Hasbro C&Ds MisterDavie, noted pony animator infamous for Cupcakes, and Smile HD
http://www.equestriadaily.com/2016/02/misterdavies-mlp-videos-taken-down-by.html
>>26400000
What a shame. A get wasted on bad news.
>>26400000
Poor bastard
>>26400000
February strikes again.
>>26400000
rip
>>26400000
Cue the trombones
>>26400000
And why should i care Mr. quints?
>>26400000
Am I the only person here who wants Hasbro to C&D all upcoming pony animations and video games?
>>26400055
Bu-but Anon!
I contributed to some of those games!
>>26400000
rip
>>26400000
I miss 2012
>>26400000
Good thing I have copies of both of his vids.
>>26400000
The super secret alternate ending to Smile HD is still up:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=35PeJbt5CXk
>>26400520
I never seen that before. Fiddy keks.
Also >>26400000
Impressive but sad to hear.
>>26400126
back when everyone was brohoofing each other and saying "20 percent cooler" and "love and tolerate" all unironically. You autist.
>>26400595
That was early 2011 dude
>>26400000
I'm confused to why they decided to take him down this late when the guy doesn't even make any stuff anymore
>>26400630
It lasted into 2012.
>>26400520
there's also this upload that's on a different channel
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ls_x14_Pbg
>>26400000
wasn't he working on a rainbow factory video? is it never going to come out now?
>>26400595
Yes. Back before dipshits started taking every little thing super seriously.
Back when people still remembered how to have fun.
>>26401073
>>26401063
He did post this and a link to his patreon on his tumblr. He also said,
>Been wanting to do this one for a while, but never had the time to. Regardless, I’m gonna finish this!
>>26400000
Every fucking febuary
And you fucks still will buy merch later.
>>26400000
That's pretty gay desu lad. Why are Hasbro suits such pieces of shit? His vids were pretty fun back in the day. Don't see why they need to take 'em down, especially when Davies has been dead a good while now. Can't even let him rest in pepperonis.
F
>>26400000
All he needs to do is file a counter-notice. There's no way Hasbro will sue him.
>>26401312
Hasbro has been trying to bury bronies for the past few years. They thought they could sweep the autism under the rug after twilight got wings, but the fandom is like cockroaches. You squish one, and 2 more pop out
>>26401312
Hasbro is so conservative that is willing to delete original content that looks similar to the show style in order to avoid being mistaken by original material by the brand.
Yes, it's stupid, but seriously, that's exactly what they're doing
>>26401480
But Mr Davey put disclaimers that clearly showed that the material wasn't affiliated with Hasbro.
He has the upper hand this time, it is fair use.
>>26401555
disclaimers mean shit to Hasbro. Jan also put them yet he got btfo
>>26401555
Not only are disclaimers ineffective in a fair use defense (since it is trademarks, not copyrights, where confusion as to affiliation matters), but they have been used in copyright infringement cases to show that the infringement was willful, entitling the copyright owner to additional damages.
>>26401555
Those disclaimers carry no weight and can actually be seen as an admission of guilt.
>>26401576
So you are telling me that Hasbro can C&D any fan work if they feel like it?
What kind of world is this? And people still DARE to tell me there is FREEDUM? When a fan can't even show he likes a show because a company doesn't like his art?
GOOD JOB AMERICA, GOOD JOB
>>26400000
QUINTS CONFIRM
February is back, baby!
>>26401612
Yeah. Copyright should last forever less one day. Eternal monopoly to intellectual property so that Disney will one day rise from the grave and another Steamboat Willie.
>>26401612
Anyone can C&D anyone else. Whether it has merit is a different question.
It doesn't matter anyways because it's not a C&D that Hasbro did, but a DMCA takedown request. Those Hasbro doesn't have as much freedom in doing, but they can get away with it because recipient never fights it. Do you want the U.S. government to step in when the recipient doesn't care? That's a fucking waste.
>>26401665
Except we have let too many things of value be lost anon, and they won't stop.
Again,where's muh freedoms at? So basically we are gonna sit down and take it in the ass forever?
>>26400000
Don't worry this shit can't last much longer.
