JWeinCom said:
DonFerrari said:
Not the same, it is a type of person but not the same rights as natural person, at least in Brazil.
I agree Sony have overreacted and it seems like Tweeter algorythm is also at fault since Sony wouldn't report itself. So perhaps what was a harsh action from Sony fucked up the algorythm and it became something else.
Do you have many channels you like that prey on confidential information and trying to release it to everyone for no good reason? It is something to break the law to protect the law (like when you disclose some confidential information regarding a crime being commited), but when you do it for clicks it isn't good.
Property is property, and freedom of speech isn't unlimited as well. If you have access to confidential material you can't claim freedom of speech to divulge it.
Sure Sony is aggressive on it, but seeing their own tweet was targeted it certainly have something to do with Tweeter algorythm being overzealous to avoid any possible Sony retaliation on not taking action on a subpuena.
|
I'm not an expert on the differences between a corporation and an individual, so I can't really comment on that.
The thing is that it is not against the law to tell secrets. It may be a violation of a contract if someone has specifically agreed not to reveal certain information. But, if they reveal that information to a third party, that third party is not constrained because they had no agreement. Sony should absolutely sue the fuck out of whoever originally leaked the material (assuming they were under an agreement not to) but they have no right to DMCA anyone else.
Ultimately, Sony's only reasonable objection to the information they're DMCAing is that they don't want people to talk about it, and that's an extremely dangerous precedent.
|
Copyright infringment is against the law, it isn't a secret. And even if it was personal secret depending on the case it is also a crime to disclose it, could be considered breach of privacy in the least even if you go by "hearsay".
sales2099 said:
drkohler said:
Too bad but you picked the 1%
Fair use does NOT apply to unpublished work. There's at least two Supreme Court Decisions nailing that.
|
Do you recall Disney reacting like this when spoilers of Rise of Skywalker leaked? (The answer is no)
Its not just discussing unpublished work, it’s also people just talking about their reactions to it without context and without saying spoilers. And that does NOT fall under the 1%.
Edit: in essence it boils down to Sony limiting negative word of mouth because millions of lost revenue is on the line. However by being this aggressive they are only ensuring negative word of mouth both online and in person. People with any belief in checking corporate abuse will notice this.
|
Disney not doing it doesn't mean no one can't, shouldn't or the law isn't that way.
Nintendo is the only one that pressured to take down let's play type of video (and they don't configure fair use, since they show the complete game and is the main focus and product, the voice of the streamer is just a small addition), the fact that Sony nor MS does it doesn't mean Nintendo isn't on their legal right to do. But yes for the released games Nintendo banning everyone except their subs to do yt is over reaction, still legal right.
The review embargo ends 1 week before the game releases, did you know it? So it isn't about limiting negative word of mouth, it is about protecting from leaks, spoilers and imprecise portrayal of their product, and sure protect their money that is their right. Again the creator of something have more right to make money of it than any other part have right to make money of it.
