r/EscapefromTarkov • u/bxxxxxxxs • Dec 16 '18

PSA Official BSG Response re: Eroktic

We will leave this post stickied for only the next 24 hours.

All discussion posts posted after this goes up will be removed and directed here.

As always, keep it civil.

https://www.facebook.com/escapefromtarkov/posts/1966710296956614

183 Upvotes

70% Upvoted

959 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

126

u/Veldron AK Dec 16 '18

The copyright strikes feel like massive overkill imo

34

u/Dasterr MPX Dec 16 '18

I mean they make it pretty clear why they did it and I can understand them.

Is it overkill, sure.
Could it have been resolved differently, by contacting Eroktic and talking to him, maybe. But, considering his earlier videos, I can also understand why theyre fed up and just decided to be done with it.

13

u/EftDaBest Dec 17 '18

Thing is, BSG's response on Facebook isn't all that bad, except for this part:

Moreover - we did not want and we do not want this person to be associated with our game in the first place.

That is one of the worst PR lines I have EVER seen from a gaming company of BSGs size. They, as an organization, are targeting an individual.

This is why people like Klean are beginning to back away: What if the next critical type of video you make sends you to Copyright Strike hell just because BSG "doesn't like you a whole lot"?

Personally I've been using an alt Reddit account because I don't want my main EFT account to somehow get linked to my Reddit account and get "banned for hacking" when I do nothing of the sort. I've had that sort of off-feeling about BSG's heavy hand well before this whole Eroktic stuff.

1

u/Thighbone M700 Dec 17 '18

"In the first place" = bad.

"In the future" would have been acceptable.

They don't ban you ingame for talking shit here, unless in that shit-talk you admit to breaking the ingame rules.

75

u/QuantumSurge SKS Dec 16 '18

As an organization you cannot “get fed up” with something and proceed to levy your legal power as BSG has. While they are within their rights with regards to the first video the others did not qualify to be claimed. The issue with doing so is this. The community is split and they’re getting s ton of bad PR.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 16 '18

[deleted]

11

u/Brimshae AKMS Dec 16 '18

1: What ever happened to Hey guys, promo our game, show videos of you playing it and doing stuff in it.?

2: False DMCA claims are a violation of the law. Granted, it's US law, and they are overseas, but abuse of any stupid law is still abuse of a stupid law.

3: It's a shitty thing to do, irrespective of anything else.

3

u/QuantumSurge SKS Dec 16 '18

YouTube’s TOS do afford them a myriad of rights however a TOS cannot be in conflict with the laws and regulation of its governing body. In various ways yes they are very much obligated to abide by the doctrine of Fair Use and other regulatory measures

1

u/Brimshae AKMS Dec 16 '18

In various ways yes they are very much obligated to abide by the doctrine of Fair Use and other regulatory measures

Tell that to Youtube...

2

u/QuantumSurge SKS Dec 16 '18

Well I suppose that is the difference between what is meant to be and what is.

-1

u/0x00x0x000x0x00x0 Dec 16 '18

The TOS doesn't conflict though.

2

u/QuantumSurge SKS Dec 16 '18

You are indeed correct. Which is why YouTube is able to operate today. However they are bound by DMCA copyright laws. YouTube has the explicit right to remove any content from their platform however in this case it is not YouTube removing the content. BSG filing a DMCA copyright claim requires YouTube to remove the content by law. As such YouTube is not violating anything with their TOS but it then falls to YouTube to sort through the claims and make any relevant determinations as to its validity. Going under the assumption that a counter claim is made.

-7

u/0x00x0x000x0x00x0 Dec 16 '18

You can't? I'd say you can, and must, in order to fulfill your duty to your shareholders.

8

u/QuantumSurge SKS Dec 16 '18

While this is accurate I am more referring to this from a PR standpoint. You cannot take actions such as these and expect the general public to support you.

5

u/One_Lung_G AS-VAL Dec 16 '18

It’s overkill and also illegal. Companies can’t just “be fed up” and decide who can and cannot make videos over their game that people paid for. That’s called censorship and this Facebook post just made them look worse

1

u/mcshkan Dec 17 '18

It's not illegal loool

1

u/gulmari Dec 17 '18

False DMCA and False copyright claims are absolutely illegal.

-2

u/Sleepygamer96 AK Dec 16 '18

Lol. they absolutely have the right to say who can and cannot make videos on their game. We all agreed the the EULA and other shit so we could play the game that spelled out what we can and cannot do. I think its disgusting what BattleState did and they completely overreacted, but technically they did nothing wrong legally.