People are starting to get fed up with company's abusing copyright law
I give the practice a year. (Abusing the law that is not copyright in general I'm not a complete fagot)
>>26401689
What we need is to recruit ponyfag lawyers to our cause. This shit has gone for far too long.
Fight fire with fire, I say.
>>26401665
>they can get away with it because recipient never fights it
That's very much the core of the problem
Legal battles are to expensive and it lets people with plenty of money ignore civil law when it comes to people with less money.
>>26401724
This is a far deeper issue then just Hasbro
I think the only real chance of anything been done is to get Google on your side because nobody's going to fuck with Google
To be honest I do wonder why Google doesent fight against such dmca abuse it seems in there best interests to do so.
>>26401758
I know people willbash me, but WE ARE ANONYMOUS, so I am sure we can get contacts inside google, somehow? There must be a way.
>>26401675
What freedom from government action has been impinged? This is just another instance of a private party abusing a process given by law. The best way to fight such abuses of process is for the victim to take them to court. However, that won't happen because these fan content creators don't want to deal with litigation.
>>26401724
A lawyer can only help those who were directly affected: the fan content creators. Even if some ponyfag lawyer volunteers, their client has to be a target of a C&D or a DMCA takedown request. That client has to be willing to be to go to court on the matter, which has huge costs both financially and temporally, not counting the risk of losing the case, which would add a larger financial burden to that person.
>>26401749
Precisely.An idea that I've entertained (though mostly as a joke) is to have the rights and ownership of some amount of fan content assigned to me, so that if any of them were targeted by a C&D or a DMCA takedown request, I can instigate legal action on behalf of myself. I don't mind taking in all the risk and costs because fair use is something I have very strong feelings about, and I do have have knowledge and training on copyright and trademark law. However, I have never done any litigation in that area, so that increases the chances of things backfiring and making it worse in the long run.
>>26401776
>WE ARE ANONYMOUS
guyfawksmask.bmp
Almost everyone in this thread is an idiot
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYPSz7H3Q3I
>>26401576
>what is the Roger's Test
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogers_v._Grimaldi
>>26401675
>Again,where's muh freedoms at? So basically we are gonna sit down and take it in the ass forever?
Yes, welcome to the real world, american
>>26401758
If Google doesn't comply with a DMCA takedown request, it opens itself to legal liability, and given how many requests Google receives, that would bankrupt the company.
>>26401806
The Rogers Test only applies to trademarks, not copyrights.
>>26400520
>When they start to spin
kek
>>26401826
I'm not talking about not complying I'm saying its in there best interests to comply but fight against them.
>>26401799
The video is a lot better informed than most of the Anons on this thread, but still misstates the law on fair use.
>>26401814
Actually I am not american, so thank you for giving me the pleasure of knowing that americans are more stupid than it seems.
It is really sad, yet they still think they have some kind of superiority over other countries, when they basically are a step away from being owned completely by their corporations.
>>26401830
Google is already taking some small steps: http://googlepublicpolicy.blogspot.com/2015/11/a-step-toward-protecting-fair-use-on.html
>>26400000
that's a fucking shame. wonder why hasbro decided to pull that all of a sudden.
>>26401826
>trademarks, not copyrights
What part of "Smile HD" did Hasbro animate? Smile HD is the copyright of the person who created it - MisterDavie. Hasbro is mad because it has Pinkie Pie(TM) Rainbow Dash(TM) Fluttershy(TM) etc in it. This has never been about copyright, it has always been about trademark - the characters that are the original IP of Hasbro.
>>26401842
Well that's good to hear.
>>26401840
>implying your country is not a member of the various copyright treaties which gives as broad, if not more, a protection on copyrights as the U.S.
>living in a country that has no fair use defense
Sure, we're not superior at all. You are.^:)
>>26401855
Characters can be copyrighted. See the line of cases involving Sherlock Holmes for a good idea of that area of copyright law.
>>26401855
I agree.
I'm too lazy to double-check, but did MrDavey use Equestria/Celestia, or did he use GenerationB in the video? (And if the latter, the beef should be between Harold and MrDavey for the princely sum of $20.00, and Hasbro ought to have nothing to do with it.)
