Jump to content


WG going batshit with copyright threats?


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
2808 replies to this topic

noobynoob5 #681 Posted 19 May 2017 - 04:14 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 267 battles
  • 210
  • Member since:
    06-10-2015

View PostCoDiGGo, on 19 May 2017 - 04:12 PM, said:

 

 

 

and wargames!!!

brumbarr #682 Posted 19 May 2017 - 04:15 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 34009 battles
  • 3,572
  • [S3AL] S3AL
  • Member since:
    07-30-2012

View Postsignal11th, on 19 May 2017 - 04:08 PM, said:

 

There we go , apology has been given to Foch by the Head of Community Staff now you can all go back to looking for another "cause celebre" to jump on.

 

We will go home when they stop releasing OP premium tanks  and stop buffing  tanks to promote gold spam.  This shitstorm is the tool to do so.

kisli #683 Posted 19 May 2017 - 04:16 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 29838 battles
  • 196
  • Member since:
    05-12-2012

View PostNjial, on 19 May 2017 - 04:04 PM, said:

I understand that my statement can be seen dubious compared to the screenshot posted, and the implied threat there. However I want to point out that there was no copyright claim done on SirFoch and I assure you it wouldn't have come to that.  

 

That leaves the questions on our communication yesterday with SirFoch, where the focus was completely and only on his vocabulary, unfortunately the wrong words had been chosen to express the importance of the situation to us. And I apologize to SirFoch, censorship was in no way ever the goal. We will certainly learn from the situation and will continue to work on the we communicate. 

 

 

 

If lies were a fluid, this would be a river.

signal11th #684 Posted 19 May 2017 - 04:16 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 30883 battles
  • 4,812
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    07-14-2011

View PostNixuebrig, on 19 May 2017 - 03:10 PM, said:

 

if there would have been no pressure from the community, they would have gotten away with that.

 

The damage is done, it is hard to repair, if it is possible at all.

 

What damage, what pressure ? A bunch of forum blowhards... please. I shall play the game as I always have as will 95% of the player base that aren't even aware of this issue. Don't worry you can all feel like you've accomplished something important today...

Edited by signal11th, 19 May 2017 - 04:19 PM.


Joantrai #685 Posted 19 May 2017 - 04:16 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 28768 battles
  • 46
  • Member since:
    07-29-2013

View PostNjial, on 19 May 2017 - 03:04 PM, said:

I understand that my statement can be seen dubious compared to the screenshot posted, and the implied threat there. However I want to point out that there was no copyright claim done on SirFoch and I assure you it wouldn't have come to that.  

 

That leaves the questions on our communication yesterday with SirFoch, where the focus was completely and only on his vocabulary, unfortunately the wrong words had been chosen to express the importance of the situation to us. And I apologize to SirFoch, censorship was in no way ever the goal. We will certainly learn from the situation and will continue to work on the we communicate. 

 

 

 

So now you are saying that you did threaten Foch with copyright strike and obviously you did not follow the threat through since he took the vid down. Furthermore, you are implying you are willing to threaten anybody who dares to be harsh on you. Nice save there, nice ...

 

It is also nice to see two WG employees issuing different, contradicting statements on the matter.

 



HeathLedger_ #686 Posted 19 May 2017 - 04:16 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 250 battles
  • 856
  • [-UM] -UM
  • Member since:
    01-13-2017

View PostNjial, on 19 May 2017 - 04:04 PM, said:

I understand that my statement can be seen dubious compared to the screenshot posted, and the implied threat there. However I want to point out that there was no copyright claim done on SirFoch and I assure you it wouldn't have come to that.  

 

So why even bother making the threat? That's already dubious enough in itself. It already conveys a certain intent which is just plain stupid to take. Nor was it an IMPLIED threat, it was an OVERT threat. "we will have to go through youtube and take it down with a copyright strike", no uncertainty there. As well as threatening the future of his youtube income to boot.

 

Block Quote

 That leaves the questions on our communication yesterday with SirFoch, where the focus was completely and only on his vocabulary, unfortunately the wrong words had been chosen to express the importance of the situation to us

 

You're a multinational company. There is no reason a simple "[edited]wargaming, you incompetent shits" should get under your skin enough that you threaten legal measures. What the [edited]. You were right to revoke his CC status and you had the right to ask him to take down the video, but beyond that you should have taken the moral high ground and let foch have his tantrum. That would've made this whole situation less of a powderkeg.

 

Block Quote

 We will certainly learn from the situation and will continue to work on the we communicate.

 

Just like how you listen to the players now I assume? Where before the findings of sandbox go live some unnamed section of WG decides to bin all of it and [edited]it up like with the light tanks? Or where tanks are blatantly OP for a year before a simple armor fix is introduced? Or how literally everyone could see the maus would be broken as [edited]with all the buffs it was getting and it was decided that it needed 200 bonus HP as well?

 

Pardon me if I don't have a lot of faith in that being the case.