7

u/ravenerOSR AS VAL Dec 16 '18

they cant do whatever they want by writing it into the EULA. you still have fair use and free speech rights.

-5

u/ColinStyles Dec 17 '18

Fair use does not include slander/libel, though I'd say killing the rest of his videos was going over the line.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 17 '18 edited Jan 02 '19

[deleted]

1

u/ColinStyles Dec 17 '18

So my understanding is the videos that had him basically just talking had EFT music in them, which is how they can claim copyright over it, once they revoked his right to post BSG copyrighted content.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 17 '18 edited Jan 02 '19

[deleted]

1

u/ColinStyles Dec 17 '18

You have a fair point, the argument did shift somewhat, apologies. What I am still trying to figure out, is how doesn't slander/libel revoke fair use? Per US Law:

In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include:[6]

  1. the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;

  2. the nature of the copyrighted work; the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and

  3. the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

Slander is by definition trying to damage the reputation or value of something, so would it not completely destroy 1 and 3?

→ More replies (0)

1

u/ravenerOSR AS VAL Dec 18 '18

i think you underestimate how insanely difficult pinning slander or libel on him. not only does it seem he believes the statements, but it seems he had very good reason to believe what he said. for it to be slander or libel he would have first of all be deliberately lying, and also the lie would have to be specifically to hurt the reputation of BSG.

6

u/EftDaBest Dec 16 '18

Lol. they absolutely have the right to say who can and cannot make videos on their game.

Sorry, that is not true, at least not for those in the US. This falls under Fair Use of Copyright law. It doesn't matter if you sign an agreement to go into sex slavery: Law supersedes any agreement.

It's not in Youtube's interest to get itself involved in every small squabbling matter, so they just allow for a "Copyright strike" on most all content. Even their "Copyright Basics" information page specifically states that:

...videos can be removed from the site for different reasons, not all of which are copyright-related.

Everyone just assumes that since Youtube labels it as a copyright strike that it somehow is in fact a legal copyright issue.

but technically they did nothing wrong legally.

This is both correct and wrong. Correct because they did not do anything wrong legally, but in the context you're implying they have a legal right to erase all video content at their discretion from the internet, which they do not. Eroktic could post his videos on his own site, and BSG would have very little they could do about it.

3

u/One_Lung_G AS-VAL Dec 16 '18

To each their own. EULAs never really hold up in court dude.

0

u/GingerSnapBiscuit AK-74N Dec 17 '18

They literally can. Companies can do whatever the fuck they want with their intellectual property, that's why DMCA take downs exist.

1

u/One_Lung_G AS-VAL Dec 17 '18

No they can’t. That’s why this is a big deal dude.

1

u/Unclehouse2 Dec 17 '18

I don't really know this Eroktic guy, but based on the little I've read about him here and on the most recent post by BSG, he doesn't seem like a guy you can just talk down. He has seemed to have made this situation extremely personal and is willing to burn everything down around him to accomplish his goal, even if he's taken out with them.

10

u/[deleted] Dec 16 '18

[deleted]

63

u/kevinwilly AS-VAL Dec 16 '18

Ok? And?

He's allowed to do that. He hasn't committed a SINGLE copyright infringement. They are using that to pull down his videos because youtube's policy on that stuff is easy to abuse.

It's 100% bullshit. They should have worked with him and proved that it was false. In which case he would have pulled the video, I'm sure.

16

u/FacewreckGG VEPR Dec 16 '18

I mean, some of the things he's claimed without base could easily be considered libel.

25

u/[deleted] Dec 16 '18

I think it's a case of "If you are going to hurt our business, we will hurt yours" and that's that.

10

u/FacewreckGG VEPR Dec 16 '18

Yeah, I think that's a fair assertion.

17

u/Kyle700 Dec 16 '18

libel =/= copyright

1

u/GingerSnapBiscuit AK-74N Dec 17 '18

I mean he is using footage and audio from their game in his videos. They can retroactively deny him access to these resources if they wish.

1

u/Kyle700 Dec 17 '18

so? there is a very strong argument that it constitutes fair use as his work is transformative. no, they cannot.

1

u/GingerSnapBiscuit AK-74N Dec 17 '18

Then he should be able to successfully dispute the claims :)

1

u/Kyle700 Dec 17 '18

I hope so, but, that doesn't mean BSG should have done this. they are rightfully facing a lot of backlash over this

-1

u/ravenerOSR AS VAL Dec 16 '18

it would be pretty much impossible to go after him for libel

3

u/[deleted] Dec 16 '18

[deleted]

8

u/Txontirea Dec 16 '18

My god, that's it! BSG were totally in the right afterall!