Hasbro certainly doesn't own the rights to "Ready to Die," and maybe Andrew W.K. might want to weigh in.
I could barely understand a trademark call -- the characters are Hasbro's, not The Hub's (nor Discovery's!) -- but I'm struggling to find a copyright issue here. It just... ain't there.
>>26401862
what is the use of having your legal bullshit if people can't use it? Can you stop being stupid and cynical for once?
>Here kid have this gun to defend yourself
>Kid can't even shot the damn thing nor pay for ammunition
Good job again, like I said.
>>26401799
Intresting
>>26401855
>>26401862
To add another point: Characters aren't even protected under trademark law unless they are used as a trademark, which has a specific legal definition.
>>26401890
The copyright issue is that the characters, including their designs, are protectable subject-matter under copyright law and thus the owner, Hasbro, owns the exclusive rights of such characters which Davey is alleged to have violated.
>>26401917
But people can use it. However most people don't want to invest the time or money in doing so. It's there, but for something as small as fan content it's not worth the cost.
>>26401932
Which is the exact problem we are currently facing and why I am arguing with you in the first place.
Now how the hell can we solve it? It is ruining our fun, so it is affecting us all directly, and we all know the trolling won't stop by itself.
>>26400000
Literary who?.
>>26401947
The only way to solve it is to take it to courtbecause the alternative of creating huge public pressure will never happen.
>>26401958
Spergs have been able to join together for huge projects that cost thousands of dollars.
We can join together for a greater cause, and pay for the expenses so the problem is finally solved.
What do you say? If we can donate to charities, surely we can do this.
LET US ALL UNITE
>>26401862
>Sherlock Holmes
That's interesting - this article says there's a statute of limitations of 3 years on copyright.
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150524/17521431095/sherlock-holmes-case-never-ending-copyright-dispute.shtml
When was Davies' "Cupcakes" published? I'm sure it was at least 3 years ago.
We create a channel with all the content that has been C&D
Then when Hasbro strikes us down, we finally fight back
It is the perfect plan, come on guys we can do this
>>26401689
>I give copyright abuse another year
Yeah, anon. I'm sure patent abuse, our healthcare system, corporate lobbying, income inequality, ISP monopolies, and every other problem caused by letting wealthy elites write their own regulations will clear up in the year following.
No, this is going to be a thing we all have to live with for at least another generation or two, and that's optimistic that it ever gets better and doesn't blatantly stagnate into a shady situation similar to what goes on in Russian government.
>>26401975
It's been over three years, so yes, the statute of limitations has passed. However, an SoL is a bar to a suit, not a defense on the merits. Therefore it wouldn't matter regarding the DMCA takedown request itself, but it would be an auto-win for Davie if Hasbro actually took him to court. That's why he has no need to worry if he files a counter-claim.
>>26401932
I think they may have finally pissed off enough people to make this into a big deal. Remember the "Save Derpy" thing? I even saw that mentioned on Adult Swim. And all those fundraisers, charities, etc. Thems Fightin Herds raised over half a million dollars thanks largely (or even entirely) to bronies. Bronies are a rather large group that can do surprisingly big things when they want to.
>>26402077
Anon. The US medical system is the number one source of bankruptcy and accounts for like a sixth of our economy because of how much money it moves. People got mad about that and they made it illegal not to buy healthcare because it was too hard to go against the lobbies.
Even if they pissed off every Brony in the US, it wouldn't be enough to motivate our political system to change copyright law to our benefit. You have no idea how few fucks they give.
>>26402107
It's not just bronies that hate copyright law abuse by corporations! It's tons of people!
We can do it! The future starts now! Carpet Denim! Do you believe in miracles?!
>>26402035
>ISP monopolies
wait what there are countrys that still have that even here in australia its only in rural areas that telstra has a monopoly.
although i suppose that is only a recent developmet in the last 7 years or so.
in general though your right we have proven time and time again we never seem to fix our problems.
>>26402035
Pretty much all a presidential candidate would have to do to lock in my vote would be to campaign on a platform of massive copyright/trademark/patent reform. Here's just the shit I can think of off the top of my head that I'd want to see.
