thebufenator
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2004
- Messages
- 1,383
I think when he was banned 10+ times they gave up "taking it easy on him"
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Kind of missed my point, he's 14. The EULA is a contract. A minor can not enter into any contract of his own accord without parental/guardian authority to do so (i.e. someone else to co-sign). It doesn't matter if he clicks a button claiming he's 18, or lied on a statement that said he's 18, he's still a minor and it's up to the company who has said contract that they verify the person "signing" it is who they say, if they want to go to the least common denominator of having a simple box to check then that's on them. So all of those contract terms, do not apply to him. The other side of it is yes the company can absolutely ban him and try to prevent him from playing, you do not need a EULA for that. But using any of the language of the EULA as reasoning for said lawsuit will not apply in this case.
My "legal" counter to this though was the fact that the mom gave her son unfettered permission to download/install/etc, could constitute a broad range of "giving permission" for everything her son does.
And yes Mom would in fact be legally responsible for the bullshit DMCA laws that her son probably broke in the same way as if your kid downloaded 72 songs *snicker*, I'm sure it's a legal matter of changing the lawsuit to be "Parent and or Guardian of douche bag cheater boy" , but again injecting code into the game via breaking encryption/etc/etc is a DMCA matter not one of the EULA.
What false claims?
I think DMCA is used too broadly. Maybe they need to come up with some laws that apply specifically to things like this. Maybe digital vandalism or defacement or something? Just thinking aloud. Once again, not a lawyer, but I don't think this was the intent when the DMCA was instantiated. I'm sure a lawyer can show me 100 reasons why it's a black and white classic case of copyright infringement, but maybe it should be something else with different penalties. (creating and/or promoting cheats, hacks, etc.)
Kind of missed my point, he's 14. The EULA is a contract. A minor can not enter into any contract of his own accord without parental/guardian authority to do so (i.e. someone else to co-sign). It doesn't matter if he clicks a button claiming he's 18, or lied on a statement that said he's 18, he's still a minor and it's up to the company who has said contract that they verify the person "signing" it is who they say, if they want to go to the least common denominator of having a simple box to check then that's on them. So all of those contract terms, do not apply to him. The other side of it is yes the company can absolutely ban him and try to prevent him from playing, you do not need a EULA for that. But using any of the language of the EULA as reasoning for said lawsuit will not apply in this case.
My "legal" counter to this though was the fact that the mom gave her son unfettered permission to download/install/etc, could constitute a broad range of "giving permission" for everything her son does.
And yes Mom would in fact be legally responsible for the bullshit DMCA laws that her son probably broke in the same way as if your kid downloaded 72 songs *snicker*, I'm sure it's a legal matter of changing the lawsuit to be "Parent and or Guardian of douche bag cheater boy" , but again injecting code into the game via breaking encryption/etc/etc is a DMCA matter not one of the EULA.
Wait a minute, this is showing everything in a different light.
If this REDDITor's post is accurate, (I can't get to Kotaku from work), the law suite against the kid is specifically, not generally, in response to the kids counter to the DCMA take-down request. In essence, it's the only way that Epic can pursue the take-down request because the kid counter filed against it. Epic has to sue the kid or drop the take-down request, and this is what the suite is over, not for the cheating part of the story.
Why, look at this case as a perfect example. The kid posted something that he really shouldn't have, Epic sent the DCMA Takedown notice, normally no one would fight that unless they had good cause, but this kid does, and leaves Epic having to sue or let the kid keep posting his video, maybe more, of exactly how to cheat in Epic's game, and the terrible message it sends to other kids like him.
And that is the other thing, how easy can Epic go on the kid without creating a thousand new cheaters?
I did actually miss the part about the counterclaim. I did know he was asking for donations and had promoted the cheat. This to me just falls under the general stupidity clause. Filing the counterclaim is what IMO does in fact push it a bit further.
So, ok, I agree with you there. I still disagree on the the actual amounts sought for damages. I still think that goes a bit too far, and a lot farther than just "learning the hard way".
Take down the site. Fine him a more reasonable amount of money. Issue a court order against him being online, under threat of harsher judgements, and call it good. Even for what he did $150K is WAY too much. That's my opinion of course.
What false claims?
They DMCAd his Youtube video of playing the game and showing how to cheat. He was a bastard and deserves what he gets, but that is a shitty practice as well. Not sure if showing a cheat qualifies as copyright infringement. It reeks of incompetence in dealing with the real problem and going with the increasingly used bully method of their own.Huh?
They DMCAd his Youtube video of playing the game and showing how to cheat. He was a bastard and deserves what he gets, but that is a shitty practice as well. Not sure if showing a cheat qualifies as copyright infringement. It reeks of incompetence in dealing with the real problem and going with the increasingly used bully method of their own.
Would a video showing how to exploit a car bug and selling a tool to break in it be copyright infringement?
This is not an Epic money grab, it is Epic showing that it gives a shit about the community playing its game, plain and simple. Epic will never come to collect any judgment, but if this family wants to stand up and give Epic the finger while Epic is championing its players, I think Epic is just in taking the family to the mat.Like I said, its overly harsh for Epic to be hunting people down for thousands of dollars simply for the crime of having their 14 year old being caught cheating in a game. Im pretty sure the vast majority of people arent likely to look favorably on such a scenario occurring. All Epic needs to do is teach the kid a lesson, conduct a lawsuit, but seek proportional damages. The lawsuit will indeed cost more money than the damages, but I cant see a scenario where Epic can "shake down" people and pay for lawyer costs as a viable solution. No, in seeking a lawsuit, Epic has decided to send a message, and to accept the costs of the message.