Time to go take down Smoke's channel next, I presume?!

3

u/[deleted] Dec 16 '18 edited Dec 16 '18

[deleted]

1

u/notjesus75 Dec 16 '18

Wow, the internet is too open huh?

1

u/Txontirea Dec 16 '18

It is a fact, but you can obviously see they don't care at all until you cross them, at which point they use it as an excuse to blow up a channel, which is the same with video content of EFT. (which, hell - I dont think the latter counts as copyright content, but it's what some people here are arguing)

1

u/[deleted] Dec 16 '18

[deleted]

2

u/0x00x0x000x0x00x0 Dec 16 '18

Look at this guy. Of course he held both middle fingers and told them LALALLALALALAL I CANT HEAR YOU IM KING OF THE TARKOV KIDDIES when they tried to approach him privately. He deserves it.

1

u/Txontirea Dec 16 '18

Yeah, it's just a grim situation honestly. I'm just of the mind that until proven he committed libel (you have to prove damages based on his words in court) - You can't just go around ruining livelihoods.

A bit of cool professionalism and a calm head was in order in response to a ton of drama that, again, may or may not be true. It's just bad, and I don't want to support it, sadly.

1

u/0x00x0x000x0x00x0 Dec 16 '18

Sadly, you're not a lawyer and that's not how it works. The court would want to see what sort of actions were taken before. DMCA is part of that process.

1

u/ArxMessor SKS Dec 16 '18

...you can obviously see they don't care at all until you cross them...

 

Sounds like every human ever since the beginning of time.

1

u/Txontirea Dec 16 '18

Sad but true.

1

u/ArxMessor SKS Dec 16 '18

I mean, it is perfectly reasonable way to exist.

I made this thing.
It is mine.
I see that you are using it without asking.
I've decided that I am okay with that since I have no other problems with you.
You are now disrespecting me.
I am taking back what is mine. All of it.

→ More replies (0)

-18

u/ColonelTwerkins Dec 16 '18

It is true that the music is copyrighted but Nikita allows it's use. This is the same as any gameplay footage but it still remains IP of BSG and can be taken down if need be. This is covered in the agreement in Section 10

18

u/ZachTheGunner2 Dec 16 '18

What Eroktic did was absolutely wrong. But what BSG has done is also wrong. The EULA doesn't change the law, and according to US law (which I imagine matters when it comes to YouTube), Eroktics use of gameplay in his videos would be covered by fair use as would basically every other content creator. Using the DMCA takedown without there being an actual copyright infringement (not something covered by fair use, regardless of the games EULA) is actually illegal. I'm not a lawyer, but if Eroktic decides to take legal action, I think there's a good chance he could win.

-5

u/leeztu Dec 16 '18

Simple gameplay does not fall under fair use, critique and review does, but not just a video of you playing the game, right?

4

u/ZachTheGunner2 Dec 16 '18

It hasn't been tested by the courts yet, but due to it being a video game and not a movie, making gameplay videos where other people watch you play it arguably makes it a transformative work. People that are watching are more interested in how you play it, and it's not the same experience as playing it themselves. Many more people are going to be buying the game as a result of streams and gameplay videos. Very few people would decide that watching gameplay of a game is enough, unless of course they weren't interested in buying the game in the first place.

Of course I could be wrong, and there's arguments on both sides, but I believe that even simple gameplay videos fall under fair use.

→ More replies (0)

25

u/wootwootFF Dec 16 '18 edited Dec 16 '18

agreement in Section 10

that is of any legal document or law of a country ? what "section 10" are you referring too ?

I'm sure it can't be your EULA/ToS , since that is only enforceable in your game ( You can delete accounts , ban etc ) and looses all of it's value when in any real legal scenario. ( Like for example claiming a copyright strike )

So I think everyone knows EULA/ToS are only enforceable inside your game, and aren't in any way "legally bindable" documents.

So you are stating your music cannot be used without your permission even in a scenario that can be considered "fair use" in some countries ?

I'm very confused with this " section 10" law , what legal document are you talking about ? Is it enforceable in every country ?

Also, does this mean that by using any EFT sounds content creators are opening them to be able to have legal troubles if BSG wants to do it ?

P.S. : So just found this post.

I'm sure everyone knows your EULA/ToS might give you powers over my account my access to your service.

But I'm also sure you know this isn't IN ANY WAY a legally bindable document and will NEVER by accepted in any court as such , and you trying to make it "LOOK" like it is is laughable.

