Off Topic

[beebo44]

A multi-million dollar company is creating content worth multiple millions of dollars. If someone leaks that multi-million dollar work early, there is a lot of money to be lost. They have scheduled times for launch, and one guy has single-handedly screwed it up. It is completely just to have him prosecuted.

Video was low quality so I don't see how is a lot money lost. As soon as Marvel released HD trailer, all people went to see it. It is only logical since the low quality trailer didn't do good job showing moive's true look. Plus I see no ads on the video of leaker which means he earned no profit from those uploads.

If this leak weren't to have happened then the trailer would've been in higher demand and thus generated more views. People who've already seen the leaked version may not care enough to watch the HD official version, which is ultimately making Marvel lose out on money. Oh and just because the dude didn't monetize the video doesn't mean that Marvel didn't miss out on money.

I just support idea of freedom when it comes to leaking something unfinished and promotional like trailer and I am sorry but I will always find it ridiculous how companies overreact about it.

Why would you support the release of something unfinished? Why doesn't Ad just release Revenge of the Dark right now, in all it's unfinished glory. Because that's very obviously superior to waiting for a complete product that has all the features intended at release. Of course a company will react poorly when their intellectual property is leaked to masses in an incomplete state. They don't want people to see their hard work in an unfinished and rough state. They would rather have it shown when they're ready and comfortable with where it's at.

[OCG]

If this leak weren't to have happened then the trailer would've been in higher demand and thus generated more views. People who've already seen the leaked version may not care enough to watch the HD official version, which is ultimately making Marvel lose out on money. Oh and just because the dude didn't monetize the video doesn't mean that Marvel didn't miss out on money.

Marvel could have copyright claimed his leaked video with tools YouTube provides and earn all money for themselves. Problem solved, they get money end of story. But instead they choose to go after the uploader so that proves they are money hungry and want to earn even more money (in case they win lawsuit and this guy gets ordered to pay them big time).

Why would you support the release of something unfinished? Why doesn't Ad just release Revenge of the Dark right now, in all it's unfinished glory. Because that's very obviously superior to waiting for a complete product that has all the features intended at release. Of course a company will react poorly when their intellectual property is leaked to masses in an incomplete state. They don't want people to see their hard work in an unfinished and rough state. They would rather have it shown when they're ready and comfortable with where it's at.

Unfinished trailer and unfinished movie or unfinished game is not the same thing, at least in my view. If full movie in unfinished state was leaked, that would be different case, but this was trailer and it actually wasn't in beta form at all. It pretty much looked finished but was just broadcasted privately first before getting played to big mass.

[Adsolution]

My idea of freedom is nothing like that. After murder, rape is the worst thing that can happen to anyone so please do not compare such thing to something internet related.

Wait, so you're censoring a legitimate analogy for not being politically correct enough? That's not an explanation.

I am only fighting for internet freedom.

Fighting for, or believing in? You're hardly doing the former - posting Facebook statuses about how you're avoiding YouTube's copyright and making money directly off of content that isn't yours isn't exactly what I'd call admirable - so I'd hate to think it's the latter.

I just support idea of freedom when it comes to leaking something unfinished and promotional like trailer

Right, so your beliefs are conditional. That makes absolutely no sense.

Unfinished trailer and unfinished movie or unfinished game is not the same thing, at least in my view. If full movie in unfinished state was leaked, that would be different case, but this was trailer and it actually wasn't in beta form at all. It pretty much looked finished but was just broadcasted privately first before getting played to big mass.

And why do you think these sorts of things are broadcast privately first? Critique? Maybe there was a mistake in the trailer or they were going to make some changes afterward. You don't know if the trailer was ready for the public or not, or what they had in mind. Whatever it was, if they had anything, they can't do anything about it now. It "looking finished" is not a valid argument in this scenario.

Whenever you stop saying "in my view" in reference to things that are quite objective is the point at which we'll start getting somewhere.

[Shrooblord]

Marvel could have copyright claimed his leaked video with tools YouTube provides and earn all money for themselves. Problem solved, they get money end of story.

