The CASE Act - Should We Be Worried?

[James Blond]

So, this seems pretty bad -

https://www.theverge.com/2020/12/21/221 ... -streaming

How worried should we be? I would hope that we're all small fish in a very big pond, and it's unlikely copyright holders will want to spend much time trying to pursue us, but still... I've been thinking about removing all of my videos from YouTube, but that feels like it might be an overreaction?

[CrackTheSky]

I'm pretty ignorant of legal process, but this just seems completely unenforceable to me. That doesn't mean we shouldn't be worried, but I just have no idea how platforms like YouTube, TikTok, Instagram, etc. can possibly survive under this.

[Zarxrax]

It's a bad law, but I don't think we should be particularly worried at the moment.
I think the real *intention* of the law is to crack down services that are basically illegal netflix-like operations where you sometimes pay a fee to an unscrupulous company to get access to their streaming service full of unlicensed content. Though, according to the many articles written about this so far, it seems the law is written in a way that if companies particularly wanted to go after small individuals like us, perhaps they could.

But in practice, I think the companies like YouTube and Twitch are essentially going to be a buffer between users and the law for the most part, much as they are now. I highly doubt we will see any overnight sting operation where every amv editor is suddenly hit with a lawsuit out of the blue. If we ever see it happen to *one* person though, at that point we might need to worry.

[the Black Monarch]

This isn't a streaming site. Streaming means you watch something while it downloads. Here, you have to finish downloading a video before you can start watching it.

[CrackTheSky]

This isn't a streaming site. Streaming means you watch something while it downloads. Here, you have to finish downloading a video before you can start watching it.

I think the "we" in the topic title is referring to AMV editors as a whole, not the .org specifically, and since most editors use YouTube, it's a relevant question.

[James Blond]

This isn't a streaming site. Streaming means you watch something while it downloads. Here, you have to finish downloading a video before you can start watching it.

That used to be the case, yes. But a while back, the ORG added the ability to "Preview" a video, without downloading it. You can use this feature to watch a full video, from beginning to end. I think an argument could be made that the ORG is actually a streaming site, too.

I think the "we" in the topic title is referring to AMV editors as a whole, not the .org specifically, and since most editors use YouTube, it's a relevant question.

Yeah; my original intent was to discuss editors/the editing community as a whole. Copyright law in this country has always been a mess, and posting AMVs anywhere on the internet has always been a risk. I just worry that these new developments will make things a lot worse. To be honest, I'm less concerned about the felony streaming part of the law, than I am about the CASE act. Allowing copyright holders (whether they're legitimate or not) to go after alleged offenders, without a judge presiding over the case, with a possible maximum penalty of $30,000 per offense doesn't seem great.