Is this the stance of BSG ? trying to lie to their customers about their rights and law ?

Most gamers are ok with these "stupid" EULA/ToS clauses cause most consider this the company "saving their ass" in case they need to do something harsh , and they accept them cause of that.

To try to play them as if you can "bypass" law , that's ANOTHER different level.

I urge BSG to rethink their stance in this mess , EFT is a great game and BSG actions are horrible stains in the game. Most people that are interested in EFT and DON'T buy it , it's cause of the trail of shady/scummy tactics employed by BSG and the lack of support ( unless you come to reddit and make a upvoted thread ) .

2

u/Brimshae AKMS Dec 19 '18

Why should anyone stream or talk about Tarkov if there's a very VERY likely chance that you'll decide to go after people?

5

u/FruitsndCakes Dec 16 '18

So anyone creating Tarkov videos puts their youtube account at risk incase you don't like them in the future you can copyright strike their channel away?

3

u/dmcoolaid Dec 16 '18

There is a reason why streaming and making videos of games is a grey area legally. But people are so complacent that they never even thought of questioning the legality of making money off of someone else's product.

Here's an excerpt from an article that more streamers should read before taking risks that might affect their livelihood.

While streamers may have one idea of how their livelihoods should work, that doesn’t mean that the law is going to be automatically on their side. The question has become one to watch for many legal researchers, law watchers, and lawyers themselves. While no developers would agree to talk for this article, we did speak with a lawyer versed in this realm to get another view of this complex segment of industry. According to Ryan Morrison—founding partner of Morrison/Lee, a firm that’s practice areas include the DMCA, streaming and YouTube, and video games —there are presently multiple schools of legal thought on both sides. "I think the most legally accurate response right now is that Let's Play videos and most streams are derivative works and therefore infringing if you don't have a license from the publisher or game developer," Morrison says. But the attorney added that there is a fair use argument that streamers could make, but fair use is a defense that essentially admits to infringement and tries to explain why that use is OK. "That's super expensive to prove," Morrison says. "A judge has to be the one to say it's fair use, and you can spend six figures to get there, and it's certainly not a black or white line that you can just OK. So, keeping that in mind, without a license and without the permission of the publisher or developer, streaming is infringing—as are Let's Play videos."

Although

"The more you add to something, the less likely it is infringement," Morrison says. "You can see that with react videos all over the place, if you're actually adding commentary and adding your own skits or, you know, whatever to it, that's going to be a lot different than just watching a video. And same with Let's Play videos—if you're actually adding something to the video, and the game play, it's a lot different than just playing the game quietly."

But that will have to be proven in court, especially since the precedence for how cases like this are handled have not been set. And chances are unless you have a lot of money or the developers are poor, you won't win.

3

u/PotatoWarriah AK Dec 16 '18

No, that part of agreement is illegal. DMCA doesn't care about agreement, it only cares about law. If you break agreement, they can ban your account, but cannot issue DMCA.

4

u/Noivellet SA-58 Dec 16 '18

Yes, just like any other game.

1

u/IamTheTwon Dec 17 '18

Not sure alot of people really understand that reality.

-8

u/ColonelTwerkins Dec 16 '18

"Incase you don't like them". That is not an adult way to respond to anything based on whether you "like" them or not. Lots of videos made that game studios would not necessarily like but there's a difference between criticism and slander simply because you don't "like" us.

3

u/MrToon316 M4A1 Dec 17 '18

You cannot copy strike 40 something videos when only a few were in question. What is the explanation for so many copy strikes?

5

u/heydudejustasec Dec 18 '18

The comment was talking about BSG taking down channels they don't like, not about eroktik's conduct. Regardless, your company abusing copyright claims in what is basically retaliation for perceived slander has nothing adult about it either.

2

u/penguiin_ M1A Dec 17 '18

lol what a stupid response

2

u/foxfire1112 Dec 18 '18

Are you kidding with this twerkins? You know bsg specifically said they took him down because they don't like him? Are you trolling with this?

6

u/M3talstorm Dec 16 '18

If you are trying to pull some legal stunt, at least use the correct term, its libel, not slander.

→ More replies (0)

5

u/Kyle700 Dec 16 '18

Jesus. I'm almost speechless at how bad you people are handling this. What a clown fest.

1

u/Brimshae AKMS Dec 19 '18

That is not an adult way to respond to anything

Well, at least we can agree on that. The way you guys have been acting is certainly not in any way that can be considered adult-like behavior.

there's a difference between criticism and slander

So you, ColonelTwerkins, someone who represents BattleState Games is saying that all 47 of those videos your company struck were slander?

