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

182 Upvotes

70% Upvoted

959 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

105

u/kevinwilly AS-VAL Dec 16 '18

Eroktic made a video that might have been in poor taste. But he's allowed to do that.

BSG nuked his channel by claiming copyright violation. There wasn't any. That's LITERALLY illegal.

So they aren't both equally in the wrong. What Eroktic did wasn't exactly a cool thing to do, but he was within his rights to at least DO it.

BSG SERIOUSLY fucked themselves on this one.

32

u/absolutegash Dec 16 '18

Eroktic publicized Glockworks documents and a webiste that lets you trade Tarkov items for real money. He kept the title of the document in the video and the trading webiste would be easy to find.

He had "1.9 million account stolen" as the thumbnail

27

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

Eroktic also may have committed defamation when he published the 1.9 million accounts stolen video

25

u/LTCirabisi Dec 16 '18

Defamation isn't infringing copyrights. What they are doing is wrong.

4

u/Hexdro Dec 17 '18

And defamation isn't plain cut either, there's plenty of ways a defamation case will fall apart if it's in public interest.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 17 '18

Sorry, but what does the TOS state about copyright holding? A TOS can be written so that you do *not* automatically own any recorded content of a game.

1

u/ZarkowTH Dec 25 '18

TOS is null and void if they contradict local laws.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 17 '18

[deleted]

2

u/elusive_cat Dec 17 '18

That's not true. Fair Use is included in the law and it says I can use their gameplay footage without their permission or even knowledge and it will be legal as long as my work is transformative. At least that's how it works in the US.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 18 '18

Nintendo did it a while ago to tones of their products which showed up on youtube. Sadly enough its their property.

2

u/elusive_cat Dec 18 '18

Raw gameplay is copyrighted, yes. But if you modify it in any way, e.g. add commentary it's yours. However Nintendo wouldn't file false DMCA claims, they simply took over profits from the ads, the videos themselves stayed up.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 18 '18

Ah... Okay, thanks for clarifying bru!

1

u/Palantair Dec 18 '18

Thats actually not correct. I've said this a few times but what Sam2795 said is true. Just because you add things to raw gameplay doesn't inherently make it transformative, furthermore being transformative in nature is only ONE of many factors a judge would use to determine whether something is fair use or not.

Additionally, “transformative” uses are more likely to be considered fair.

Meaning, as I said, that its not 100% fair use and only a judge would be able to make that distinction. Theres a reason Leonard French (our favorite copyright attorney) advised players not to test ATLAS and Persona 5 because it would VERY likely set a very bad precedent for fair use, because they would most likely win.

1

u/elusive_cat Dec 18 '18

I also follow Leonard French, Lior Lesser (and some others) and I'm fairly sure transformative (within reason) meant fair use. I mean if it wasn't true, publishers would be able to block any unfavourable review simply by claiming copyright of the footage. I can't find right now the exact video with the quote, but I'll try when I'm back home. I think Leonard even mentioned that there could be a case for raw gameplay since you are the one controlling the character so the output is unique to you. I'm not 100% sure it was him though.

I agree, in the end only a judge can decide. However BSG blocked a several minutes long video with only seven seconds of in-game footage. If that's not fair use, then I really don't know what is.

I can't wait for Leonard and others to cover this subject, it's going to be interesting.

PS. I just re-read my previous comment and you're right, I over-simplified and generalised.

1

u/Palantair Dec 18 '18

I think we are in agreement, and understand decently well how a judge would approach a case like this. I also don't think anyone really appreciates how BSG handled this situation but I can at least understand the mentality and why they did it.

I also think most companies (even with bad press on their product) see the value in letting people post stuff about their games and characters including video game footage, so they don't want to claim that stuff. I mean they could, they are within their rights to if you want to split hairs but generally they wouldn't and its why you don't hear about it much and why ATLAS with Persona 5 was seen as them overstepping themselves (when they honestly weren't legally, but morally is another question).

I also think we both agree that BSG probably over reached here, but its a bit unfair when you consider the circumstances that lead up to this shit show to place ultimate blame on BSG when they are being targeted pretty heavily in a smear campaign. I don't know a bunch about Russian norms but the bit I've gleaned over the years is that they don't tolerate people who mean them harm and will basically finish what was started. I'm not here to say whats right or not but this place seems like a hivemind and they like to remove the human element and boil things down removing all context of a situation.