Except you have proven more than often yourself that the YT copyright legislation isn't quite foolproof.

Also, you say that it's not alright were a finished product to be released, but it would be if that product was still in unfinished state? Consider a book of memoires on yourself, except the writer has only had the inspiration to write about your crappy times so far and hasn't focussed on any of the good life events you experienced. The book is released, far from completion, and people read it. They think your life sucks and that you dwell on only the sad things in your life. Now the book gets finished and released, but at this point, people's opinions of you have already been set.

Same goes for the trailer: it was not complete yet. It was still in progress. But yeah, after it was leaked, they had to release the official one too so that at least they could gain as many viewers as they could - they had to compensate viewer count for content completion and/or accuracy. And now their schedules have been put out of whack, people who were assigned to look after the trailer up to its intended release are without work and the company has lost valuable potential viewers on a leaked trailer. Worse yet: they as a company can not rely on one of their employees. This creates an incredible trust issue that may very well take a while to resolve. It creates an uneasy atmosphere at work and an unpleasant vibe across all employees and employers, who must now look upon their workers with a wary eye. That's some bad mojo! No wonder they want to go after the guy.

[Jewish Candy]

To add to this, OCG, your use of 'internet freedom' seems more akin to 'mah guns' than any serious consideration of the privacy issues facing us today. What, were the stolen nudes an example of 'fighting for freedom'? Both of these cases involve the unsolicited publishing of private (or personal in the case of the nudes) property, both with severe and long-lasting consequences as Shrooblord explained. Just because you can flex what little muscle the internet still has left doesn't mean you should. This is not a public-interest-Wikileaks leak, this is a personal-gratification-theft 'leak'.

Marvel - like most major corporations - has done a lot of shit on a far greater scale than this that it will likely never get punished for. And you know what? It should be punished. For ALL of it. Mr Leaker here, likewise. You can potentially argue about scale (GenericCorp gets off scott free for multiple crimes/booboos, this one guy gets the full force of the law for just one) but it's trite and more than inconsiderate to actively cheer this guy on simply because his opponent - which contains thousands of proles as well as evuhl bourgeoise CEOs - is big. And if he's leaked other stuff he has no business doing that ffs

[OCG]

Marvel could have copyright claimed his leaked video with tools YouTube provides and earn all money for themselves. Problem solved, they get money end of story.

Except you have proven more than often yourself that the YT copyright legislation isn't quite foolproof.

Content owner has multiple options to do when claiming video:
1. Tracking views
2. Monetize uploader's video and earn money for himself
3. Take down video

If he chooses 2nd option, uploader will have to dispute the claim. Then claimer has 30 days to answer dispute or the video gets restored to normal and money is either earned by nobody or uploader earns it (depends if he put ads on video or not). Marvel could have just claimed video and even if leaker disputed claim, Marvel could simply wait 29 days, earn money for 29 days and then reject dispute. Uploader could then appeal and Marvel can do same thing again. Wait 29 days to earn money form his upload and then reject appeal. When appeal is rejected, video will get taken down automatically. Uploader can then submit counter-notification (which would be falsefied since he does not own rights) and only thing Marvel needs to do is show proof in less than 14 days that they filled lawsuit based on information leaker had to provide in order to submit counter notification. In the end, Marvel could have win without bothering Google.

[Dark Lum Lord]

So I came back to Kid A, and I was blown away. I've listened to it a few times before, but it didn't hit a homer until now -- it was interesting, yes, but I couldn't ever finish it until now. But now, it's pulled me in completely, sucking me into Another World ©. Like a French kiss, or a fist up the ass... minus the bodily fluids, but, fun fact, females are capable of having orgasms via sound waves. Life is quite the Choose Goose. So, I give it five thumbs up [Inexplicable fisting joke / Starfish aliens ??], or, roughly (lol)... An A+!
Kid's got an A, eh? (Shoot me, $12)

In other news, are we not going to talk about Coco's character development from 2 to 3? It was weird enough that ole Tits McGee that we spent the entire first game trying to save was replaced with her, but now she's hit the mute button like Crash? Like I didn't notice, you Naughty lil Dog (I'll shit on your rug). Not that it's an issue since her voice acting was no Tara Strong quality, which itself is excused since it's a PS1 game. That brings me to another debate, N64 vs. PS1 voice acting. Ex. CB vs. BK (I nearly typed "BJ", and I think I officially have a problem) -- former has (poorly aged) voice acting, latter has cutesy grunts (Grunties? Sounds like a brand of dog treats~) which can quickly escalate to fucking annoying.
Cheers for fears, peers!

