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This discussion has been archived.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 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."
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (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.