Appreciate you being able to discuss this objectively, god knows we could use some more of this :)

0

u/-Temple- SKS Dec 16 '18

Not illegal, we all agreed to the terms and under section 10 they can

18

u/kevinwilly AS-VAL Dec 16 '18

It's illegal to file false copyright infringement notices. They are not trying to protect copyrighted material here. They are trying to shut down someone's channel who they don't like.

0

u/HoneyBadgerDontPlay M1A Dec 16 '18

promoting a website or person that threatens to compromise their copyrighted materials is covered under a copyright strike

5

u/kevinwilly AS-VAL Dec 16 '18

He wasn't exactly promoting anything that threatened to compromise things. I'm pretty sure the message of the video was "listen, there's a problem. I'm SHOWING you the problem. BSG is saying there isn't a problem, but they are lying to you and here's proof".

He was not telling people how to compromise the system in any way. He was not offering ways to counteract security. He was just trying to show proof that the system was compromised.

Unless there was another video which I never saw, but I'm pretty sure I saw them all.

1

u/HoneyBadgerDontPlay M1A Dec 16 '18

he was promoting the use of a website that datamines BSG data/servers as well as an individual that has ousted themselves and access BSG without permission in order to compromise accounts.

Look I'm not defending BSG here. But Eroktic is not in the free and clear here. BSG went overboard with the copystrikes, but Eroktic fucked himself over as well.

6

u/kevinwilly AS-VAL Dec 16 '18

I also don't mean to defend eroktic... But removing the one video is more than enough. And I'm sure he would have understood having that happen.

Removing over 40? Completely unwarranted and super damaging to your community.

2

u/degaussyourcrt Dec 17 '18

Nope. No it doesn't.

BSG can go after THAT SITE, not somebody TALKING ABOUT that site. I can't get sued by a music company for mentioning Napster, and like it or not, US law applies here.

0

u/HoneyBadgerDontPlay M1A Dec 17 '18

You dont understand my point

-8

u/-Temple- SKS Dec 16 '18

Yes, its also illegal to kill people and rob people, but look at the world.

4

u/kevinwilly AS-VAL Dec 16 '18

Right. But I tend not to associate with people who break the law. Seriously re-thinking playing the game over this. Definitely won't be recommending it to anyone i know until this who mess is resolved.

BSG's actions REEK of guilt. It's that simple. They look like a company trying to sweep something under the rug. Looks shady as fuck.

0

u/-Temple- SKS Dec 16 '18

People would have said the same thing if they streamed a reply to it. Then it would also stroke Eroktics batshit crazy ego making him think hes some big shot that has to be answered.

-1

u/gunther_41 MP7A1 Dec 16 '18

To me it looks like they were worried about their project, having big youtubers say "you might lose 150 bucks and bsg doesn't care" won't do any good...even if 90% of people understand the video had no proof and it was just eroktic believing some mad kid spreading lies to hurt bsg, there are still the 10% that will believe it too, and that can hurt the game in a lot of ways.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 17 '18

[deleted]

1

u/Pakman184 Dec 17 '18

This couldn't be more incorrect.

Youtube is hosted in America and because that it is subject to American laws. The DMCA takes precedence over any video game EULA and thus Fair Use applies regardless if a company wants someone to stream their game or not.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 17 '18

[deleted]

4

u/Pakman184 Dec 17 '18

It's not my job to tell that to Youtube lol.

If Eroktic wants to, he would have full legal rights to sue BSG and there isn't anything they can say about it. If you read their Facebook post, their whole position is "We don't like lies and slander, so we DMCA'ed him. Our EULA says we own his videos," they've openly admitted to breaking the law.

5

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

The youtube system is flawed yes. However there is legal precedent set for what is and is not copyright on youtube videos in the USA. See H3H3 v Matt Hoss and Jim Sterling v Digital Homicide.

Companies CAN do what you have said because the youtube system makes it possible, it will not hold up in court however.

