General > General Technical Chat
[SOLVED] Ericsson slammed me with a Copyright Strike on a Teardown video, help!?
ebastler:
--- Quote from: wraper on February 06, 2020, 11:22:32 am ---Could you explain how showing the product violates any intellectual property rights?
--- End quote ---
Agree, I can't see how patent rights would cover that at all. One can infringe the patent by making or selling the patented technology, or using it commercially (without having obtained use rights, e.g. by buying a unit from the patent holder). But disseminating information about the technology -- even offering training commercially -- does not constitute an infringement to my knowledge. Standard disclaimer: I am not a lawyer.
One potential caveat: The limitations of "induced infringement" are less clear to me. If you tell people "Here's a great way to implement XYZ, I encourage you to use this technique in your commercial product", without pointing out that XYZ is covered by patents owned by a 3rd party -- could that be construed as induced infringement?
EEVblog:
--- Quote from: ebastler on February 06, 2020, 12:34:08 pm ---
--- Quote from: wraper on February 06, 2020, 11:22:32 am ---Could you explain how showing the product violates any intellectual property rights?
--- End quote ---
Agree, I can't see how patent rights would cover that at all. One can infringe the patent by making or selling the patented technology, or using it commercially (without having obtained use rights, e.g. by buying a unit from the patent holder).
--- End quote ---
And even if it was covered under Trademark protection, that means nothing, as they have still knowingly filed a fraudulent Copyright claim, and that's actually a crime.
I would point this out to them.
iMo:
--- Quote from: EEVblog on February 06, 2020, 01:36:41 pm ---
--- Quote from: ebastler on February 06, 2020, 12:34:08 pm ---
--- Quote from: wraper on February 06, 2020, 11:22:32 am ---Could you explain how showing the product violates any intellectual property rights?
--- End quote ---
Agree, I can't see how patent rights would cover that at all. One can infringe the patent by making or selling the patented technology, or using it commercially (without having obtained use rights, e.g. by buying a unit from the patent holder).
--- End quote ---
And even if it was covered under Trademark protection, that means nothing, as they have still knowingly filed a fraudulent Copyright claim, and that's actually a crime.
I would point this out to them.
--- End quote ---
You cannot argue to the other party they should stop claiming against you because you think they allegedly committed a crime by claiming you :D
You may file a suit against them because of their alleged crime, but that will be the second Case, independent from the first Case.
IMHO - nobody here is an expert in IPR laws, and even a lawyer. What I was always advised by experienced lawyers in past the best you can do is to avoid, at any cost, any legal disputes or strikes or Cases.
magic:
--- Quote from: tooki on February 06, 2020, 11:54:14 am ---But this cell tower amplifier is not a "creative work", it's a product, so copyright isn't the issue. Nor is it a patent violation, since the OP produced documentation, not an amplifier itself.
--- End quote ---
A number of surprising things have been made to be "creative works", like software itself (even if not software APIs) and AFAIK circuit board designs too. Post a high-res pic of a PCB and technically it's a copy of a protected work in a different medium. Now, the copy has little practical use and is in no way a substitute or competitor to the real thing, and fair use provisions apply for the purpose of review and critique, but that's for the courts to decide :)
SilverSolder:
--- Quote from: magic on February 06, 2020, 07:25:02 am ---
--- Quote from: SilverSolder on February 05, 2020, 11:40:31 pm ---This is really a problem of a few semi-monopolistic companies (Youtube, eBay, Amazon and the like) sitting on so much of communications and actual trade/distribution... that they have ended up with disproportionate power to ban legitimate activity for arbitrary/abusive reasons, and there doesn't seem to be any reasonable recourse for ordinary citizens / small business people.
--- End quote ---
DMCA is not a whim of YouTube. Every website operating in the US would take it down.
There we go, this is the garbage you are dealing with:
https://www.dmca.com/faq/What-is-a-DMCA-Counter-Notice
I'm under impression that the video will stay down even if you submit a "counter notice" and then Ericsson demonstrates within 10 days that they are suing you to take it down, regardless of whether the lawsuit has any merit or ever comes to any conclusion. Welcome to America, I guess ::)
About your only chance of winning this is to gather a mob with torches and pitchforks and some lawyers before filing the counter notice or "kindly" asking Ericsson to reconsider their claim. Or be ready to threaten them with your own suit for abuse. Maybe EFF would care?
--- End quote ---
That whole situation is total BS, though, isn't it. Protecting intellectual property rights is one thing, corporations using the rules to "cheat" with no real practical right to reply is another.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version