| General > General Technical Chat |
| [SOLVED] Ericsson slammed me with a Copyright Strike on a Teardown video, help!? |
| << < (35/35) |
| Mr. Scram:
--- Quote from: EEVblog on February 19, 2020, 05:42:32 am ---Not if the terms of the forum/website stipulated that they are granted a non-exclusive perpetual license etc. You can't just post something under those conditions and then demand they take it down under copyright law. Posting content to Youtube for example: --- End quote --- Exactly, that's why must websites will include a clause of similar nature. It's not a given though. It should also be noted that a lot of these clauses have never been tested in court so not everything may hold, although I don't think that hosting messages will be in question under such a clause. |
| peter-h:
Every forum run by a competent admin will say the above in their Ts & Cs, in the GDPR age. If somebody is not happy about this, they must not participate in such a forum, because they are basically reserving their right to destroy the contributed content (and, by trashing the threads, damaging content contributed by others) at any time of their choosing. The one I run tells people directly to not participate if they don't accept this. I am also not aware of case law, but legal advice to forum admins is uniformly aligned on this, so it's not surprising nobody has had a go at it. As I said, if it was not thus, you would have the "book in 100 libraries" scenario where the libraries are forced to destroy their copy of the book, which is self evidently ridiculous. It would lead to the destruction of all online communities which carry user contributed content. I am well aware there are individuals out there who would enjoy that scenario (typically, ones who were banned for posting offensive stuff) but they must not be allowed to damage a community which the other ~99% enjoy and support. A large % of a mod/admin job is dealing with that 1%. |
| Mr. Scram:
--- Quote from: peter-h on February 19, 2020, 03:48:01 pm ---Every forum run by a competent admin will say the above in their Ts & Cs, in the GDPR age. If somebody is not happy about this, they must not participate in such a forum, because they are basically reserving their right to destroy the contributed content (and, by trashing the threads, damaging content contributed by others) at any time of their choosing. The one I run tells people directly to not participate if they don't accept this. I am also not aware of case law, but legal advice to forum admins is uniformly aligned on this, so it's not surprising nobody has had a go at it. As I said, if it was not thus, you would have the "book in 100 libraries" scenario where the libraries are forced to destroy their copy of the book, which is self evidently ridiculous. It would lead to the destruction of all online communities which carry user contributed content. I am well aware there are individuals out there who would enjoy that scenario (typically, ones who were banned for posting offensive stuff) but they must not be allowed to damage a community which the other ~99% enjoy and support. A large % of a mod/admin job is dealing with that 1%. --- End quote --- You need to check your assumptions as they're incorrect. Views that serve your own interests won't serve you in matters of law no matter how convenient they are. The book example is irrelevant not only because forum posts as copyrighted as books are as was established before, but also because books and a forum are different in the sense that the latter is actively serving up and distributing the information. It's explicitly called copyright and not ownershipright. The ownership of a physical book and the copyright of the text therein are two very different matters. A forum owner can protect himself from copyright claims by obtaining the rights to the material. This is something the forum owner explicitly and actively has to do. Excluding GPDR claims doesn't appear possible but their extent is more limited. |
| madsbarnkob:
--- Quote from: Yansi on February 18, 2020, 02:42:45 pm ---Instead of arguing what can or can't be taken down, can someone enlighten please how it ended for the OP vs. Ericsson? I am becoming quite lost in this thread. --- End quote --- I updated the thread subject and put a link to the solved answer in OP :) |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Previous page |