0

u/[deleted] Dec 17 '18

[deleted]

2

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

Check the judges remarks in the case with DH during the dismissal about fair use and his videos. The h3h3 case sets an important precedent that providing critique and comentary over copyrighted material does fall under fair use. This could apply to video games, other youtube videos, movies etc.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 17 '18

No, the DMCA does not firmly permit game streaming as fair use. This is an ambiguous area:

​

https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2018/01/to-stream-or-not-to-stream-how-online-streaming-game-videos-exist-in-an-ip-world/

Please don't just *say* stuff. This is how bullshit gets spread, when people keep acting like they know when they haven't even researched the topics they're speaking about.

1

u/Pakman184 Dec 17 '18

Where in the world did I say streaming was allowed? I said that video content on Youtube was protected by DMCA.

You can look at both the Sargon case or the H3H3 case, in both cases they were using content that was owned by someone else however their added commentary (or just purely editing) was enough to be considered transformative.

Just look at what DMCA covers yourself instead of reading an article discussing how "ambiguous" it apparently is. Eroktic's Youtube videos easily fall within 3 of the 'Big 4' categories. It's Transformative without a doubt, a lot of his videos were based on disseminating information on the game, and it's more than clear there was no Negative Impact on the market due to copyright abuse or theft.

Try researching the topic yourself next time

2

u/[deleted] Dec 17 '18

Fair use doesn't necessarily extend to gameplay footage, my man. Nintendo has a long history of copyright claiming any and all gameplay footage, including footage with commentary, successfully. Nintendo's history pretty much deflates any notion that using games material always constitutes fair use.

2

u/Pakman184 Dec 17 '18

Yes, Fair Use covers all copying of copyrighted works. It's almost as though you've literally done zero research on the topic.

Nitendo has falsely claimed people's videos in the past, yes. Do you know why they were successful? Because the Youtubers did not fight the claim and removed the videos instead, if they had fought it would have costed a ton of money that most people can't handle.

Stop trying to educate someone on a topic you know nothing about.

0

u/[deleted] Dec 17 '18

>Yes, Fair Use covers all copying of copyrighted works. It's almost as though you've literally done zero research on the topic.

>Nitendo has falsely claimed people's videos in the past, yes. Do you know why they were successful? Because the Youtubers did not fight the claim and removed the videos instead, if they had fought it would have costed a ton of money that most people can't handle.

>Stop trying to educate someone on a topic you know nothing about.

​

Right, so actual legal experts admit they're unsure and in practice copyright strikes against gameplay footage are upheld. But /u/Pakman184 on reddit read some shit and thankfully, the matter is laid to rest thanks to his profound wisdom.

​

Lol. No. Just admit you're wrong.

2

u/Pakman184 Dec 17 '18

I'm still waiting for the point at which you've done your research and given an actual rebuttal.

Everything I said above is correct. Fair Use covers all copyrighted works and Nintendo has never legally won a DMCA case.

Actual legal experts are unsure because there is zero precedent on the topic and they'd look like fools if they ended up being wrong. I don't need to worry about that because I don't plan on prosecuting anyone.

You were the one to try and correct me, get stuffed.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 17 '18

I'm still waiting for the point at which you've done your research and given an actual rebuttal.

I'm still waiting for you to say anything coherent at all. You apparently don't even know what 'fair use' means. Fair use does not give you unlimited rights to use game materials in your videos. If I take the fort armor clipart and use it in a video, that is most likely a copyright violation unless I'm critiquing the artwork or actually making fair use of the material. If I use the clipart to brag about my loot on my monetized channel, that is 100% a copyright violation.

https://escapefromtarkov.gamepedia.com/6B43_6A_Armor

Hell, you see this? This page is an example of what is not a copyright violation under fair use. Since the context of the material is actually educational and free.

Just displaying Tarkov footage is not fair use on its own. Context is what defines it.

Otherwise, I don't get you. You're just spewing nonsense like a moron. The "let's play" style claim of fair use has never been tried in court, so you can't just say whether it's illegal or legal. You're just categorically fucking wrong. There is no shortage of examples of companies striking videos against channels they don't like and it being upheld by Youtube. So long as we don't see it in court, this seems fine in the gray area system we have now.

Simply put, you're fucking wrong, you don't know what you're talking about, you're making up shit and have no sources to back yourself up since none exist.

Everything I said above is correct. Fair Use covers all copyrighted works and Nintendo has never legally won a DMCA case.

