad that when people view it as "well it's our evil guy" suddenly massive theft of data becomes completely justified and counter measures undesirable.
Applicable moderation:
+1 informative
+1 funny
+1 troll
He wasn't talking about speed skaters but figure skaters. Completely different breed. In figure skating, if you have boobs, you're out pretty much always. They NEED low centre of gravity on body.
Something tells me you're expecting dead or alive level of boob physics there!
And funnily enough, the art from those times suggests that beautiful women were fat with huge tits and asses.
At that level, placebo effect plays an important, often deciding role, as these are people who push human body to the very limits. That's why they use anything from snake oil to kinesio tape to tap into the "110% potential" as the trainers often call it.
In this case, it may have been that one or two athletes performed badly at the start of the games while wearing these suits, and then blamed the suits along their peers, causing negative placebo effect. In other words skaters started to believe that suits are in fact slowing them down, which affected them.
Correct. A few years ago high tech swim suits were used that gave swimmers using them a massive advantage. They were banned after the games.
Effectively you can't really ban what you haven't seen yet, unless you want to go the way of formula 1, and even them people will find ways around the rules.