This is only a "confusing case" because people are so biased against Activision like this. Look, I fucking hate Activision, but people are trying their damn hardest to somehow make Activision wrong in a situation where Fantano is clearly being the piece of shit, even if that harms other small creators in the process.
@@Brianna_Q how is that any good for anyone? It literally affects everyone else badly don't pray on someone's downfall because you hate them when it affects others at least that's not how it works
He isn't right, there's thousands if not tens of thousands of companies that do the exact same thing every day, him being the first one to be a giant crybaby about it doesn't lend much credit I'm afraid
Getting Activision to comply in the first place and take the og ad down was a feat in and of itself, I don't know why he felt the need to press his luck like that..
@jeltje50 That's not a cease and desist. That would imply Fantano knew the commercial using his bit was being created, and he probably didn't. This is a copyright claim, where the claimant can request the person who maybe in violation to take down the work. It must stay down until a counter notification is filed or is taken to court and ruled that the property is fair use. Fantano most likely doesn't have a case since it's fair use.
I like how Fantano decided that picking a fight with a multi-billion dollar game development studio with a bottomless pit of money to throw at a lawsuit was a GREAT idea.
It’s also a bottomless pit of money to throw at a settlement… the side people always forget. I haven’t finished the video so I’m not going to side against Fantano like everyone apparently has, just saying, I’m sure Fantano’s network have a decently large law firm on retainer that decided to take this on, on its merits. It’s not like Fantano just saw the ad and got mad and decided to sue, someone on his end brought it to his attention with the purpose of asking him to sue, that’s how these things go 99% of the time
Details aside, sending a C&D to a multi-billion dollar corporation is pretty foolish. They will always find a way to make the lawsuit more costly than it’s worth
The cease and desist alone was fair. Fantano didn't want his likeness associated with Activision. Activision complied (surprisingly) and took it down. Fantano took it too far by demanding compensation after it was taken down, though. That was just incredibly dumb. Someone else in the comments said Fantano pulled an Icarus, I completely agree.
I know its a small pleasure, but I always love it when a guy in the Twitch chat gets Charlie to look up a news article and it leads to a full face to cam video
@@PlanOfActionz Charlie doesn't make money from these videos. Last I checked he donates his ad revenue on youtube to charities. He only makes money from twitch
Activision is inadvertently doing a good thing by serving its best interest. It's like Godzilla destroying a city but the city is actually a cartel compound.
TikTok policy works like this: Business accounts (these are accounts registered to businesses) aren’t legally allowed to use anything outside of the CML (commercial music library) even on organic posts. If they want to use non-CML sounds, they have to show that they acquired the rights to use that sound. TikTok’s standard sound library licensing agreement only protects non-business accounts. Activision is claiming that they got the sound from the CML, I can assure you, the CML is highly curated and would never have Fantanos audio recording within it. TikTok policy is written that way for exactly that reason. They’re confusing the standard TikTok audio library (non-business use only) with the CML (free for business use).
@@Junya01 otherwise Walmart could use a Taylor Swift song to promote Walmart products for free on TikTok, skirting the licensing agreements they’d have to go through ordinarily. It’s why TikTok makes the distinction between standard users and business accounts, TH-cam does something similar where standard users you can upload copyrighted music, but you can’t monetize it.
Wouldn't it be literally the easiest thing on the planet for Fantano to simply prove the sound is not on the CML if that were the case? I don't think "the lawyers of this giant corporation are all basing their defense on the idea that nobody will bother checking this publicly available resource" is a particularly likely scenario here.
Wait these last two comments, how can you side with him? Did you not watch the video at all? You can't pick and choose. He gave up his exclusive rights for protection by putting this video up. That means any one can use it regardless. I'm pretty anti corp and I'm siding with Activision here because they're right this time. He got greedy and now must pay the price.
@@devizesolstice4617 I feel like, when it comes to a legal view, Fantano is 100% wrong and screwed, even in an ideal world, you wouldn't go about it the way he did. But morally speaking, I don't see why not? I think if I want to say "Individuals can use my music for free, corporations and ultra rich people can't because they obviously have the money lol", I think that would seem fair to most people intuitively, I feel like that should be allowed. It sort of is, that's WinRAR's entire business model. So as long as people concede that in the real world, Fantano isn't getting anywhere and was stupid to put his stuff in the CM Library if this is how he really feels, I think it's fair for people to have the view that morally Activision owes him because he says so, it is his work.
@@anthbills307saying I'm ok with meme or TikTok videos of me isn't the same as saying im ok with my likeness or anything I created being used in an ad these 2 things aren't comparable
@@devizesolstice4617Activision is pretending that fantano is going after small TikTok creators which he isn't and just like you I imagine don't want your likeness or creations to be used in an ad without permission. I remember when we shat on companies when they used footage of people "playing" there shitty mobile game how the tables have turned
This is actually settled case law. Once you create content it becomes your IP, however once you put it into a royalty free library you surrender rights to control of said IP. The case this is based on is from a woman who posted an image to a royalty free library, however she later found a stock photo company selling her IP, she took legal action, and the court ruled in favor of the defendant stating that the creator surrenders rights to control their IP upon posting it to a royalty free library.
yo could also point your finger at a number of cases that were ruled the opposite such as the model who ended up as the face of hiv treatment billboards and won. it's all dependent and not actually set case law.
