Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Saturday October 22 2016, @01:20AM   Printer-friendly
from the any-publicity-is-good-publicity? dept.

Samsung 'Blocks' Exploding Note 7 Parody Videos

Samsung appears to have filed copyright claims against YouTube videos mocking its recalled Galaxy Note 7 handset. Many gamers have showcased a modification to video game Grand Theft Auto V, in which sticky bombs were switched with exploding Samsung phones.

But some have reported that their videos have been blocked on YouTube following a copyright complaint.

Samsung has not yet responded to repeated BBC requests for comment.

Critics have warned that trying to remove gamers' videos will only draw more attention to them.

One US gamer - known as DoctorGTA - said restrictions had been put on his YouTube account as a result of Samsung's complaint. "It's going to take three months to get the strike removed from my channel... I got my live stream taken away," he said in a video.

Game Modification Ridicules Samsung Galaxy Note 7

The gamer HitmanNiko (non-Cloudflare link), and perhaps others, modified the sticky bomb weapon in Grand Theft Auto V , giving it the appearance of the trouble-prone Samsung Galaxy Note 7 mobile phone. Reportedly, Samsung sent a DMCA notice to YouTube, requesting that one of the videos showing the mod in use be taken offline, and YouTube, initially, complied. The video (N.B. shows violence) is currently available; according to the uploader, "YouTube finally put it back up."

coverage:

related:
Samsung Recalls Galaxy Note 7 due to 'Exploding' Batteries

Samsung Faces the Prospect of a Second Galaxy Note 7 Recall

UPDATE: Samsung Halts Galaxy Note 7 Production


Original Submission #1Original Submission #2

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by Snotnose on Saturday October 22 2016, @02:39AM

    by Snotnose (1623) on Saturday October 22 2016, @02:39AM (#417504)

    The only way to stop this BS is to form a class action lawsuit. Granted, you will make pennies and the lawyer(s) will make thousands. But if you want your videos to be seen when they aren't infringing anyone's rights, except those easily butthurt, you need to band together and sue Google.

    On the other hand, if you lose it's the lawyers that lose all the money. So, win win, amirite?

    --
    Why shouldn't we judge a book by it's cover? It's got the author, title, and a summary of what the book's about.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by TheGratefulNet on Saturday October 22 2016, @02:44AM

    by TheGratefulNet (659) on Saturday October 22 2016, @02:44AM (#417505)

    CAL is never about YOU making any money; but its always been about punishing a big co that would not be easily punished in a one-off lawsuit.

    --
    "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    • (Score: 2) by Snotnose on Saturday October 22 2016, @02:53AM

      by Snotnose (1623) on Saturday October 22 2016, @02:53AM (#417507)

      This is exactly the problem with a CAL. You can be butthurt, but did the company do wrong? Do lots of other folks feel butthurt as well? Some lawyer files a class action, company has to spend $$$ to defend while the lawyer spends nothing but time, and IMHO the results are random.

      Maybe I'm jaded. When Governor Deukmejian won a CAS against Levis for something or other I submitted a claim, think I was gonna get $1 for every pair of Levis I'd bought. 40 years later, I'm still waiting for the $3 check.

      Get crap in the mail for a class action lawsuit for something or other every month or so, I toss them all into the trash as soon as I realize what they are.

      --
      Why shouldn't we judge a book by it's cover? It's got the author, title, and a summary of what the book's about.
      • (Score: 2) by Nerdfest on Saturday October 22 2016, @03:21AM

        by Nerdfest (80) on Saturday October 22 2016, @03:21AM (#417511)

        Wouldn't it be better for a pile of people that lost money due to their false claims to individually take them to court, or even small claims court if it's within the amount it cost them? Eating up their lawyer time would be a pretty good punishment, the actual people it cost money to would get paid, perhaps even with some punitive damages as well.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 22 2016, @02:41PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 22 2016, @02:41PM (#417579)

    Google should not be the target of any lawsuits, it needs to be whoever is making the takedown request and they need to put up a bond ahead of time before making any takedown requests in case they get sued. Google can be fined huge amounts of money if they keep infringing content up and so to fine them for taking down content on their own servers at their discretion would put them in an unfair position. It's their servers, they can take down content for whatever reason they want. You're probably one of those pro-IP Google haters that just wants Google to die.

    and the fine for making bogus takedown requests should be greater than infringement penalties.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 22 2016, @04:24PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 22 2016, @04:24PM (#417598)

      google should be punished for being such kiss ass whores! all they have to do is look at the video before taking it down instead of taking down first and asking questions later. you're just a boot licker like them.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 22 2016, @07:22PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 22 2016, @07:22PM (#417637)

        Google shouldn't have to bear the legal burden of making such a determination, the person(s) sending the takedown request should bear that burden and if they are wrong it should be at their expense.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 22 2016, @05:36PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 22 2016, @05:36PM (#417616)

    that's the other way and it might work better