>heavily restrict length of copyright for any holder that's not the person(s) who actually created the work
>expand and give heavy-handed protections to fair use
>retract copyright provisions of treaties and leave the multi-national corps to cover their own asses
>abolish and nullify genetic and software patents(and quite possibly require engineered genetics to have the sequences openly published to give opportunities for third-party review and testing as to their safety)
>punish patent trolls where it can be proven that no functioning design or technical expertise was present
>expand the definitions of what can be considered "too broad/common" to patent
>prohibit DRM and similar implementations that restrict user access to and modification of data on devices they own
>declare EULAs void
>establish that software is purchased for personal /business use rather than licensed and once purchased may not be altered/disabled/updated without express permission of the buyer(nor subject to a limited period of use) while also requiring that the buyer has, at a minimum, permanent access to the revision they bought
>corporations are not people or entitled to any protections as such
>>26400640
Go fuck yourself
>>26402271
A lot of that stuff is going too far IMO, but I agree reform is necessary.
>heavily restrict length of copyright for any holder that's not the person(s) who actually created the work
I don't agree, because there are easy ways to get around that (e.g. assigning certain rights rather than wholesale transfer of ownership) and artists would get even less money for their work since the value of their work is substantially diminished. There are already some provisions where musicians can get their ownership of their songs reverted back to them after a period of time, but I don't know if that would address your concern if it were to expand.
>expand and give heavy-handed protections to fair use
The problem is first defining what is fair use in more detail.
>retract copyright provisions of treaties and leave the multi-national corps to cover their own asses
That would substantially destroy any economic value of artistic products (e.g. music) since by reneging on those treaties, artists here won't be protected from outright piracy abroad. (Not that we fully adopt those treaties anyways, and I do think what we do adopt is too much.)
>abolish and nullify genetic and software patents(and quite possibly require engineered genetics to have the sequences openly published to give opportunities for third-party review and testing as to their safety)
A lot of the blame is on the Federal Circuit, and luckily the Supreme Court is starting to take a few of those cases to reverse such enlargement of patent protections.
>punish patent trolls where it can be proven that no functioning design or technical expertise was present
That doesn't fully cover that patents protect, but if you mean that trolls should be punished for frivolous claims of patents, then there are already things in play. The problem is that it involves many years of expensive litigation before that point, and when juries are involved, the results don't always follow what the law dictates.
Well did he put them on DailyMotion at least?
>>26402271
>>26402350
>expand the definitions of what can be considered "too broad/common" to patent
The problem is choosing a definition that wouldn't eviscerate patent law.
>prohibit DRM and similar implementations that restrict user access to and modification of data on devices they own
There are security concerns if this occurred, but I do agree that there needs to at least be a curtailing of those in most instances.
>declare EULAs void
More than agree. Don't get me started on this shit.
>establish that software is purchased for personal /business use rather than licensed and once purchased may not be altered/disabled/updated without express permission of the buyer(nor subject to a limited period of use) while also requiring that the buyer has, at a minimum, permanent access to the revision they bought
Somewhat agree, except for cases such as the payment is for a monthly or yearly subscription.
>corporations are not people or entitled to any protections as such
Oh god, the whole idea of corporate personhood stemmed from a misreading of cases giving corporations the right to sue and be sued on their own behalf. "Legal personhood" was never meant to be anything more, especially since corporations were creatures of the state or federal government and are meant to be limited by that fact.
The biggest problem I have with your post though is that the president can do fuck all about it. It is Congress that is the lawmaking body, and they won't change a damn thing as long as they get paid by special interests and as long as voters don't see intellectual property as an issue.
>>26400000
I can see why Hasbro wanted THAT removed, considering it had almost 10 million views and was definitively not the best image of the show.
I'm surprised they took that long desu.
Welp
>>26401990
there's a channel already
deleted pony videos. go check it out, is in YT
And yet reaction videos are still up.
Fuck this
>>26401555
>>26401480
>Not Understanding the Copyright Fair Use Laws in DMCA Fair Use acts in Article 107.