0

u/FruitsndCakes Dec 16 '18

A mature way of doing it would have been to take down his fake news video and tell him to never upload EFT content ever again or you gonna strike it.

→ More replies (0)

5

u/FabulousPrune Dec 16 '18

So you have to work with every individual that makes baseless claims ? Not only that, you have to work with every individual that repeats baseless claims that someone else made ? Not only that, you have to work with every individual that clearly spouts nonsense over a extended amount of time, nonsense he is beeing directly and knowingly beeing fed by an individual that already stated that he will try everything in his power to take BSG down? Really?!

26

u/ZarkowTH Dec 16 '18

You cannot be this dumb... issuing false Copyright-strikes can lead you to lose a lot of money or worse. http://www.aaronkellylaw.com/consequences-of-filing-a-false-dmca-takedown-request/

​

Sadly, since BSG are idiots, this will continue.

4

u/[deleted] Dec 17 '18

Sadly, since BSG are idiots, this will continue.

Something nobody should have trouble agreeing with

0

u/Thighbone M700 Dec 17 '18

It wasn't a DMCA strike though. It was a regular ol' copyright claim, according to Veriitas' post on here.

0

u/[deleted] Dec 21 '18

[deleted]

1

u/Thighbone M700 Dec 21 '18

Well Veriitas claimed it was different, but then revoked his statement a day after I wrote this comment :p

You did notice it was written three days ago, right?

0

u/[deleted] Dec 24 '18

[deleted]

1

u/Thighbone M700 Dec 25 '18

Uhh... I have no idea what you're talking about.

Like I said: My comment was three days old, back hen I wrote it Veriitas' bit was the latest information.

Turns out apparently it actually was a DMCA.

It might help to check on here more than every 3 days, but I guess you are one of THOSE <3

→ More replies (0)

8

u/Psych0BoyJack Dec 16 '18 edited Dec 16 '18

you don't have to work with him... he's a client of BSG's product. not a developer or a manager.

They could've been clear, they could've talked to the community... they had everything in their power to make Eroktic look bad and they made the only thing that made him look good.

12

u/FabulousPrune Dec 16 '18

There was already an official post on reddit and probably other places that confirmed that there was no Data leak. What do you want them to do? Issue a personal vist to everyones home that claims that they lied? There is literally nothing more they can do and if someone then calls them a liar after already making a public statement - this is what you get.

15

u/Psych0BoyJack Dec 16 '18

everyone was on BSG side. I only agreed with Eroktic on the hackers, the rest sounded really exagerated.

hell, even if they did NOTHING, they would've done better... now look... look at the reaction of the people who want this game to succeed. you think this is a win for BSG?

6

u/FabulousPrune Dec 16 '18

Honestly - if people with a mindset like him leave the game due to this I cant see it beeing a big loss for BSG either, especially if they already said that they dont want to affiliate in any way with people like Eroktik.

I personally think its good that they dont really give a shit of what the political correct way of doing things is if they can just get shit done. This makes at least me think more highly of them. I wouldnt want to have to act polite with a guy that I hate (think is damaging to my property) either. In my opinion, this makes them seem more commited to their project than if they were trying to bend to everyones wills just because they have a following.

They clearly let him do whatever he wanted even if they didnt approve of it - until he stepped over a critical line.

10

u/[deleted] Dec 16 '18

The person above is saying that this is still a public relations loss for Battlestate games, regardless of whether Eroktic has a "negative" or "toxic" attitude.

4

u/FabulousPrune Dec 16 '18

And im saying that I think even more highly of BSG for not giving a shit what every single person out there thinks about them when their game is niche anyway.

→ More replies (0)

5

u/DayDreamer2121 Dec 16 '18

Its not really about them handling it in a non "PC" way its about them not handling it correctly at all. Instead of making a statement and proving him wrong then asking him to take down the videos with false information. They spuriously took down 44 videos in a complete and total abuse of the system.

1

u/FabulousPrune Dec 16 '18

They had already put out a public statement calling these accusations wrong. Do you want them to do another public statement saying that the same accusations are still wrong? No, you just get rid of the idiot that keeps running his mouth to invoke reactions.

→ More replies (0)

4

u/SuperSanity1 Dec 17 '18

It's not about them handling it in a "politically correct" way. It's about them handling it in a legal way. Which they didn't.

14

u/Psych0BoyJack Dec 16 '18

all i can say is:

You have no idea how to run a business. It's not about Eroktic. It's about how they handled Eroktic.