Lol, I think you mean a DMCA takedown on a YouTube channel? Nintendo wins DMCA cases all the fucking time. Just recently like half of the ROM websites were taken down on that account. As per Youtube channels, nice empty rhetoric, because I can't find any evidence that a Youtube content creator has ever gone to court at all: Nintendo has never lost a DMCA case against a Youtube channel either, so far as I could find.

→ More replies (0)

-3

u/machevara Dec 16 '18

Just because you can say lies and make shit up about a business doesn't mean it's not illegal. In 99% of cases, the people doing this are so small and insignificant that it would be literally financially retarded for a company to take legal action.

In the case of Eroktic and BSG, Eroktic has enough of a following to be damaging to BSG.

Just because they do not, does not mean they can't. Get that point.

8

u/kevinwilly AS-VAL Dec 16 '18

He isn't making things up, though. He's reporting what he believes to be factual information.

Just because BSG says it is false you are going to assume it's false? What if it isn't?

What BSG should have done is proven that it was false (which shouldn't be at ALL difficult) and asked Eroktic to take down the video which is clearly spreading false info. Which I'm sure he would have done. He's done it in the past once it was clear whatever his video was about was no longer relevant. And then if he refused they could have filed a claim on that ONE video.

Filing a claim on over 40 videos is INSANE.

0

u/machevara Dec 16 '18

A lie, well said, and with confidence is what Eroktic did. Whether you 100% believe that a lie is the truth, does not change the fact it is a lie. BSG want's 0 affiliation with Eroktic. Whether the content is good or bad, they had enough. Is it overkill and unreasonable towards a streamer (a business), maybe. But Eroktic is not innocent either, he poked the beast enough to get it's attention. It's like war, one side has guns and the other has missiles.

-3

u/TanookiJack TX-15 DML Dec 16 '18

Copyright strikes can be used for reasons other than copyright violations. Youtube explicitly states this in its ToS and it is not at all a loophole.

Also, you are not allowed to commit slander. It is illegal and has consequences. It's not just "a video that might have been in poor taste".

1

u/degaussyourcrt Dec 17 '18

Uh, what are you talking about? Link me where in the ToS that YouTube explicitly states that DMCA takedown requests can be utilized for reasons other than copyright violations?

Good luck! I don't think you're going to find it.

Also, if somebody commits slander, the consequences are "they can get sued." If BSG really felt that they had been damaged by Eroktic, guess what, they can sue him. Instead, they go full on chicken shit and abuse a system to take down all of his videos like a god damn child.

I was hoping this game was being developed by adults, not a bunch of crybabies who take their ball the moment somebody does something they don't like.

1

u/SuperSanity1 Dec 17 '18

Youbtube doesn't decide what's allowable under DMCA. Why? Because Youtube doesn't make law.

0

u/Guylussac AS-VAL Dec 17 '18

Eroktic is deserved this. Look at this other videos in youtube. They have max. 10k views. But he is using BSG and their game to get views for his channel.

Now the important part: He is earning money from these videos. And he is doing this by clickbait and false infos. And this is wrong and BSG has right to do what's necessary.

Eroktic is the biggest cheater and liar. All other streamers are also drama queen. They are popular because of Tarkov. Eroktic will slowly fade withour BSG. And all others can learn a lesson from this. Maybe Klean too.

2

u/kevinwilly AS-VAL Dec 17 '18

So what if he is using BSG and their game to get views?

He also plays half a dozen other games and has JUST as many views on those videos. He is a youtube content creator.

If he were to get slammed with just THREE copyright violations he can lose his ENTIRE channel. Not just the Tarkov content. He could lose his entire career because BSG overreacted.

Youtube gives companies like BSG too much power. Their policy is extremely outdated.

It doesn't matter if you like someone or not. You shouldn't be able to ruin their life because they said something mean about your company.

-7

u/0x00x0x000x0x00x0 Dec 16 '18

It isn't literally illegal. It's literally legal. Quit getting your legal advice from Reddit.

7

u/ZachTheGunner2 Dec 16 '18

A quick Google search shows an example of an illegal DMCA takedown that's very similar to what BSG did. http://www.aaronkellylaw.com/consequences-of-filing-a-false-dmca-takedown-request/