It's the confusion Factor. Supreme Court rulings deem there are four factors,
the purpose and character of your use.
the nature of the copyrighted work.
the amount and substantiality of the portion taken, and.
the effect of the use upon the potential market.
Now, I'll let you guys read this. But if anything, you should understand that this isn't going end well, even if it's just ONE of FOUR factors that are massively damaging. Two if you factor in the children that could view it, and ignorant parents who think it belongs to Hasbro.
Now if they had marked it as a parody, or Satire, they could've had higher ground.
>>26402577
Did you NOT know the fools at Fine Bros. rescinded all trademarks on Reacts/Reaction?
I mean, thank god they knew they fucked up at the pinnacle of the problem, but it was too late for them to save a deal of their image.
>>26400000
>You want an MLP fighter? Too bad.
>You want to have any relatively violent MLP content? Nope, not under our watch!
>What's that? A fan-made video game with ponies that isn't a cashgrab leased under our boot? Better C&D that, too.
Its like we just can't BE with Hasbro tossing that shit around, and no one has the will or pockets to fight it. They can (softly) dictate what we can and cannot produce, and its no wonder why so many fan projects either dont take off or quit while they're ahead.
I'm honestly just waiting for the day they actually try to target our porn
>>26402637
You know the reason they do this is so they can legally keep making the show you make porn about, right?
>>26402637
don't forget jan anon
>whoa, this new short looks really good!
>sir, we didn't do it
>then, who?
>a fan who does it for free
>for free?! muh shekels!!!
it doesn't help the poor guy then was just tossed around like a hot potato til everything was "forgotten"
>>26402643
He understands this copyright stuff.
I like you.
>>26400028
>February strikes again.
>>26401282
>Every fucking febuary
>And you fucks still will buy merch later.
What's the deal with Febuary?
>>26402643
>3+ Years and 10mil views of letting some fan related content sit has any actual impact on the show, its production, and its merchandising - where the bulk of its funding comes from
Anon, pls
>>26402651
Oh man, I haven't forgotten that shit, either.cap: d'abidjan
>>26402661
>I like you.
I like me too.
>>26402661
Actual logical people who understand copyright law?
>In my vagina?
>>26402662
it's usually the month where the annual income is counted
so far the show and pony toys are great in business, EqG is a little down, but it's time is already done after the disney deal
after that, it's time to "stay your ground"AKA fuck everything that made you big in the first place
This suck, but it isn't really Hasbro's fault for doing what they must (see >>26402643). It's the shitty copyright laws that allow them to do retarded shit like that.
It will only get worse unless Burgerland changes its copyright laws and that isn't going to happen. Not to make them more permissive, that's for sure.
>>26400000
>mfw I actually liked how over the top this it was after seeing how asshurt and troubled it made others
>mfw Smile HD was the video that pulled me into giving ponies a chance to begin with, if only to see why it was such a big deal to see those characters get their shit kicked in by Ponk
>I later checked out cupcakes and learned that it was based off of some fic somebody made, and got morbidly curious about it and other stories like that
>mfw this thread and news
>>26402701
>Bawwing about the fact that copyright laws are this strict.
Do you really want Hasbro to lose the licence for the show you have a fandom over simply because someone made a funny web series and decided to make money off it?
If Hasbro didn't file actions like they did they face legal actions against themselves for their own fucking product.
That is what is fucked up about the law.
>>26402728
>This guy was making money off of his videos
Got any proof of that being the case here?
>>26402728
That's exactly what I just said, retard.
Copyright laws should allow fans to do whatever they want with their characters, not to force/allow companies to take down their work because otherwise they would lose their license or gain earn less shekels.
You know Hasbro is only doing this because they can.
If you truly want Hasbro to stop you need to start making a shitstorm.
>>26402697
>EqG is a little down, but it's time is already done after the disney deal
Wait, what Disney deal? Is Disney buying out Hasbro?
>>26402796
we tried a yeaar ago with jan and it didn't work
what difference would be doing it now?
>>26402807
No you didn't, you didn't make a shitstorm.
>>26402807
We gave up realizing that EQD would never join us.