Somnorila #687 Posted 19 May 2017 - 04:16 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 52645 battles
  • 1,610
  • Member since:
    10-13-2012

View PostPvt_Duffer, on 19 May 2017 - 03:06 PM, said:

 

And apparently you do not understand what Copyright rights are, his "props" are owned by Wargaming, he get's to use them only with their permissions (as do you, check the EULA), but otherwise see comment above about "transformative" nature of you tube.

 

Probably, but i think i can identify what has sense and what does not. WG owns the toys but not how i play with them. As long they gave access to play with those toys, whatever i do with them (without breaking them which is not really the case with digital stuff) is mine. And [edited]that EULA that nobody reads like ever... If i pay for a tank i am entitled to sell it if i want, for a profit even, to other players, so selling accounts is not illegal but prohibiting that is. Or at least it should be, as it has a lot more sense. I'm willing to bet that this kind of clause exists just to cover WG's [edited]so i wouldn't ask them for refunds whenever i'm an idiot and get scammed. So i'm not blaming them but for sure i'm not going to accept that my garage is not mine and whatever stunt or funny stuff i make in the game, as well as my opinions about the game, including examples with in game footage (from my garage and my tanks) can't make them public without their approval. There is legal and there is reason. As long the implications are not that important we might accept to juggle between those two. But when it hits the fan and unreasonable twats hide behind the law, well riots and revolutions are born from that stuff.

K_Flynn #688 Posted 19 May 2017 - 04:17 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 48546 battles
  • 519
  • [IPRO] IPRO
  • Member since:
    01-22-2012

View PostNjial, on 19 May 2017 - 03:03 PM, said:

Hello all, 

 

without a preamble, please allow me to clarify one thing which seems to be in the center of all discussions and which is extremely important to me as Head of Community and to Wargaming!

We at Wargaming never claimed and will never pursue a copyright strike on public available or given content based on criticism, negative reviews of content, opinions on content etc. as long as I am having responsibility for community management in Europe. The only exception can be content provided under conditions of an NDA.

 

Florian Mentl

Head of Community 

 

Realy Never? Never Ever? Or is it the same NEVER EVER as with the selling of the M6A2E1?

 

 



Aim_Away_From_Face #689 Posted 19 May 2017 - 04:18 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 30698 battles
  • 518
  • [ACED] ACED
  • Member since:
    09-10-2011

View Postbrumbarr, on 18 May 2017 - 07:07 PM, said:

 

He said the F word once? what are we know? America?

 

Those tanks did break the SH gamemode, and they are OP,  and they ARE breakign tier8, the old premiums are now useless. And shooting more gold is needed now.

 

This is the core reason why most players are so unhappy with the new premiums. 

The T34 would need to be buffed up to 475 average damage to match the Chrysler K and 500! to match the Patriot. That's only on DPM too, let's not forget that they're both A LOT faster, vastly better for armour (yay 279mm turret that virtually anyone can go through because the top plate is visible from below the damn tank) and so many other stats which make a huge difference.

 

We (yes i have several) are pissed about these tanks because all the tanks we paid the same amounts of money for are no longer competitive!!! 

A complete overhaul of ALL premiums of ALL tiers is probably the most needed thing in WoT right now. Even them out, make ALL of them able to grind credits and crew xp reliably (since they are LITERALLY their only purposes) and ensure that they cannot roflstomp over regular tier 8's. 

IT should be Stock T8 < Premium T8 < Elite T8.

It's how it used to be,. it's how it should still be.



laremanne #690 Posted 19 May 2017 - 04:18 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 4684 battles
  • 45
  • [H0PE] H0PE
  • Member since:
    02-25-2017

View PostiSoL8R, on 19 May 2017 - 04:11 PM, said:

 

When EVER has WG learned from anything?

 

After the Type 59 debacle, they learned that OP premiums were a bad thing. Well, until they unlearned it...

Redstar96GR #691 Posted 19 May 2017 - 04:18 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 21945 battles
  • 36
  • [GSQT] GSQT
  • Member since:
    11-27-2014

View Postsignal11th, on 19 May 2017 - 05:16 PM, said:

 

What damage, what pressure ? A bunch of forum blowhards... please. I shall play the game as I always have as will 95% of the player base that aren't even aware of this issue.

If you don't consider this important,why are you here then,except to trigger idiots and farm memes? :hiding:



Aim_Away_From_Face #692 Posted 19 May 2017 - 04:19 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 30698 battles
  • 518
  • [ACED] ACED
  • Member since:
    09-10-2011

View Postlaremanne, on 19 May 2017 - 04:18 PM, said:

 

After the Type 59 debacle, they learned that OP premiums were a bad thing. Well, until they unlearned it...

 

Yeah, they nerfed it so hard that the damn thing barely qualifies as a bus nowadays.

HeathLedger_ #693 Posted 19 May 2017 - 04:19 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 250 battles
  • 856
  • [-UM] -UM
  • Member since:
    01-13-2017

View PostStrappster, on 19 May 2017 - 04:08 PM, said:

We accept enthusiastic amateurs who show promise. We like to see a good overall shill rating, your recents may not be enough.

