cross-posted from: https://piefed.social/c/games/p/2117387/sega-issues-dmca-takedowns-to-scrub-persona-6-images-from-the-internet-as-fans-expect-i
Images allegedly showing leaked Persona 6 characters and logos have been scrubbed from the internet via copyright claim, with Sega believed to be behind the takedowns.
If it was an abuse it could be challenged but there are no grounds as Sega owns leaked stuff.
Just because someone owns the copyright to something doesn’t mean it’s illegal to distribute. Fair use.
Is this why no one challenged Atlus on their streaming restrictions successfully?
Ah yes the famously zero risk action of signing a legal form under penalty of perjury.
“Getting robbed? Just say no! Robbers cannot legally rob you if you say no!”
You can challenge DMCA and the other side has to actually follow up in court. If you’re sure of your case why has nobody done it? There are loads of people with financial incentive to do so which is enough to get things going in capitalism usually. My guess? They know there’s no case and Atlus can do it legally.
No, the filer has another appeal (same form) then it’s up to the uploader to sue.
Are you getting this from an LLM or your butt?
https://dmcaauthority.com/how-to-appeal-a-dmca-takedown-notice/
The actual issue is that you’re getting strikes on your YouTube / Twitch account. You can still host this stuff outside of US and their allies jurisdiction but you wouldn’t make any money that way - which shows that most of those affected are after money.
Because legal battles with massive corporations are time consuming, expensive, and risky?
Do you know of a case where DMCA takedown was followed up by a corporation and then dragged out into a long legal battle? You either have rights to content or don’t and establishing that in case of leaked advertisements seems to be quite straight forward. I’m pretty sure leakers didn’t purchase those rights because there’s no way to do so right now. One could argue that if you purchase the game then you should have right to share parts of it under fair use and I agree but the game is not even out.
When you receive a DMCA notice you can respond with a counter-claim notice that says the claim is incorrect and that you’re willing to go to court about it. This could be because you have distribution rights, because of fair use, or for any other reason that would make the claim invalid. The copyright holder then has 14 days to file a case to sue the alleged infringing party. If they don’t, the notice can be ignored and any third party host must restore access to the files.
Whether these files should be accessible under fair use, I don’t know, but at that point it’s up to the court.
Point being, if you file a counter-claim you’re basically saying go ahead and sue me then. If a company with deep pockets has a reason to think they can enforce the claim, they probably will take you to court. Even if you win, you’re going to have to pay for a lawyer and deal with a court case.
https://copyrightalliance.org/education/copyright-law-explained/the-digital-millennium-copyright-act-dmca/dmca-counter-notice-process/
I don’t disagree with any of this. It’s just that companies rarely if ever follow through with a lawsuit if they’re abusing DMCA. For them the strikes YouTube / Twitch influencers get on their business accounts is enough of a deterrent. In this case nobody is even bothering filing counterclaims because they know they’d have a very weak case.