>>26402796
You would have to get the whole fandom on your side and the fandom hates drama.
>>26402796
The fandom is too retarded to band together like that.
>>26402784
STOP BEING SUCH A BOOTLICKER.
>>26402807
>We tried
lel no
We called him a faggot, pedo and only lamented the loss of his mom.
We didn't do shit.
>>26402796
On top of that a lot of fans have mixed feelings about this one considering that his work was gory and he hasn't been (all that) active since.
With C&D and takedowns being a yearly norm, on an issue this divided, we've all just gotten used to letting it be. If they targeted something else that the masses loved/was popular, then maybe something would happen, but I dont think Hasbro is quite THAT stupid.
>>26402807
Jan had the backing of MLPG, the first fandom general Hasbro mate actual contact with.
>>26402805
>>>26402697
>>EqG is a little down, but it's time is already done after the disney deal
>Wait, what Disney deal? Is Disney buying out Hasbro?
>>26402831
The problem is this won't stop until this starts to seriously affect Hasbro's image.
No one is raiding their facebook and YT pages in anger.
>>26402853
We need to find the info on more MLPG posters, set their personal shit public and watch he fire burn
>>26400000
Checked.
And nothing of value was lost.
>>26401426
That does auctualy explain a lot of Hasbro's retardation.
>>26402701
Honestly I'm scared for a difrent reason
It's clear copyright law needs to be changed if you don't think there are any problems you can go get fucked
But I'm scared of what will happen if they do decide to change it I'm worried it will get hyjacked by fagots who will push for bassicly making outright piracy legal and shit
Humanity can't have nice things because whenever we try to improve something we make it worse.
>>26402805
no anon
look >>26391659
>>26402796
>making a shitstorm
Man I remember Derpygate, that was a real shitstorm...
>>26402932
Am I the only one who has this fear.
Am I just a cynical old man in a young man's body.
>>26402637
>>What's that? A fan-made video game with ponies that isn't a cashgrab leased under our boot? Better C&D that, too.
Are you talking about Starlswirl academy or whatever, Is that still being worked on?
I think the problem was this:
In his animations he listed it being a hasbro production and key people from the creators.
To us we absolutely get the joke, but to anyone else whos seen the show on tv or isn't familiar with the fanworks might think it's legit due to the style being exact. Still, a shitty thing to do by hasbro.
http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/588004
So who are they coming for next?
Or is it just mister davey.
I want fans of the fandom to leave.
>the porn (and other fanart, to an extent) will never be touched, because it is beyond reasonable doubt separate from official content
>despite potential to be removed, fanfiction is highly unlikely to ever be touched because Hasbro seems more interested in protecting its property via visual media
As such:
>Liking literally anything else fan-produced
>Liking fanmade videos
Alsonow that the shitty Cupcakes parody is fukken ded, can we change the goalhorn to something that isn't overplayed, overrated, or y'know, not boring shit? Something that actually embodies /mlp/, rather than just "a >fanvideo """""we"""""" like."
Or is it too soon? :^)
Did anyone save his Season 4 video?
/r/ing links to his vids pls
>>26402672
Yes.
Iunderstand it Anon.
ButI'm out of your Vagina and in my ass.
>>26400000
Checked
Also, the description is still available and there's a fucking download link in the description.
>>26403627
>Implying we put the goalhorn because we enjoyed the cupcake parody and not because it's hype as fuck.
And what would you want to put, HMMMMM?
>>26403579
Honestly there is a ton of stuff that could trigger Hasbrone's lawyers with this, notably the content itself.
>>26402932
>>26403413
>I'm concerned that copyright law will get hijacked and piracy will be legal!
Are you fucking retarded? The people running are government are the same assholes sitting on the board of directors for these companies. Hillary ran Walmart for a while, for Christ's sake.
They would NEVER make piracy outright legal. The US is intensely plutocratic. Most attempts at copyright reform today are ones aimed at making copyright a federal issue rather than a civil one, so that your tax money will go towards prosecuting it instead of a company's money.
I feel like fluffy is gonna get hit next considering he made an entire series based on hasbros ip and is nearing a million subs.
