TROM4d ago

We have received a Copyright claim from Amazon for our @peertube instance videos.trom.tf/ . Hetzner, the hosting company where we have the dedicated server at, gave us 24h to resolve it.

The problem?

The video in question, a documentary about "aliens", a garbage piece of content, was NOT hosted on our instance, of course. But since Peertube is federated the idiots sent the claim to our hosting company. Even if UNDER the video you can see that video is "Posted By:" and the instance and username. It takes a few seconds to see where the video is hosted.

But who cares...maybe Amazon has "AI Agents" employed and they simply find a video of theirs on a URL and see the IP of that URL and submit a Copyright claim to the hosting where that domain is registered?!

Bunch of idiots.

But it is very concerning the fact that they can do these and we, the ones who host (and for free for that matter), need to quickly "fix" these things even if the claim has nothing to do with our server.

We eventually had to block that URL, thanks Peertube for allowing that, else these idiots cannot understand that it was not us who were hosting that video.

#peertube #fedi #fediverse

videos.trom.tf

A trade-free video hosting platform for science/technology/nature videos in the English language. You do not have to trade your currency, data, attention, freedom or anything else, in order to use it.

videos.trom.tf
Show threadFinchHaven sfba4d ago

@trom

"The video in question, a documentary about "aliens", a garbage piece of content, was NOT hosted on our instance, of course"

As other have said (and may yet say) IANAL

*That said* there is a vast difference between "hosted on" and "served from"

Your instance may *not* be the sole source for that content, but if a video consumer *gets* it though you, guess what?

It doesn't matter what "makes sense"

This is law, and lawyer-speak

Good luck with it

cc @[email protected]

Show threadTROM
@FinchHaven It is ridiculous to act as if the content is "on your server" and you have to deal with it. If it is federated, go after the source. Else you swift the responsibility on the TV if one watches "pirated" content on "it".
May 11 at 3:50pmWeb
Show threadFinchHaven sfba4d ago

@trom

What you "like" or "think should happen" is utterly irrelevant

And you clearly don't understand the usage of the word "Federated"

Which is super common around here

Being federated makes *every* federated instance the [a] source

There is no one single point source -- the sources are all federated into multi-point "sources"

Show threadTROM4d ago
@FinchHaven If you make the instances that "display" a piece of remote content, liable for the content, you are destroying the internet itself. I cannot be responsible for a remote content. Federation cannot work if this is the case. It is utterly insane to do that. It is like making your Browser responsible for the content people display on it.
Show threadMaddad ☑️4d ago

@trom @FinchHaven

That's a good analogy re the browser...👍

Show threadjeSuisatire neindochohh ᘛ⁐̤ᕐᐷ4d ago

@maddad
If a forum page embeds a YT video isn't it displaying just a link?

Anyway, if we become relevant they will drown us in lawsuits, not because their claims are reasonable but because we can't afford the lawyers to prove that.

That's how the justice system works.

I guess only #EFF could solve this by defending some cases to establish a rule of law.

@trom @FinchHaven

Show threadRokosun4d ago

@FinchHaven @trom

The way Peertube federates is different from how Mastodon does its federation. As long as the video in question is not stored on your server and is just streamed from a different instance then that instance should be contacted for the removal - that's what any competent lawyer would do. But now what they've achieved is merely made us put up a curtain to hide the video from their view, a video that still exists on the original instance and free for anyone to watch.

Show threadStrypey3d ago

(1/2)

@FinchHaven
> And you clearly don't understand the usage of the word "Federated"

You probably intended this as a nonchalant segue into your next point (I've done this). But FYI it comes across as quite patronising and out of context. @trom is hosting a PeerTube server. Chances are they have a pretty good understanding of the range of things "federated" can mean in this context.

Show threadStrypey3d ago

(2/2)

You're not wrong that a lawyer might see a search result as a 'source' for copyright purposes. This is exactly what they've done with TPB et al. But ...

@FinchHaven
> federated makes *every* federated instance the [a] source

On Mastodon et al, yes. Because text posts are automatically delivered in full to everyone following the account that posted it. But PeerTube doesn't work that way, it just sends a title and a link to followers (or the wasted storage and bandwidth would be extreme).

Show threadRodolfoRG4d ago
@trom @FinchHaven I think this is like the gray area of Torrent file server. It does nota host the file itself, only points where to get from