Gathering additional details, but the two already listed - Chapo Trap House and David Pakman have been identified.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Multiple Twitch Streamers Suspended After Streaming Democratic Debate
- Thread starter Deleted member 18944
- Start date
- Status
Gathering additional details, but the two already listed - Chapo Trap House and David Pakman have been identified.
Seems like a pretty straightforward TOS violation.
Don't stream copyrighted content.
OP
OP
So they wanted to get paid to stream a live broadcast, seems pretty straightforward why they'd get shut down
Yes. From a rights perspective it is no different than, say, a NFL game.
You can commentate all you want, but if you rebroadcast the original source without permission, you're in violation.
These streamers seem entitled. No, you cannot stream things you don't have rights to. You need permission.
it's stupid but lol at calling twitch a democracy
cmon bro
OP
OP
I agree, but then the conversation should be - why are these debates copyrighted? wack system.
So he was showing video with subtitles with no audio ? Correct me if i'm wrong but I don't think audio is the determining factor in copyrighted content. I don't think the debates should be but its their content.
Same reason people aren't just automatically registered to vote, our "democracy" sucks.
Image would also be copyrighted. So I have no idea why they thought this was a good idea.
Just do what all the shitty reaction channels do: cam on their face with some indication of where to start the content.
Gonna be wild if they let the Trihex ban go away but smaller channels stick.
They are party events.
Work products of the Federal government cannot be copyrighted in the US (overseas yes, but not in the US).
This is a private party event. Not a government event.
Again, comparing it to a NFL game is apt. The party puts on the event and then assigns broadcast rights.
Nope it isn't. You can commentate but you can't have the audio come through on the stream. You cant play copyrighted video either.
this seems uh extremely relevant given the reactions since this post
That tweet says nothing of value.
Most takedown notices are sent by third party companies. Neither the tweet or Hobbes has posted any evidence that this was a rogue takedown.
Regardless, since it is a copyright violation, and against Twitch TOS, none of the channels really has any viable channel of appeal.
Because they are "content creators" who deserve to get paid for their "hard work", but don't value the content created by others.
Eh while copyrights are a thing I don't think we need to go to bat for television networks showing something that helps determine the fate of our country.
I mean, yes you're right, but comparing a Democratic primary debate to an NFL game is either super fucked up because, it's a political debate, right, and that should be full open, right? Or it's super fucked up because primary debates don't achieve anything higher than a sports game-level seriousness?
Either way, yeah the law is against these dudes but that seems messed up for a debate on a future political candidate!
you can.
some content creators explicitly allow re-streaming their content.
Yeah saying "welp, that's the law" doesn't make it ethical.
In an ideal world, they'd throw all these debates up on CSPAN or PBS.
They should have put up a DDR overlay, nobody would know wtf was going on
The primary debates are sponsored by a network so they can actually happen. These networks pay rights fees for this. They are literally taking someone else's work and trying to monetize it for themselves, and yet have the audacity to say that it's "ruining democracy". And it's not like you couldn't watch it for free legally anyway.
This has been happening ever since the first dem debates. I know it's shitty, but they should have adjusted by now. Did Hasan Piker get banned? After his first ban over this he switched to a different method of doing the debates where he syncs with chat but doesn't play the video.
That said there's a fair discussion to be had on why this is copyrighted material at all. Political debates should be free to share discuss by everyone regardless of who owns the original broadcast. But alas, America.
That said there's a fair discussion to be had on why this is copyrighted material at all. Political debates should be free to share discuss by everyone regardless of who owns the original broadcast. But alas, America.
The deserved to be banned for TOS violations? Copyrighted Content 101.
until all debates are federally sponsored, these are and should be TOS violations. The laws are very clear and simple to understand here.
I really feel like this should be in the OP since people aren't reading the responses
Right, I don't disagree. I'm just saying that discussion on changing the law or how things should be different is a fair discussion to be had.
The thread isn't about people who got falsely identified as breaking TOS. That's a Twitch moderation enforcement issue and really isn't what the thread is about.
Why is that locked to networks? Isnt this a good thing more exposure is done by these streamers? This is like anti-democracy shit i expect say from china.
well the networks dont get compensated for "exposure". And they're paying for it.
he'll have to skype into the next debate from his prison cell
free? they should pay me to watch it
Wasn't the debate freely available anyway? I don't have cable and just watched it live on YT on my Roku.
Last edited:
- Status