| General > General Technical Chat |
| [SOLVED] Ericsson slammed me with a Copyright Strike on a Teardown video, help!? |
| (1/35) > >> |
| madsbarnkob:
SOLVED ANSWER: https://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/ericsson-slammed-me-with-a-copyright-strike-on-a-teardown-video-help!/msg2917040/#msg2917040 My channel for Kaizer Power Electronics: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCSukTlgTEWiL-sl0UeYeJvQ/ So apparently owning a piece of equipment, taking it apart while filming it and show very little / basic design about it is now breaking intellectual property rights according to Ericsson. I show PCBs, I follow signal and current paths and labelled different ICs and transistors used. I never revealed any software but only what you can see on the hardware. Simple reverse engineering. They slammed a copyright strike on a teardown video of a RBS3202 Base station for cell towers, with a extremely vague reason: "This videoclip include detailed information of the product - Ericsson RBS3202 - which belong to an area where our company holds many IPR rights" I am in doubt would hold up in court, but I got little to no knowledge about that subject and I got no time or money to spend on a possible lawsuit. :-// There is only three things I can do: 1) Accept the strike and remove all Ericsson content in fear of getting youtube channel closed forever. 2) Contact Ericsson directly, I got a contact email with the strike, but what should I write them? (Clearly they just wanted the video gone) 3) Counter-file the strike and that can possible lead to a court case, legal action etc. Which is such a serious step that there basically is no choice for a small youtube channel to go against a international company. I can only come here to hope for help, support or just shred a bit of light over the doom that will soon hit everyone making teardown videos if this is the new normal. |
| Mr. Scram:
Holding patents in a certain area doesn't mean suppressing any information or discussion about it. It doesn't sound like they're claiming design patents either. If a teardown video isn't fair use I don't know what would be. No reviews or critiques would be possible. This seems malicious abuse of their position but unfortunately YouTube seems eager to facilitate it. If it were me I'd fight it tooth and nail but I admittedly don't have skin in the game. https://www.youtube.com/about/copyright/fair-use/#yt-copyright-protection |
| Benta:
Not nice, but I can see no wrongdoing on your side. Taking things apart and describing/filming them is perfectly OK. Reverse engineering as well. To your options: 1: is the comfortable one, keeping out of trouble by ducking your head. 2: ask Ericsson precisely which IPR "rights" they're referring to. BTW, no such thing as "IPR" exists, although it is often seen in the Media. It can only be Patents, Copyrights/Trademarks or Trade Secrets. None of these seem to apply here. 3: file a criminal complaint at the Police about coercion (bagvaskelse, evt. trussel) against Ericsson. This is free of cost and assures that your complaint is registered. Don't expect the Police to do anything, but it's on record. Good Luck with your decision. :) |
| daqq:
Disclaimer: I'm no legal expert. And I have 'no skin in the game'. That's some serious bullshit, likely committed by some overzealous lawyer. Thunderf00t did some videos on fair use, since he has been targeted several times from other youtube channels and other entities, though never by a large corporation of this type. While I'm pretty confident that displaying the guts of a device that I'm guessing you can buy on ebay for a few hundred USD falls well within fair use, the question to what lengths are they willing to go. A good question would be whether they know about the (professional) public backlash that follows this kind of BS. Also: Paging Mr. Jones! |
| ve7xen:
IANAL, either. This is clearly BS. As pointed out, if they are claiming IP, they must be claiming either Trademark, Copyright, or Patent. YouTube's notice specifically mentions copyright, which makes sense, since the DMCA only applies to copyright, and is almost certainly the legal process by which this has been undertaken. The only copyright protected work remotely related here is probably some firmware, and the PCB artwork, neither of which you are distributing - and fair use would clearly apply anyway to showing some images of the PCBs not intended as reproductions of the artwork. False DMCA takedowns do face some penalties, including your potential legal fees were you to fight this. This case seems totally (again, IANAL) not 'in good faith' as the DMCA requires under penalty of perjury. I'm not sure how far I'd take it, but I would certainly push back and demand they specify what protected work has been infringed. Does Google also provide an appeals process? Hopefully they employ people knowledgable enough on copyright to know that this is a bullshit claim, if human eyes actually set upon it. I guess this is the 'Request Retraction' option. I'd pursue that too. |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |