Several Pro And College Sports Teams Suspended From Twitter Over Mystery DMCA Notices
from the overkill dept
We’ve had many long discussions here, and have replicated those discussions through more official channels, as to how there are severe problems with the DMCA when it comes to its collision with free speech. One of the core issues is the way the DMCA sets up a system in which service providers feel forced to proactively take down the speech of others based on accusation in the form of a DMCA notice, rather than this working the way it does in nearly every other aspect of American law in which an accusation does not result in a penalty. And penalty truly is the right word, as the American system recognizes that speech is among the most fundamental of freedoms. And, yet, when service providers like Twitter get sent DMCA notices over copyright claims, they are heavily incentivized to take down the content and take action against the account holder — or face potentially massive liability.
Such as the Twitter account for the Houston Rockets, which found itself suspended over a series of DMCA notices for old tweets that apparently contained some unlicensed music. The Rockets also weren’t alone.
On Monday, the Houston Rockets Twitter account found itself among a handful of official sports team accounts, most of which were college team Twitters. The accounts were temporarily shut down due to DMCA complaints against them for the use of copyrighted music without obtaining those rights. The Rockets were joined by Auburn football, Rutgers football, Iowa State football, and Iowa football and gymnastics as prominent official accounts to be shut down either this weekend or on Monday.
“Our Twitter account has been temporarily suspended due to a few prior social media posts with copyrighted music,” the Rockets said in a statement. “We are working to correct the issue now.”
To my immense frustration, nobody appears to have any details as to what the tweets in question were, what music they contained, or who issued the DMCA notices. That is, frankly, fairly strange. It’s also worth noting that the Rockets at one point had something of a rogue managing their Twitter account, and even fired that individual for behavior unrelated to copyright.
Still, it’s instructive to witness what happened here. Twitter gets DMCA notices claiming infringement on the part of a rather marquis account for the Houston Rockets, does whatever review of the tweets in question it does, and then shuts down the account, ostensibly over the volume of tweets contained in the DMCA notice. In case it isn’t obvious: that’s crazy. Think of all the speech that got shut down that wasn’t infringing when that occurred. And, yes, you might not be terribly concerned with the speech emanating from the account of an NBA team, but its more than 2 million followers did.
And it’s also terribly frustrating that this system is set up in a way that shrouds all of this from the public, as though a matter of public speech should be treated like some kind of mystery of national security proportions. The public has an interest in the deletion or suspension of speech, and an interest in the fact that the DMCA is written in a way, and enforced in a way, that not only encourages service providers to take this proactive heavy-handed action, but also leaves those issuing DMCA notices when they shouldn’t without punishment.
Today that was a bunch of sport team accounts. Tomorrow it could be speech you might care about.
Filed Under: censorship, copyright, dmca, safe harbors, takedowns, tweets
Companies: houston rockets, twitter
Comments on “Several Pro And College Sports Teams Suspended From Twitter Over Mystery DMCA Notices”
And yet ZERO worry over arbitrary "deplatforming" of Alex Jones!
IT IS THE TOMORROW since Alex Jones was simultaneously and in illegal collusion removed from the big "platforms" without any just cause under common law.
A YESTERDAY LAST YEAR was the time that you kids gave in on principle and didn’t worry about even political speech. The corporatists have gone ahead with plan.
This, which IS lawful — so far — and as even you state is minor — and likely temporary — is just where you note blithely that you’re not going to draw a line. You’re just stating to all that you’ve given up on all principles.
If Masnick’s notion — which I give again:
"And, I think it’s fairly important to state that these platforms have their own First Amendment rights, which allow them to deny service to anyone."
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20170825/01300738081/nazis-internet-policing-content-free-speech.shtml
then there’ll be no one with any large outlet when it’s YOUR turn to be silenced. Enjoy.
Re:
You can keep whining about “censorship” of Alex Jones, for all I give a damn. But at least admit that copyright was used to censor the Houston Rockets.
Re: And yet ZERO worry over arbitrary "deplatforming"
You don’t know what common law is.
Re: Re: And yet ZERO worry over arbitrary "deplatforming&qu
Re: And yet ZERO worry over arbitrary "deplatforming" of Alex Jo
and in illegal collusion removed from the big "platforms" without any just cause under common law.
Oh – you claim a law was violated? Which law?
Re: Re: And yet ZERO worry over arbitrary "deplatforming&qu
common law. Common.
You know, law about that patch of grass in the middle of town…
What do you mean, "commons"? There’s more than one patch of grass?
Re: Re: Re: And yet ZERO worry over arbitrary "deplatformin
Cabbage Law.
An Important Reminder:
Censorship via copyright is state-sponsored censorship.
Re: An Important Reminder:
Copyright is Censorship.
Re: An Important Reminder:
I think that would be apparent by now. No offense by the way.
Where Did That Bottle Come From?
It really feels like the world gets dumber and dumber every day. It’s like someone shook a Coca Cola bottle and shoved it up the ass to try and get high because they thought they were using Cocaine. How retarded can people get?
Re: Where Did That Bottle Come From?
This comment put a image in my head that’s not going to leave in the next couple of days…
I find the image both disturbing and hilarious. So Thanks for that?
Re: Re: Where Did That Bottle Come From?
Uh… your welcome.
Re: Re: Where Did That Bottle Come From?
You’re fortunate. I immediately thought, "and then he took off the cap…"
Re: Re: Re: Where Did That Bottle Come From?
I mean if the poor dude was stupid enough to take the cap off after he shook it, may God have mercy on his soul.
But don’t worry. it doesn’t go THAT far.
Re: Re: Where Did That Bottle Come From?
Now imagine someone shoving it up their ass and then shaking it…
Re: Re: Re: Where Did That Bottle Come From?
As long as they don’t put mentos in first.
Re: Where Did That Bottle Come From?
From here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hvgFqdqPIuE
Re: Re: Where Did That Bottle Come From?
Actually no. I never even saw that before
It would be a pity if this drove the teams to cut their contracts with all of the gatekeepers & only used music freely available without all the strings. Then any clips they post online would only have music no one would launch claims about.
We’re losing millions because of 10 seconds of sound in a clip online!!!
Oh shit we lost everything because we pissed off a customer with enough money & power to walk away & never pay us ever again.
Re:
You would think so, anyway. History tells us otherwise.
Re: Re: Re:
History tells us otherwise
…
Yeah. I’m guessing some people weren’t happy when the internet was first made. That or they just can’t seem to get into the 21st century lingo.
Re: Re: Re: Re:History tells us otherwise
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20180105/10292038938/white-noise-youtube-gets-five-separate-copyright-claims-other-white-noise-providers.shtml
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:History tells us otherwise
r/woooosh
Re: Re:
You say that in a world where claims have been made against silence… your optimism is unfounded.
Tweet Dreams are made of Cheese
See https://ccrma.stanford.edu/groups/tweetdreams/
There is a nice 80’s Brit-synth-pop theme in this. Although Tweet Dreams is a nod to the Eurythmics, quite a lot of the mono-synth sounds are Vince Clarke-esque. There is a bright high-pass filtered trumpet stab sound reminiscent of Just Can’t Get Enough (Depeche Mode), and a muted wood wind stab like that used in The Other side of Love (Yazoo), and a further blown glass-bottle sound like that used in San Jacinto (Peter Gabriel).
Nope, sorry Timothy.
You don’t actually know what the review process was, do you?
And if those accounts were indeed repeatedly using copyrighted music without permission, that would certainly violate a repeat infringer policy, which would quite naturally get them suspended.
The reality is that from what we know, the system worked exactly how it’s supposed to.
Re:
Therein lies the problem: How does Twitter know for sure if the music was used without permission?
Re: Re: Re:
Because John Smith said so, that’s why! /sarc
Re: Re:
I think it’s hilarious that you claim we don’t have enough information to make a judgment immediately before making your own judgment.
Re: The reality is you haven’t a clue, from what we know
You of course have a citation for that rather bold claim don’t you champ?
Oh you’re just talking out your ass. How surprising a copyright cocksucker would lie about a copyright claim and promptly run away when called out on it.
Re: Re: The reality is you haven’t a clue, from what we know
Better pull your pants up before you run. That would be embarrassing
Why CLOSE the accounts..
restrict them to the group/person they belong to..
Restrict Who can see the page, and that they can not post..
until its fixed.
Also it would be neat to see the DMCA.
Widespread takedowns
“Twitter gets DMCA notices claiming infringement on the part of a rather marquis account for the Houston Rockets, does whatever review of the tweets in question it does, and then shuts down the account, ostensibly over the volume of tweets contained in the DMCA notice. In case it isn’t obvious: that’s crazy. Think of all the speech that got shut down that wasn’t infringing when that occurred. And, yes, you might not be terribly concerned with the speech emanating from the account of an NBA team, but its more than 2 million followers did.”
Sounds like Warner Bros (https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/09/eff-wins-release-warner-bros-documents) and Nintendo’s move that they would rather nuke instead of pointing their crosshairs to ONLY things they enforce against unauthorized distributions (that they have their rights to).
That, combined with not all sites publish DMCA takedown notices, very common that the takedown is to only be notified to the poster.
I believed that all take down notices should have a public record.
I read an article this week , the music companys are
claiming videos that on youtube that have 2 -3 seconds of music from songs they own .
They get all the revenue from 30 minute videos
that describe how certain songs work how the guitar is played .these videos are educational , how to pay the guitar.
Videos are being claimed because they show sheet music or say i like the song song title ,artist name , which have no music in them .
is this not a attack on free speech ,
and fair use .
Is a 30 minute guitar education video featuring 2 seconds of music not fair use ?
https://www.theverge.com/2019/5/24/18635904/copyright-youtube-creators-dmca-takedown-fair-use-music-cover
And this is before the new laws from the eu come into force .
Fact is, twitter is obliged to deal with DMCA notices the same way they deal with people abusing copyrights owned by others. If I created a piece of music, and an important group, business or whatever uses my content without permission, I have the right to demand that content be removed. In the world of Techdirt, everyone seems to be of the mindset that you don’t own what you create.
twitter risked getting sued if they did not comply once they found the matter was a legitimate complaint. I’d love to see twitter get sued and shut down for not dealing with the illegal use of copyrighted content used without permission.
Re: Now serving 14,997
I love it when you copyright clods talk out your ass. You deride other people for being wrong about copyright, when it’s obvious that you don’t have clue one about the law. And every single one of you think you the first one to make whatever your profoundly stupid argument is. And every single time you twatsanders run away after your betters disabuse you that your argument is in any way novel or not debunked a thousand times already. And tomorrow there will be another one of you regurgitating the same tired old RIAA garbage talking points.
Re:
Pretend the takedown provisions of the DMCA do not exist. For what reason should a platform remove potentially infringing content before a court can decide if it should be removed?
Re: Re: Re:
Logically there wouldn’t be.
…
They’d try to sneak a quickie in but then the Coke Bottle is shaken and then gets shoved up their asses… (as a previous comment of mine implies)
…
Stephen, our world gets crazier every day. Next thing you know they’ll put GPS blocks so that we can’t travel down certain roads because they think there’s a security leak on that road.
I'm sure it wasn't just a bunch of sports team accounts
That’s just what makes the media. Here’s another example, his account is still suspended, 300k follower verified account 10+ years old. In this clip he says it’s Sony Music and the song is Macarena, in a meme clip that he didn’t make but merely reposted years ago. https://twitter.com/ChrisCrockerX/status/1131615035854393346
Craziness
"… that’s crazy."
No more so that when done to an individual. The "virtue" in this instance is that the negatively affected accounts are "prominent enough" to draw attention to the craziness.