 

My recents are only that low because I've been playing forum arty. Please give me one week to pad forum-ELC till my recents are 1k likes and I have a 2:1 post:battle ratio and reconsider your stance. 



signal11th #694 Posted 19 May 2017 - 04:20 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 30883 battles
  • 4,812
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    07-14-2011

View PostRedstar96GR, on 19 May 2017 - 03:18 PM, said:

If you don't consider this important,why are you here then,except to trigger idiots and farm memes? :hiding:

 

To try and put a bit of balance, something of which modern society is lacking as this forum shows us on a almost second by second basis. I don't consider it important because on the list of "important" things in life it's around the area of "Do I scratch my balls or not" and if you think it is, you really need to take stock of your life.

Edited by signal11th, 19 May 2017 - 04:23 PM.


Keuning #695 Posted 19 May 2017 - 04:20 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 3856 battles
  • 3
  • [H-VOC] H-VOC
  • Member since:
    06-15-2014

View PostNjial, on 19 May 2017 - 04:04 PM, said:

However I want to point out that there was no copyright claim done on SirFoch and I assure you it wouldn't have come to that.  

 

If it wouldn't have come to that, what would you guys have done if he didn't want remove the video? And why does Ph3lan say that to him? That's a threat, right?



Akathis #696 Posted 19 May 2017 - 04:21 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 64279 battles
  • 1,072
  • Member since:
    12-02-2012

View PostCoDiGGo, on 19 May 2017 - 03:42 PM, said:

8º angled premium with 230 effective armor "weak spot"  at tier 8. 

 

 

Sir Foch criticizing this op TOXIC prems is the one defending the company imo.

 

THIS.

 

You, forum moderators, wg employees, should bring this kind of feedback to your bosses in Belarus.

 

NO to OVERarmored tier 8 premium heavy tanks, stop this madness!!!!



HonoredStone #697 Posted 19 May 2017 - 04:22 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 20112 battles
  • 977
  • [DEPAC] DEPAC
  • Member since:
    08-04-2013

View PostNjial, on 19 May 2017 - 03:04 PM, said:

I understand that my statement can be seen dubious compared to the screenshot posted, and the implied threat there. However I want to point out that there was no copyright claim done on SirFoch and I assure you it wouldn't have come to that.  

 

That leaves the questions on our communication yesterday with SirFoch, where the focus was completely and only on his vocabulary, unfortunately the wrong words had been chosen to express the importance of the situation to us. And I apologize to SirFoch, censorship was in no way ever the goal. We will certainly learn from the situation and will continue to work on the we communicate. 

 

 

This sounds like Virgin Airlines: "We are Sorry that you are stupid"

 

Ph3lan said that if the Video is not taken down there will be a Copyright strike and that he won't get any more money from future videos.

Thats a 1+ thread to his personal and financial life. I hope SirFoch prepares a private complaint at the police, so that you have to learn that you can't crap on your community.



Damathacus #698 Posted 19 May 2017 - 04:23 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 6421 battles
  • 159
  • Member since:
    05-09-2013

View PostNjial, on 19 May 2017 - 04:04 PM, said:

I understand that my statement can be seen dubious compared to the screenshot posted, and the implied threat there. However I want to point out that there was no copyright claim done on SirFoch and I assure you it wouldn't have come to that.  

 

That's not how it works. You as a company made a pretty serious threat against SirFoch and you can't just swipe it to a side by saying that you were never going to actually follow it through.



Pvt_Duffer #699 Posted 19 May 2017 - 04:23 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 16075 battles
  • 2,201
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    05-11-2011

View PostSteelScooter, on 19 May 2017 - 02:26 PM, said:

 

You are the one who doesn't understand Copyright Law, and you don't seem to understand Fair Use and how commentary and reviews on YouTube work. You can keep repeating yourself in this thread until the cows come home but it wont make you informed or correct.

 

As I made clear before, Fair Use is a different thing and has some very specific restrictions.

Transformative is what would actually apply to You Tube videos and that has never actually been tested, and until it is WG "reserve all rights".

 

It is really not that complicated.



LaManche #700 Posted 19 May 2017 - 04:24 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 17111 battles
  • 459
  • [3EGS] 3EGS
  • Member since:
    03-31-2014

View PostNjial, on 19 May 2017 - 03:04 PM, said:

That leaves the questions on our communication yesterday with SirFoch, where the focus was completely and only on his vocabulary, unfortunately the wrong words had been chosen to express the importance of the situation to us. And I apologize to SirFoch, censorship was in no way ever the goal. We will certainly learn from the situation and will continue to work on the we communicate. 

 

Just as you learned that T26E5 and Liberte are too strong, so you release Object 252U and will release Chrysler K next week and that OP Maus tier VIII premium a month later?






5 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 5 guests, 0 anonymous users