*I have no idea what the current shitstorm is, nor do I have the attention span to read back, but I'll cash in my two cents later

[Shrooblord]

Well, that was a read and a half. Thank you for my daily dose of laughter, DLL.

[MrBadGuy]

All these views and opinions about this YouTube "leak" thing that I know nothing about. Here's all I know:

It's Marvel's property, I don't care about whether it's "freedom of the internet", I don't care if it's "money that's forever lost to them"

It's Marvel's property, it has nothing to do with opinion, they can do what they want with it, you can't.

[OCG]

I never said in any post that they don't have rights to do it. I just stated that I find it hilarious.

[Adsolution]

Marvel could have just claimed video and even if leaker disputed claim, Marvel could simply wait 29 days, earn money for 29 days and then reject dispute. Uploader could then appeal and Marvel can do same thing again. Wait 29 days to earn money form his upload and then reject appeal. When appeal is rejected, video will get taken down automatically. Uploader can then submit counter-notification (which would be falsefied since he does not own rights) and only thing Marvel needs to do is show proof in less than 14 days that they filled lawsuit based on information leaker had to provide in order to submit counter notification. In the end, Marvel could have win without bothering Google.

That's a ridiculously prolonged and contrived procedure for a multi-million dollar company to have to go through - that's an extra two months put on the waiting period for lawsuit filing. Why stoop down to that level if you have the means to simply contact Google directly? I'm not talking about money here either, I'm talking about the fact that Marvel has established themselves as an icon. I share my empathy with novice content creators, but why are you trying to restrict access to those who are established enough to be able to get where they need to quicker? That's like saying that touring performers should not have prepaid flights, that they should have to drive themselves to their destination, through shitty traffic to reach their gigs every single day. Whether they're able to or not doesn't affect anyone else or put them at any kind of a disadvantage in this context, so it's clear you have a raging superiority complex.

I never said in any post that they don't have rights to do it.

Yeah, you basically said that everyone has the right to their unreleased work, implying that they don't have the right to privacy at their own discretion, that the consumer decides what of their content is private. You don't want corporations controlling consumers? Don't be a fucking shit and try to puppet the corporations then.

To make another analogy towards my own content, if I privately shared with you a trailer for ROTD, would you secretly record it without me knowing and upload it to YouTube without my permission in the name of 'freedom'? Or would that, for some reason, be wrong???

Respect eachother's right to privacy; like Candish said, a point made which you completely ignored: advocating any of it coming from either end, corporation or consumer, is exorbitantly childish.

So I came back to Kid A, and I was blown away. I've listened to it a few times before, but it didn't hit a homer until now -- it was interesting, yes, but I couldn't ever finish it until now. But now, it's pulled me in completely, sucking me into Another World ©. Like a French kiss, or a fist up the ass... minus the bodily fluids, but, fun fact, females are capable of having orgasms via sound waves. Life is quite the Choose Goose. So, I give it five thumbs up [Inexplicable fisting joke / Starfish aliens ??], or, roughly (lol)... An A+!
Kid's got an A, eh? (Shoot me, $12)

High five! I felt the same way, it really is, at its heart, Kid A+.

[technology4617]

I never said in any post that they don't have rights to do it. I just stated that I find it hilarious.

Your finding it hilarious is entirely a result of your irrational, unconditional dislike of corporations, which in turn causes you to make all of these ludicrous assumptions that highlight your fundamental misunderstanding of corporations and blatant disregard of copyright law. I'm not going to try and combat your points directly, but the mindset that causes them to be spewed out, as that's really what needs to be addressed here.