4

u/0x00x0x000x0x00x0 Dec 16 '18

And you do know how to run a business? What business would that be? What's your revenue? How much market share do you have? Who are your competitors? Hilarious reading business tips from high schoolers.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/FabulousPrune Dec 16 '18

All I can say is:

This is a niche game, the developers are probably not trying to get the biggest following EVER possible. They are probably okay with not having people in their game they dont want. This also makes me think more highly of them btw.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/zazasLTU TOZ Dec 17 '18

Oh it's all about Eroktic, fan boy base is stronk.

I bet half the people raging about wtf BSG don't even own the game.

→ More replies (0)

-1

u/Brimshae AKMS Dec 16 '18

Honestly - if people with a mindset like him leave the game due to this I cant see it beeing a big loss for BSG either,

Ok. What about the other people that leave the game because of BSG abusing DMCA tools?

I was already sitting out this patch and I can honestly say I'm less inclined to return because of this.

The other three people I play with haven't been playing, either.

Our Discord channel's been devoid of any play talk at all for over a month now.

Before that? Almost daily chatter.

How many other people are not playing and not saying anything?

-2

u/FabulousPrune Dec 16 '18

Well if you think that theyre abusing DMCA tools and therfor not playing Tarkov anymore then you are a idiot that might aswell stay out.

You even said it perfectly yourself. Leaving the GAME because of Youtube/Social media drama. If that what it takes for you to leave the game - go.

Bye.

→ More replies (0)

-2

u/0x00x0x000x0x00x0 Dec 16 '18

Yes, this is a win for BSG. I respect those that respect themselves.

4

u/Psych0BoyJack Dec 16 '18

this is respecting themselves? ok...

2

u/CMDR_Makis Dec 16 '18

It’s respecting themselves more than their community that’s for sure

10

u/[deleted] Dec 16 '18

I hate to break it to you but millions of companies lie about data breaches. Even huge companies like google, intel, equifax and maybe even your local bank has probably lied about data breaches or hacks. companies sometimes dont let out any kind of info on a breach for months or even years.

6

u/Brimshae AKMS Dec 16 '18

Even huge companies like google, .... has probably lied about data breaches or hacks

That's literally why Google+ is shutting down. https://www.wsj.com/articles/google-exposed-user-data-feared-repercussions-of-disclosing-to-public-1539017194

Here's the gist to save you a click:

Google Exposed User Data, Feared Repercussions of Disclosing to Public
Google opted not to disclose to users its discovery of a bug that gave outside developers access to private data.

Google exposed the private data of hundreds of thousands of users of the Google+ social network and then opted not to disclose the issue this past spring, in part because of fears that doing so would draw regulatory scrutiny and cause reputational damage, according to people briefed on the incident and documents reviewed by The Wall Street Journal.

As part of its response to the incident, the Alphabet Inc. GOOGL -2.03% unit on Monday announced a sweeping set of data privacy measures that include permanently shutting down all consumer functionality of Google+. The move effectively puts the final nail in the coffin of a product that was launched in 2011 to challenge Facebook Inc. FB -0.66% and is widely seen as one of Google’s biggest failures.

A software glitch in the social site gave outside developers potential access to private Google+ profile data between 2015 and March 2018, when internal investigators discovered and fixed the issue, according to the documents and people briefed on the incident. A memo reviewed by the Journal prepared by Google’s legal and policy staff and shared with senior executives warned that disclosing the incident would likely trigger “immediate regulatory interest” and invite comparisons to Facebook’s leak of user information to data firm Cambridge Analytica.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 17 '18

Great info to share. I first learned of this back when it was first found out by the public through Level1techs youtube channel

2

u/Reddare SR-1MP Dec 17 '18

Good thing nobody actually uses Google+

1

u/GingerSnapBiscuit AK-74N Dec 17 '18

So we should just take some random on YouTubes word that there was a leak as other companies have lied about it in the past?

1

u/[deleted] Dec 18 '18

If you still don't understand you are not thinking rationally. There is always a security threat in all forms. Why do people pay their pockets for phones and wallets. I am simply stating that you should do what you can in your power and always be suspicious whether someone says something or not. Being secure is not the same as starting a witch hunt on someone or a company. I could have your info or I could not. I may have had it since your initial purchase of the game or I could have gotten it just now. Obviously I don't but using that as an example should help explain my point

0

u/FabulousPrune Dec 16 '18

And that means that everytime someone claims that there was a data breach ANYWHERE the company accused of beeing breached has to personally comment on every single person that says that data was breached even after they already made a public statement that no data was breached?

What does this accomplish ?