Two wrongs don't make a right. False DMCA claims aren't a civil way of doing things.They've banned him several times and he keeps pulling the same crap and he was making money off his videos and showing people how to cheat. Epic getting those videos taken down is the right move. Taking them down gives the people a strike on their account, but strikes don't last forever and it is a very civil way of dealing with those videos.
Two wrongs don't make a right. False claims aren't a civil way of doing things.
Please read before replying. I'm talking specifically about the DMCA, not going after him in general.What the hell are you talking about? There is no proof of false claims from Epic. Cheaters DO cost them money. It costs money to fight people hacking the game, it costs money to defend themselves from cheaters, and cheaters by-pass systems put in place for them to make money off of their game. You can try to twist things all you want, but Epic is 100% in the right here. The kid was a fucking dumbass for filing a counter claim. The idiot's mother can say whatever she wants, doesn't make it true. It left Epic with no recourse but to file a lawsuit. Youtube leaves companies no other options. Its either let the video go back up or take it to court. Epic is suing for any money the moron made off of donations. You act like they're going after him for millions of dollars.
Please read before replying. I'm talking specifically about the DMCA, not going after him in general.
From what I gather, they are only fining him the amount of money that he earned from the "donations". To me that is entirely reasonable. Let's just hope he didn't spend all the money already...
Wait, he got $150k in donations for making a video showing how to cheat in a game, and probably not the only one on youtube? Fuck me why do I even have a job, people apparently have money to just throw at people! Whether it's Twitch or Youtube, or anything else "oh hey I like watching you play games, here's $5"From what I gather, they are only fining him the amount of money that he earned from the "donations". To me that is entirely reasonable. Let's just hope he didn't spend all the money already...
Don't forget in many circumstances it can be also used as a warning to others, the whole "an example must be made" situations. Which has happened many times in DMCA circumstances.A civil suite is not about how much money someone received doing something wrong. It's about the damages their actions caused.
I did, I even re-read the article before that reply. My opinion still stands. As for the copyright question: Yes, it still counts. Let's play style videos are NOT covered under fair use protection. There is an argument to be made that they should be, but until a case sets legal precedent they have no legal protection and exist solely at the whims of game studios. And then there is the issue with him modifying the game without permission, violating the EULA. He's been banned so many times for cheating I'd bet Epic has proof of him doing it. Which further justifies them going after the video.
Wait, he got $150k in donations for making a video showing how to cheat in a game, and probably not the only one on youtube? Fuck me why do I even have a job, people apparently have money to just throw at people! Whether it's Twitch or Youtube, or anything else "oh hey I like watching you play games, here's $5"
Don't forget in many circumstances it can be also used as a warning to others, the whole "an example must be made" situations. Which has happened many times in DMCA circumstances.
The only thing I'd worry about with this is WHICH case sets the precedent for fair use, let's play, long play, etc. and whether protective actions start seeping into legitimate (non-malicious) territory. I really wouldn't want to see this particular case become the standard. It's a little too messy for my liking.
Yeah. I doubt this case will make it all the way through a trial, I imagine they will end up settling out of court. I wonder if things would fall on the side of LPers if things did go all the way through a trial anyway. I think LPs should be fair use, but I wonder if they would fit the legal qualifications of transformative.
Which ironically would be called "cruel and unusual punishment" and not be allowed, yet putting a family into potential financial ruin is perfectly ok in our society!Like I said, I think putting him in a cage, with a sign that says I cheat in Fortnite over it, and letting people throw rotten vegetables at him is the proper method of punishment.
plenty of people are whining about a false DMCA claim.... But I haven't seen much elaboration on why it's a false DMCA claim....Two wrongs don't make a right. False DMCA claims aren't a civil way of doing things.
I think the real news story here is that people are actually playing Fortnite
Don't forget in many circumstances it can be also used as a warning to others, the whole "an example must be made" situations. Which has happened many times in DMCA circumstances.
I don't think that's the case. I believe (and correct me if I'm wrong) that this might be a max damage or some other nice round number to sue for. I don't believe that he could actually make that kind of money from this particular video, or even off of this game in general. Maybe it's maximum for one count of "copyright infringement" in a case like this, and then they just see what they're awarded. Not only do I not believe he made this kind of money off it, I also don't think that Epic can prove that they lost out on that kind of money due to his actions.
How is a video about him using a cheating tool a copyright infringement?plenty of people are whining about a false DMCA claim.... But I haven't seen much elaboration on why it's a false DMCA claim....
What about their claim was false?
He literally showed people how to get a game-modifying hack and install / use it directly in the video.
How is that a falsely labled DMCA claim?
the DMCA can cover modifying existing software.How is a video about him using a cheating tool a copyright infringement?
the DMCA can cover modifying existing software.
It wasn't a cheat code, it was an external application modifying the software.
only sort of.Which makes sense. It sounds though as if the DMCA is being used against the video, and subsequently the donations gained from that. Making a video about how to use such a tool isn't actually doing any code modification. That could be a bit more on the blurry side.
only sort of.
"Here's a tool you can use to cheat by fucking with the game"
"Here's how you install it"
"Here's me using it in the game."
As mentioned above, if he just didn't challenge the DMCA, this wouldn't even be happening right now.