Full Screen censorship

Politics, Social Issues, Religion, Philosophy & other Serious Topics Only.
User avatar
You Crack Me Up, Little Buddy
You Crack Me Up, Little Buddy
Posts: 321
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2012 3:07 am
Location: Quincy, MA
PostPosted: Wed Aug 05, 2015 5:21 am
So I saw this just a little while ago https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fh1wlSb2H04. This is a video from a YouTube channel named Ethan and Hila. Honestly I know nothing about the channel itself but the claim here is that Full Screen (owners of SA) copyrighted a video of theirs that used a clip from some prank video that Full Screen owns. I'm just wondering doesn't SA run a part of Full Screen's channel? Should Craig (or someone else from the office) comment on the censorship by their parent company? And do people think it was right for Full Screen to put a claim on this video?

Also according to Ethan's twitter account (https://twitter.com/h3h3productions) Full Screen has threatened to destroy the channel if the video wasn't removed. And his own network CDS has un-monetized all his other videos.

I guess the point of me posting this is should SA help this channel since they are part of Full Screen? Seems like these people are getting screwed by the Networks
Image
User avatar
I Just Got the Bundle for Free
I Just Got the Bundle for Free
Posts: 2541
Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2009 6:12 pm
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
PostPosted: Wed Aug 05, 2015 6:58 am
Yes.
Image
User avatar
Sweet Tooth's Daddy
Sweet Tooth's Daddy
Posts: 4389
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 11:00 pm
Location: West Michigan
PostPosted: Wed Aug 05, 2015 3:03 pm
ScrewAttack runs the VIDEO GAME side of Fullscreen (aptly named the "ScrewAttack Network"), which from the looks of the channels involved isn't part of SA's jurisdiction.

That said, I wouldn't expect any of the SA crew to comment on their own, being employees of Fullscreen are likely legally and/or contractually obligated to remain impartial.

As for whether it is right or wrong? There is only one side to the story we've pretty much seen so far, and my intuition tells me there's probably a lot more to it then just the standard "Big Time Company shitting on the little guy", despite what some people would otherwise believe. "Fair Use" is and always has been a murky cesspool legality to wade through. At best one would hope this brings us closer to reckoning & organization it so desperately needs.

Regardless SA doesn't need to do anything anyway, as the George Strompolos (CEO of Fullscreen) has stepped up to the plate; https://twitter.com/gstrompolos/status/ ... 1670885376
Image
User avatar
You Crack Me Up, Little Buddy
You Crack Me Up, Little Buddy
Posts: 321
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2012 3:07 am
Location: Quincy, MA
PostPosted: Wed Aug 05, 2015 4:01 pm
Oh that's cool that the CEO of Full Screen a least is trying to work on it. Thanks for the update
Image
User avatar
I Just Got the Bundle for Free
I Just Got the Bundle for Free
Posts: 2541
Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2009 6:12 pm
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
PostPosted: Wed Aug 05, 2015 4:20 pm
Metalcyanide wrote:Oh that's cool that the CEO of Full Screen a least is trying to work on it. Thanks for the update


Of course they are, it's turning into a PR disaster.
Image
User avatar
You Crack Me Up, Little Buddy
You Crack Me Up, Little Buddy
Posts: 321
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2012 3:07 am
Location: Quincy, MA
PostPosted: Wed Aug 05, 2015 5:53 pm
Jawshy wrote:
Metalcyanide wrote:Oh that's cool that the CEO of Full Screen a least is trying to work on it. Thanks for the update


Of course they are, it's turning into a PR disaster.


Even if that's the only reason it's good that they are working on it
Image
User avatar
It's a Cat. I Think
It's a Cat. I Think
Posts: 151
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2014 1:43 pm
PostPosted: Wed Aug 05, 2015 10:20 pm
Metalcyanide wrote:
Jawshy wrote:
Metalcyanide wrote:Oh that's cool that the CEO of Full Screen a least is trying to work on it. Thanks for the update


Of course they are, it's turning into a PR disaster.


Even if that's the only reason it's good that they are working on it


This isn't someone stepping up to the plate and doing a good job. It's someone covering their asses. So, it depends on what you mean by "good." Is it ethically or morally good? No. Is it good for Full Screen? Yeah.

Good isn't really the question.

And even if they hadn't looked into it, hypothetically. No. No one from ScrewAttack should have said anything. You do not speak out against your boss if you intend on keeping your job.
You're so vain. You probably think this signature's about you.

Return to Formal Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests