Director Uses Takedowns to Remove Pirate Bay Docu "TPB-AFK" from YouTube.

Director Uses Takedowns to Remove Pirate Bay Docu "TPB-AFK" from YouTube * TorrentFreak

In an unexpected turn of events, the director of the Pirate Bay documentary TPB-AFK has sent takedown notices to YouTube requesting its removal. The director states that he sees the streaming portal as a radicalizing platform full of hate. The takedowns are not without controversy, however, as TPB-AFK was published under a Creative Commons license.

TorrentFreak @sh.itjust.works

bot @rss.ponder.cat

BOT

1w ago

Director Uses Takedowns to Remove Pirate Bay Docu “TPB-AFK” from YouTube

torrentfreak.com /director-uses-takedowns-to-remove-pirate-bay-docu-tpb-afk-from-youtube-250323/

25 comments

tldr: the author doesn't want the documentary anymore on Youtube specifically, anywhere else seems to be still ok.

Nice, we should post it on Peertube then if it isn't on tgere already ...
Yay:
https://video.hardlimit.com/w/366HD3wNWzECHw9QxJ9tcC
- You're kind of missing the point. He released the film under creative commons license, specifically Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported. The license specifically says;
  You are free to: share -- copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format.
  Which of course includes YouTube. The license cannot be revoked as long as you follow the license, and sharing to YouTube doesn't constitute breaking the license. Which means he's breaking the license.
  He's very liable to be sued in this situation and he would absolutely lose.
  
  the thing with DMCA is that it's super easy to issue one but potentially more costly to challenge, especially if your appeals to the host fail and your only option is court.
  Hosts are scared of facing liability for approving appeals so they'll just ignore them (unless the victim is a big name that can muster popular support) so as the DMCA victim you're usually fucked
  
  The only legitimate takedown I can see is is the non-commercial clause. If YouTube is making money off streams, wouldn't that be a license violation?
  
  Which of course includes YouTube.
  Which distributes videos commercially.
  
  Sued for what exactly?
- Can someone explain the IP sharing with peers part (a popup from that site)? Sounds like a torrent, but how does that work with copyright? To be clear, I don’t give a fuck, just curious
  
  Sounds like a torrent
  Because it is torrenting. I clicked on the "More information" link in the popup and:
  PeerTube uses the BitTorrent protocol to share bandwidth between users by default to help lower the load on the server. The main threat to your privacy induced by BitTorrent lies in your IP address being stored in the instance's BitTorrent tracker as long as you download or watch the video.
  Source
  No idea about copyright though, but I also don't quite understand the issue there that doesn't apply to ActivityPub itself too.
  
  Is the question how does it work legally or technically?

Ah hell, I don't know anything about it, but figured I'd go ahead and download it to watch later.
- Director using reverse psychology to get people to watch his documentary
- You still can, it's on archive.org!
  Edit: not sure if I'm allowed to post the direct link, but it comes up right away on the search.
  
  I see no reason why not, it's Creative Commons licensed. Would be different if it were actually pirated content but it isn't. It's freely sharable.
  https://archive.org/details/tpb-afk-1080p

Is that how that works?

25 comments