>>26400055
I'm with ya. Fuck all the autistic shit people are making.
Has Double Rainboom been taken down yet? Because that shit is easily the worst so far.
>>26404927
If Hasbro doesn't nuke it, Cartoon Network might.
It deserves as such for fucking up TWO cartoons.
Wasn't CupcakeHD taken down once before?
>>26404769
Personally doubt it, Fluffy is more focused on the OC. Unless Flufflepuff videos are monetized; which I do not think they are, Fluffle is safely under Fair Use as parody.
>something pony related get C&D
>/mlp/ suddenly cares about the fandom
Fucking hypocrites
>>26405044
I checked, all of his videos are monetized.
>>26405044
Nothing fluffy makes is parody, it's all derivative works. Taking characters and sticking them together to do fun things without any critique or commentary of original is not parody. To be fair though, 95% of the fandom is the exact same thing.
>>26404927
>>26404993
Yes, that was nuked. He had a license to use the characters for his school thing, but he used assets taken from the show or something because that was a thing people were doing around then. He didn't have permission to use their actual assets, just the likeness of the characters, so they sent him a C&D.
>>26405044
Fair use doesn't prohibit an artist from making money on their parodies, or else all of MAD Magazine never would have been profitable.
>>26405090
However, this is true. Flufflepuff is basically the ongoing adventures of a goofy OC in Ponyville, and there's probably not a fair use case for it. Not that it matters these days, is the thing. People talk about that Lenz Vs Universal case like it was a big breakthrough for the little guy, but it set a ton of really terrible precedents along the way that basically ensure nobody is going to have an easy time defending themselves from fraudulent or misguided DMCA attacks.
>>26405189
He also tried to pay wall the assets from it
>>26400000
>>26403627
>he doesn't like the song
>>26405221
>Lenz Vs Universal
Though the impact is overstated, the case does hold one thing that big corporations did not want: They have to consider fair use before sending a DMCA. Before Lenz, the prevailing thought was that since fair use was an affirmative defense, the copyright owner had no need to consider if the allegedly infringing work was protected under fair use. After Lenz, the burden is shifted. Though this means little for most, it does force them to confront the fair use issue at first blush, allowing the alleged infringer to make a stronger fair use defense if it goes to trial.
Tangent:Fair use was never a traditional affirmative defense. The Supreme Court long ago called it such solely due to the burden of proving fair use lies with the alleged infringer, but unlike other affirmative defenses, fair use means that infringement never occurred (rather than it occurring but is excused and/or justified). Most lower courts misunderstood it, but the courts in Lenz were right about it, which led to the holding in Lenz.
>>26402612
Note that in the video, the only thing that marks the videos as being Davey's work is as animator. WTF was he thinking when he put in the OPENING CREDITS, "Produced by Hasbro, Written by Lauren Faust?" Seriously...Yes they should of made it more clear that it was parody but as it is. He could be sued for deformation of character, liberal (written as in credits) on top of violation of copyright. Lets just hope the take down notice is only a slap on the wrist.
>>26402697
It is sorta funny ,February. At least with my state, the bylaws dictate that a Board of Directors meeting must be held on the 1st of every February. I wonder if Hasbro is the same and why it is "That time of the month" or year for them in which we see a larger volume of these take down notices. Uncanny coincidence I am sure, or perhaps I did hit the nail on the head.
>>26408188
It cannot be defamation (including libel) because there's been no harm in the reputation of the alleged victims.
>but mah edgy glorified music videos
>mah copyrights
Lord, you people are pathetic.
Good riddance I say.
>>26408510
That is actually very very debatable. The harm comes from the image of the studio, Hasrbo, as well as Lauren Faust. We sit back and say, "Who cares, all in good fun." And really that is the truth, "in good fun" But for a studio like Hasbro who makes entertainment for families and children as well as toy lines, clothing and own a franchise based on family, children and maintain certain values with in their company. Branding their name on a product that promotes violence and gore is more than a call of alarm at tarnishing their name brand. And more than a case for lawyers to eat up.
