Twitch is in the news again for banning a streamer over a 5 year emote due to a DMCA claim meanwhile Twitch still has streamers who are racists, homophobes, etc and they are not banned:
-
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.
Twitch bans streamer over DMCA claim over a 5 year emote, meanwhile racists, homophobes, etc are still not bannned
- Thread starter Deleted member 3812
- Start date
Just a friendly reminder that internaitonal copyright and trademark laws still apply to the internet. Memes aren't in the public domain.
Sadly for enbys etc. that's one of the kinds of discrimination that's still fairly popular and it's likely not going to result in much more than fingerwagging from advocates.
24 hour ban isn't shit to get worked up about. Doesn't it says only if the claim was against live content then it'd be 24 hours, do emotes even fall under that? (Edit: Rereading it, I guess it does. Odd.) I'd think live content would be like playing a movie or tv show on stream without permission.
Racists, homophobes, etc do need to catch lengthy bans though, not 24 hours. Hit with month bans and keep increasing the length every time they fuck up.
Racists, homophobes, etc do need to catch lengthy bans though, not 24 hours. Hit with month bans and keep increasing the length every time they fuck up.
Twitch moderation being unevenly enforced has been a major complaint for years so I can understand the exasperation.
Twitch has to comply with the law. They have to act when they get a dmca claim or they could expose themselves to legal action. The age of the emote doesn't matter and it's a 24 hour ban that she can appeal, not really a big deal.
Comparing it to the assholes they allow on the platform is an apples to oranges comparison, though I get why people make comparisons like this all the time, the intent behind it is valid even if the actual comparison is faulty.
Comparing it to the assholes they allow on the platform is an apples to oranges comparison, though I get why people make comparisons like this all the time, the intent behind it is valid even if the actual comparison is faulty.
If she had made it about twitch not applying TOS to their moneymakers she would have a point. But she got banned for something completely different (even if it's bullshit).
True but the implication of the statement is very hateful and toxic. It's not something that can be said in isolation as a harmless proclamation. So many of these idiots that say this can't go into thier justification because in no time they will find themselves spouting hate speech. Then again if Soda was actually pushed on the issue he would probably just say it was a troll because he grew up a rich white kid and has no backbone so he would wilt very fast.
She's pointing out their priorities, not complaining about moneymakers in general.
Wtf, I had to look it up.
We need to hold these platforms responsible.
The story is that Twitch bans her over a license issue, but people that abuse animals or spew hatred get a free pass.
Probably! But Twitch shouldn't be given the benefit of the doubt here.
Probably because they can be sued if they don't comply with DMCA. As shitty as it is they aren't at legal risk with the other issues yet. Still need to do something about it.
It's almost like amazon doesn't take twitch moderation seriously in the slightest.
Who'dathunkit?
Yes, her point is that it only matters when it costs them money.
And never when it's anything else.
Who'dathunkit?
Yes, her point is that it only matters when it costs them money.
And never when it's anything else.
By holding those in a position of changing these things personally accountable.
This wasn't even a ban, it was a 24 hour suspension. She apparently didn't even try to fight it.
Drawing attention to it and making a big stink about it. Off platform activity is part of the ToS since 2018 so the tools are there. The people in charge just need something to get too much attention for comfort and they will act.
Yea I agree with that point. Things have to really spill out to other media sites or even tv for them to even acknowledge it. Feels like every media site that gets big falls into this same pattern too no matter what. Youtube, facebook, twitter, etc... until it gets a ton of outside or even government pressure they'll do the bare minimum.
Assuming you have their names/handles and proof that they are willfully not acting on rule-breaking content, you would put that information out there and have people contact or @ them to change their minds.
She used it for 5 years and after not streaming for a month got a 24 hr ban because of it.. do the math...
The copywrite strike is the bigger issue if Twitch works anything like Youtube. She really should have tried to fight it, assuming she had any leg to stand on.
I don't get the point of championing over Twitch bans. Like who the fuck cares other than those livestreamfail ultra-nerds that totally don't hate women btw
Twitch should get critized for its inconsistent moderation actions regarding their own TOS. Thats one matter on its own.
Going full whataboutism because you got caught using an artwork from someone else has actually nothing to do with the other Twitch issues.
Going full whataboutism because you got caught using an artwork from someone else has actually nothing to do with the other Twitch issues.
I mean twitch is legaly required to act on a valid DMCA claim and will likely do so no matter who the person is. So it's not really the same
Agreed, she's only now pointing the finger at a legitimate issue after being caught red handed for another legitimate issue. Her ban is completely justified.
The owner of the Twitch emote can do a DMCA claim whenever they want. Just because they didn't do anything for 5 years does not make copyright infringement legal. It's like how Nintendo fan games can exist for years until Nintendo suddenly sends a cease and desist order.
Copyright right law doesn't require the owners of protected material to constantly defend their claim or loose it. That only applies to trademarked material. For copyrighted material It's their property for a 100 years or until they decide to release it in the public domain.
She was calling out Twitch on their hypocrisy. And rightfully so.
Last edited:
Yeah, I think the point that needs to be stressed is how easy it is for some Twitch streamers to get banned, but for the racist, homo/transphobic, etc., users, they remain up and are allowed to freely assume their position. Even when they get "Banned", it's a joke for how long and don't even lose privileges.
For the record, she does openly admit she ultimately ended up being in the wrong here, once she realized for the cause of the ban, but I think her point still stands regardless.
That said, if the user wasn't 100% aware the emote could've been a problem (I think it's still very common how memes/imagery themselves could be copyrighted and the like and the individuals don't realize this), even with DMCA take-down, why isn't there a contact system that gives the user enough time to comply, rather than an automatic ban? I admit, it's likely in the TOS (been awhile since I overlooked certain things on it), but at the same time, given how inconsistent that's even enforced (the TOS), I just don't get why they don't have a system like that in place.
I don't know, just my 2 cents.
For the record, she does openly admit she ultimately ended up being in the wrong here, once she realized for the cause of the ban, but I think her point still stands regardless.
That said, if the user wasn't 100% aware the emote could've been a problem (I think it's still very common how memes/imagery themselves could be copyrighted and the like and the individuals don't realize this), even with DMCA take-down, why isn't there a contact system that gives the user enough time to comply, rather than an automatic ban? I admit, it's likely in the TOS (been awhile since I overlooked certain things on it), but at the same time, given how inconsistent that's even enforced (the TOS), I just don't get why they don't have a system like that in place.
I don't know, just my 2 cents.
Under the DMCA a website must comply with any copyright notices or their site could be shut down for copyright infringement. Like many torrent and streaming websites have. Under the 'safe harbour' principle websites wont be sued if their users upload copyrighted material as long as they make an effort to remove said material when copyright owners ask them to do so.
The DMCA was a compromise between internet companies and the major movie/TV/music studios on how to deal with the widespread illegal sharing of copyright.
Twitch would immediately become liable to prosecution if they don't automatically react to a DMCA claim. Same is true for every other US website out there.
It's kinda scary how much people seem to know about laws and "internet stuff" or more so the lack of that knowledge.
Twitch has little choice but to comply with a DMCA claim. They do have a choice on how to moderate their site.