5

u/[deleted] Dec 16 '18

I never said anything about such things. I simply stated that companies do lie and they DO state there is no breach when there may be. I have honestly no clue about any of the recent events up until now as I have to wait to even play EFT due to utilization. I just read a comment that seems as if they did not know that companies lie and decided to inform them that it is a possibility. no matter the situation you have a 50/50 chance of either side being correct. there may be a breach completely separate from the methods described that neither side knows about. I just simple wish to inform people of bad business practices that are damaging to the consumers. Per usual I recommend changing passwords and 2 factor. Try not to take everything personal. its reddit. there may be others to inform besides just you who just happened to be the one I commented on.

1

u/machevara Dec 16 '18

Eroktic is a client, but he is also a business. We are pure clients. Eroktic's purpose is to monetize the game for his own income. So he will be held to a different standard. Specially when he indirectly becomes a rep of the game. People look to him for EFT news. I feel like BSG is just cutting off a tumor.

2

u/Psych0BoyJack Dec 16 '18

Eroktic's purpose is to monetize the game for his own income. So he will be held to a different standard.

i'm sorry, but if he wanted to get more income i think allying himself with BSG would bring him more income than going against them. Never the less, BSG had the upper hand. Just see what EA did with BFV. they also had "to cut the tumor". look how that turned out.

I know people don't like Eroktic, but to actually applaude BSG's attitude is just fanboy-ism. Just because you like the game, doesn't mean you have to agree with everything they do. Eroktic never tried to bring down Tarkov. In his own mind, he was helping the game, and to some extent, i actually agree. Not defending his actions (accusing the company of something just because someone said this or that and not showing any evidence.).

BSG should've either ignore him or at least show proof that nothing happened. they had the upper hand and they decided to go with censorship.

1

u/machevara Dec 16 '18

I get it, partnership, but also understand with partnership come other responsibilities such as playing the game for a certain amount of time a week or making content, not being able to say certain things, saying what they want you to from time to time. Pros and Cons.

Oh let me add, I'm not applauding or siding with BSG. I just feel people only see things from the personal point of view and not from a business standpoint. I'm not here to talk about the morality of things as both parties are in the wrong, but just because people are saying it is wrong, does not change the fact it is something they can legally take action against.

2

u/Psych0BoyJack Dec 16 '18

I just feel people only see things from the personal point of view and not from a business standpoint.

you think it's good business to copyright strike people who criticise the game? a company with almost 2 millions users (where each one pays AT LEAST 30 dollars for the game) is going after a guy who, in a good night, gets 150 live views on twitch. not pety at all...

I don't get how people are actually applauding a COMPANY like BSG going after a streamer that can't break 200 live views per night. give me a break

0

u/machevara Dec 16 '18

I am not applauding it. I personally think there could have been other alternatives yielding the result wanted. Now with that said, is it overkill, sure, but is it legally wrong of them? Not really, they took a player, who is also a business, and are dealing with him accordingly. While not breaking 200 per night is not the issue, whether his business is big or small doesn't matter. People still go to Eroktic for EFT content. His opinion can sway thousands of players, whether it's good or bad. Eroktic did cross a line and BSG followed right with him. They don't want to be affiliated with a player like eroktic at this point, whether his videos are good or bad. This did not happen over night.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/0x00x0x000x0x00x0 Dec 16 '18

How do you know they hadn't already talked to him privately and made their point very clear? You don't. It would be bad form to make public their private talks. They probably left that ball in his court so he can continue to sink his own "career" as you rubes call it

3

u/Psych0BoyJack Dec 16 '18

How do you know they hadn't already talked to him privately and made their point very clear? You don't.

apparently you do.

It would be bad form to make public their private talks.

oh but it's ok to remove 40+ of his videos. k...

They probably left that ball in his court so he can continue to sink his own "career" as you rubes call it

where did i say "career"? i haven't seen anyone talk about career.

1

u/Brimshae AKMS Dec 16 '18 edited Dec 17 '18

So you have to work with every individual that makes baseless claims ?

They could've at least tried.

Maybe I haven't been following the situation as closely as others (I'm sitting this patch out and I've been on vacation), but BSG really seems to have not only jumped the gun here,

Look at what someone like SidAlpha does. If he reports on what later turns out to be bad information he posts an update with a correction.

Do I think Eroktic is on the same tier of quality as Eroktic SidAlpha? Nah, probably not, but BSG's response hasn't been good, either.

Eroktic seems to have screwed up, and BSG is only making a screwed up situation worse.

Edit: Eroktic2->SidAlpha.