So yes. It very much is defamation of character for the individual and company.
http://injury.findlaw.com/torts-and-personal-injuries/defamation-law-the-basics.html
Defamation under statement, Written
Defamation under Publication, Written as in video (Credits) as is Liberal
Defamation under Falsity, Hasbro and Lauren Faust did not make this animation nor were aware or apart of.
>>26408688
Falsity and publication are not enough to satisfy the elements of defamation. Except for non-public persons on private matters, actual harm MUST be shown. Here, there is no provable harm. Hypothetical harm is not compensable.
>>26401426
that isnt a hidra?
a autistic hidra
no one fucking cares lol
>tfw literally every february.
so how many C&D's in a row now? 4? 5? Like I genuinely didn't care since it was edgy gore and shit, but it's kind of getting ridiculous at this point, there's only so much alienation one fandom can take.
>buy our shitty toys and officially liscenced merch, try to make anyhting that can be seen as outside the demographic and we'll fucking ruin you
fuckin' hell hasbro.
>>26400000
>mfw
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=El--W4CY7Tw
>>26400000
All others are down by why isn't Smile down?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ts_FLBYsNyE
>>26413048
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqVVtaWd8Pw
>>26400055
>>26404927
>Wanting something taken down because you don't like it
Anon pls. There's probably half of the anons here who was introduced to ponies because of fan videos, shitty they may be.
>>26405066
That's because they ARE part of the fandom, and it's been part of the pony fandom's culture, these fan videos, cringe or otherwise.
>inb4 'we not bronies, we horsefuggers'
>>26403627
By being on /mlp/, you're liking anything fan produced and god forbid, anything made by a fan of the fandom.
>>26413086
You know they are just parasprites with nothing better to do right?
>>26401218
This shit is why I don't feel sorry about their shit getting recked.
Making an actual income off of a series via fan parodies is absolutely disgusting and only encourages maximum Jewing.
Whatever happened to asking for donations if people were feeling generous instead of asking for money before you even finish or attempt to do something.
>>26400000
>>26401689
Can we get mad already?
Consumer uproars generally get quick attention.
>>26400055
But if they do that, then what will we do during the hiatus?
>>26413161
I don't see him demanding that people contribute to his patreon or he won't make it you know.
I think in his case his patreon is just a way for him to get donations for his work. I've never seen a hint of him holding any of his potential works hostage unless people pay him like many other artists do.
His patreon gives the impression that he'll still make the animations even if people don't contribute. They'll just get done faster if people contribute enough money that he can afford to work less.
TL:DR I'm pretty sure he is just asking for donations via his patreon, not saying "I won't make it at all if you guys don't pay me".
>>26413161
He IS asking for donations (as evidenced by the fact that nowhere on his patreon, tumblr, youtube or deviantart is there any sign of him saying he won't make any more animations unless he gets X amount from people via his patreon).
Also evidenced by the fact that he doesn't make exclusive content only for patrons and get's about 15 dollars a month right now from his patreon.
You see, that is why people do what you hate. Because when you just ask for donations via your patreon, you get 15 dollars.
If on the other hand you hold most of your work hostage like a big fat jew you can extort hundreds or even thousands of dollars a month from poor hapless fools using patreon.
>>26413161
Get with the times, man. Patreon is how he gets his donations.
>>26401063
He can, DMCAing an original creation is not even legal.
>>26401480
And this is not what copyright laws allows them to.
They're playing the wrong game, and it's perfectly legal to make a parody.
>>>What is the first amendment and what are covered under free speech? hurf?
https://twitter.com/tiarannosaur/status/697208020196061184
This.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqVVtaWd8Pw
is up.
Everything else he had is down.
>>26413323
Problem is, no one will stand up against
>>26400000
Parody is not restricted by copyright laws. This C&D is worthless and there's literally nothing they can do about it.
>>26413810
yes they will
all the guy has to do is file a counter claim
im not certain he will, he aught to
damn man
this was part of my childhood. perhaps one of the most influential parts.
ive come back to this board after 4 years, its so fucking strange man revisiting all this shit and thinking about how its all changed. i cant believe how into this stuff i used to be
>>26413086
As far as I'm aware, moot never liked the show.
checkmate.