I hope Avengers leaker lives in safe country where international copyright infringement law is not defined. It would be massive trolling and Marvel could not do shit about it and they would just be wasting time trying to get info from Google LOLOLOL.

People don't particularly want to join in on your hypocritical "rebellion" against large content creators due to the minor inconveniences you've faced with YouTube's Content ID system. That's really entirely the reason; most people, including probably Adsolution, would be quite pissed off at the leaker, and I'm sure that in the case of ROTD, you would feel differently, and make some over-the-top rant about the leaker instead, probably advocating physical violence or something.

Also:

LOLOLOL.

No.

Well he already posted on YouTube that he regrets nothing and got over 70 thumbs up. Whatever happens, that guy will truly be remembered as awesome leaker (he leaked many different things on YT). If only there were more people like him.

I'm quite glad there aren't. The fact that he has no regret about anything is sadistic more than anything else.

You guys can boon as much as you want but he is awesome.

OK, then.

People like him always fascinated me. I see them as a fighters for freedom.

Freedom from what? You haven't really specified, and for the moment it sounds like you're proposing some sort of anarchist society.

So, just for example, if I was working on a nearly-complete trailer for ROTD and I showed it privately to someone before release to ask for critique, and they in turn took it and posted it online without my permission, you would passionately advocate them in the name of 'freedom' and laugh in my face?

No, I wouldn't laugh at you if something like that happened. My reaction would be "Cool trailer, awesome that I had a chance to see it before official upload, can't wait for upgraded official one"

Your avoidance at answering the implied question pretty much gives us the answer.

Video was low quality so I don't see how is a lot money lost. As soon as Marvel released HD trailer, all people went to see it. It is only logical since the low quality trailer didn't do good job showing moive's true look.

This is, very simply, not true. If you casually watched the leaked trailer, I doubt you'd care about going back and seeing it again in higher quality unless you're some Marvel fanatic.

Plus I see no ads on the video of leaker which means he earned no profit from those uploads.

You have a very simplified view of how corporations earn money.

Your idea of freedom seems to be "I should have the right to rape your little sister, because [...]". Now give me a good explanation as to how that isn't actually your idea of freedom without nullifying at least one part of your previous argument.

My idea of freedom is nothing like that. After murder, rape is the worst thing that can happen to anyone so please do not compare such thing to something internet related.

Well, yeah, it is, fundamentally.

I am only fighting for internet freedom.

You're not really doing anything other than posting ridiculously over-the-top rants about Google executives are Nazis, honestly.

Now don't get me wrong, I have limits for myself too. For example, I criticised leakers of The Expendables 3 and commented on rant my friend made that it was permanent damage for company. I just support idea of freedom when it comes to leaking something unfinished and promotional like trailer and I am sorry but I will always find it ridiculous how companies overreact about it.

Those limits are pretty far out there by most people's standards, and despite being subjective, don't really make a lot of logical sense.

Marvel could have copyright claimed his leaked video with tools YouTube provides and earn all money for themselves. Problem solved, they get money end of story. But instead they choose to go after the uploader so that proves they are money hungry and want to earn even more money (in case they win lawsuit and this guy gets ordered to pay them big time).

We don't live in an anarchist society which is completely ruled on a moral grounds, though. Uploading a copyrighted song is not on the same level as leaking shit that wasn't even supposed to be public in the first place.

Unfinished trailer and unfinished movie or unfinished game is not the same thing, at least in my view. If full movie in unfinished state was leaked, that would be different case, but this was trailer and it actually wasn't in beta form at all. It pretty much looked finished but was just broadcasted privately first before getting played to big mass.

Releasing the unfinished movie would've certainly been way worse, but releasing the unfinished trailer is still bad, and it's still illegal.

Content owner has multiple options to do when claiming video:
1. Tracking views
2. Monetize uploader's video and earn money for himself
3. Take down video

Yeah, let's purposefully choose the more inconvenient method typically used to profit off of music videos uploaded to YouTube to get funds, while letting the motherfucker get off scot free without any sort of criminal charges placed against him whatsoever.