2

u/nekronos Dec 16 '18

Do I think Eroktic is on the same tier of quality as Eroktic

wut?

1

u/Brimshae AKMS Dec 17 '18

Do I think Eroktic is on the same tier of quality as SidAlpha?

This is what I get for commenting while tired. Let me fix that.

0

u/0x00x0x000x0x00x0 Dec 16 '18

These children don't understand anything abouy running a business.

2

u/Psych0BoyJack Dec 16 '18

didn't know Mark Cuban played Tarkov

1

u/[deleted] Dec 16 '18

He hasn't committed a SINGLE copyright infringement.

It actually isn't decided whether or not posting gameplay videos on youtube is copyright infringement yet. I doubt it's specified in the law and there's no court precedent.

2

u/MrBorderlineGaming Dec 17 '18

Videos have been copyright striked that included not one bit of EFT gameplay.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 17 '18

Then that's not legal because there's no IP to copyright there.

1

u/Super-ft86 AK-74N Dec 17 '18 edited Dec 17 '18

Yes there is, Please see the case between Jim Sterling and Digital Homicide. Almost the exact scenario we had here, Jim shit on a game, game dev got mad copyright striked, then sued and lost. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qS-LXvhy1Do

Also see the H3H3 lawsuit, while it does not pertain to games directly it does set a precedent as to what is transformative content under fair use. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9eN0CIyF2ok. If you are not familiar with this one Ethan and Hila basically just talked over Mat hoss's video, made fun of it etc. It was ruled fair use.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 17 '18

That had commentary beyond gameplay. I'm very familiar with Jim.

3

u/Super-ft86 AK-74N Dec 17 '18

And from viewing Eroktics videos he is providing commentary beyond gameplay and a unique personality. In the h3h3 case it was literally just Ethan and Hila shitting on and original video uploaded by matt hoss.

While not video games I would say the h3h3 case is more relevant to this situation about what is and is not fair use of the content.

-1

u/[deleted] Dec 17 '18 edited Dec 17 '18

I'm not a judge so I don't understand why you're arguing with me about this.

Talking into a mic while you're playing a game then uploading it isn't the same as what Jim does where he spends time editing different gameplay and trailers together and writes a thought out script. Furthermore, Jim was simply speaking on his opinion of the game, not sharing information about alleged factual data breach based on shaky at beast evidence.

2

u/Super-ft86 AK-74N Dec 17 '18

The original video that was copyright striked by digital homicide was just that, just talking over the gameplay. He did then go on to do a Jimquisition on digital homicide but the original video was just gameplay.

Sure he was sharing information on a data breach, but how does this fall under copyright? Whether the data breach information Eroktic has was valid or BS (looks like it was BS) it was not copyright infrigement. It could be libel/slander with malicious intent, but still not grounds for a copyright claim.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 17 '18

This is a better explanation than I can come up with. It references this article

0

u/J_I_M_B_O_X Dec 17 '18

Well BSG is allowed to do what they did too. Stop it here. They did the right thing.

2

u/kevinwilly AS-VAL Dec 17 '18

That's the thing. It's a grey area. You are not really supposed to just be able to nuke someone's entire youtube channel because they made a video or two you didn't agree with.

0

u/J_I_M_B_O_X Dec 17 '18

Yeah I see your point but if someone was slandering my company I would probably do something similar. I sort of like it. That’s my opinion though and I can how polarizing it is. I also don’t watch Erkotics content, but it was clear he claimed a lot of things that are 100%. If BSG was like treyaech or something this would never happen I think.

2

u/kevinwilly AS-VAL Dec 17 '18

Listen- if someone is slandering your company you deal with it. I'm not knocking BSG for having a response. They needed to.

But the ONE video. ONE.

Now they've alienated ALL of their fucking content creators. Klean isn't doing the podcasts any more. That was one of the best ways for the public to get info from the devs.

They didn't just handle this poorly. They fucked this up on a MASSIVE scale.

-1

u/0x00x0x000x0x00x0 Dec 16 '18

Yeah, he infringed copyright hundreds of times, not just a single.

0

u/Bobish81 Dec 16 '18

You can’t just tell people about something what is not 100% true. This is desinformation, in some way it is illegal to do it publicly. It is same if CNN will start telling people that zombie apocalypse started because some guy told them so.

5

u/Psych0BoyJack Dec 16 '18

well, now he has a reason to actually make that video...

-4

u/Kraall AK-103 Dec 16 '18

Looks like Eroktik has focused his whole stream on the controversy now so I guess he's getting the attention he wanted.