You've repeatedly shown that pretty much all of your beliefs stem from some sort of bias based entirely on your personal experiences with something, be it your stance when it comes to the console wars, whether Jim Sterling posts "idiotic nonsense," whether Apple is shit over a minor design flaw with their current series of iPhone, or just blatant racism on the account that "you lived with those people so you can judge them." Please avoid from doing the above. It's an issue that I and many others are honestly having some difficulty seeing past, and it seems to become more prominent as of late.

[Haruka]

I don't want to break the conversation chain (TL;DR) but, oh my god, Candish! You're back !

[OCG]

@Tech
I am only going to respond to last statement of yours since everything above is pretty much more-less same what Ad and Shrooblord said.

You've repeatedly shown that pretty much all of your beliefs stem from some sort of bias based entirely on your personal experiences with something, be it your stance when it comes to the console wars, whether Jim Sterling posts "idiotic nonsense," whether Apple is shit over a minor design flaw with their current series of iPhone, or just blatant racism on the account that "you lived with those people so you can judge them." Please avoid from doing the above. It's an issue that I and many others are honestly having some difficulty seeing past, and it seems to become more prominent as of late.

Well of course I am going to base everything based on my personal experiences. Imagine if I based everything based on someone else's experiences. It would make no sense at all.


Anyways I am done talking about this topic since my beliefs are clearly different than yours and there is no point in talking about this anymore. It would not change or achieve anything.

[technology4617]

@Tech
I am only going to respond to last statement of yours since everything above is pretty much more-less same what Ad and Shrooblord said.

Well, yeah, they're right. If my arguments are similar to theirs, that doesn't mean I'm "hopping on the bandwagon," it just means I agree.

You've repeatedly shown that pretty much all of your beliefs stem from some sort of bias based entirely on your personal experiences with something, be it your stance when it comes to the console wars, whether Jim Sterling posts "idiotic nonsense," whether Apple is shit over a minor design flaw with their current series of iPhone, or just blatant racism on the account that "you lived with those people so you can judge them." Please avoid from doing the above. It's an issue that I and many others are honestly having some difficulty seeing past, and it seems to become more prominent as of late.

Well of course I am going to base everything based on my personal experiences. Imagine if I based everything based on someone else's experiences. It would make no sense at all.

I don't think you realize how big of a problem that is. Your extremely limited experience with comparatively massive things (and races) in no way justifies the vast assumptions and generalizations you've been spewing out over the past few months.

Anyways I am done talking about this topic since my beliefs are clearly different than yours and there is no point in talking about this anymore. It would not change or achieve anything.

So you'll never change. Well, thanks for admitting it, I suppose. If that's the case, though, I feel somewhat differently about the kind of person you are.

[rolesfamily]

You're never going to get through to somebody who's whole YouTube channel is based on infringing copyright.

[Snagglebee]

Speaking of YouTube's copyright system, I was forced to sign a contract so a friend, who owns a bigger YouTube Channel, could legally use my provided material. He told me, it's for the copyright system.

[OCG]

That was totally unneeded since YouTube won't make issues about copyright unless you registred your channel to Content ID system. For example. I could now take and reupload Adsolution's video (not saying I will do that but just giving an example) and nothing would get triggered by YouTube's system since Adsolution is not signed in Content ID system (only big companies usually get accepted for that and get granted access to special Content Manager menu). Only thing he could do is manually report the video that it was reuploaded from his channel and have it taken down.

I hope this YouTuber did not scam you somehow and that he won't use that contract you signed against you in future and do stuff that you do not apporve later. You should have asked me about this Omar before you signed it. You should have explained him how Content ID works.

[Snagglebee]

He told me, in case that he gets trouble with anyone else, claiming it to be their content, he would have gotten something to prove the opposite.
I have read the contract, and there is nothing actually that I don't agree with. Basically, he just profits from the source I provided him and that's basically it. I dunnot care for YouTube money anyways so

[OCG]

Oh, ok then. Well in that case it should be good I guess. Good thing you agreed to let him profit off your footage. Thats how the true YouTubers do. Well to be fair he is adding new meaning to it by providing his own commentarry so it is fair.