@allanpeterson1137 yeah that actually makes sense though. It wouldn't be a ruling on intellectual property rights. I would be a ruling on defamation as nobody who saw that advertisement would believe you don't have HIV
Dude doesn’t have much of a case, but I do find it hilarious a company like Activision preaching about fair use when they’ve fraudulently copyright claimed hundreds of videos for reviewing their games negatively.
It bugs me that people are genuinely not in the know on how copyright law works. It’s there for a reason. People aren’t better than the law just because they’re famous.
As someone who has brown eyes, i hate having brown eyes. They aren't even good looking. My parents said if i get 2k followers they'll get me an eye color surgery 🥺🙏
While this makes sense. The dude has a lot of subs. He's been around a long time and I'm willing to bet has made a damn good living being a YT'er. I don't think this is a cash grab for that reason and the fact that well, he just doesn't seem like that kind of guy (though I could be totally wrong on that second one, not like I know him personally).
@@JayBigDadyCy Why does him being around for a while and you not knowing who he is make you think it's not a cash grab? The fact that he has multiple out of court settlements for similar things against large companies definitely raises my eyebrow while your reasonings simply makes me roll my eyes.
@@JayBigDadyCyyeah this is absolutely a message he is trying to send. Like whatever lil money activision may have neen willing to throw his way is irrelevant to him.
@@itsjohnnyr8560 I don't think I have seen an album review of Fantano in years. I'm fine with most reviews I remember. I do not like his character though.
goood for ACTIVISION . sometimes these influencers think that just because they have small following of people they can get away with anything. i bet he will try to defame activision and ask his 9 year old fans to post troll comments on activision social media once he loses the cases. (of course he will not deliberately tell his fans to do that because he knows his ass will be in jail but he will definitely try to isuniate hate towards acitvision and it only take small hint for his 9 year old fans to wreck havoc on social media thats how it works nowadays . you dont even have you command your dumb followers . just say that big corporation bad im good and his unga bunga fans are ready to go)
@@bendover-bz4bc You have no idea who Anthony Fantano is, do you? Small following? Try... millions. He is a music critic/reviewer that's been around for years. Pretty sure he has almost no child following either. He's a piece of shit, yes, but to discredit Anthony as some typical run of the mill Tiktok influencer is just disingenuous and makes me think you are just an Activision fanboy, which, btw, none of us here are, so you are not gonna get a lot of support either way. Is Activision right in this instance? Yes, they are, but that doesn't mean we like Activision.
bro what? how did they spin the case? public opinion wouldve always been on their side because the original tiktok sound has 55k videos under it how come he didnt go sue all those people?
I don't respect Activision as a company but they've got a point on this one. Anthony got way too greedy. He was lucky to even get the Crash Bandicoot video using his meme clip taken down in the first place. I wouldn't be surprised if he dropped the lawsuit before it could go to trial. If not, he'd likely lose and his reputation would be shot!
I was under the impression that Anthony himself didn't create the meme, but someone actually clipped it and turned it into one and it went viral. So I don't don't think he entered it into the commercial sounds library, but this will be super interesting to follow
Even if Fantano can prove he didn’t put the clip in the commercial library Activision has plausible deniability and their initial comply of the C&D as means to dismiss any further action. Overall it’s a power move for everyone, they get to know if he uploaded it or not and they also get to use that as their plausible deniability. Fantano can’t even win anything monetary in court as he has no registration number for enough slices. He’d win an injunction preventing further use at most.
If he didn’t upload it then activision can fall back on the fact that the sound has been used millions of times and he only takes issue with it being uploaded now. They would still have to take down the clip but there is no avenue for financial gain for Fantano that I could see.
@@Seven-tk7spthat’s not the defense. The defense is that to keep certain rights you have to defend them and you can’t be choosy about whom you defend them from. I’m not a lawyer and even I have read about this numerous times lol it’s nothing unusual. People with no idea of how things work and whom have read nothing about it : “that couldn’t ever work that way!” 😂😂 The people who know the least will always talk first and loudly lol
@@mrjjman2010 "The people who know the least will always talk first and loudly lol" Not quite looking in the mirror there are we bud? When it comes to advertising, a company would need explicit permission to use the likeness of an individual or organization, either visual or audio, regardless of the origin of said likeness. The defense of certain rights that you mention is only applicable in copyrights, of upholding and defending copyrights via suits or DMCA in most cases. This does not fall under copyright defense as you claim as one: Fantano most likely does not have a copyright on the "that's enough slices" clip, i believe that is partially taken by TikTok actually under their terms, two: there is a vast difference between what could fall under fair use or be argued as "defamatory" ie what Activision is counter suing here, and three: Activision used the clip in a advertisement sense, which allows for a lot more broadness in protections of individuals when it comes to their individual rights.
Even if Anthony could establish he didn’t put his meme into the library Activision can clearly show that they used it fairly since they had no way of knowing that was the case and furthermore they acted in good faith by immediately stop using it once he contacted them about his objection. Anthony isn’t going to get a dime.
Innocent infringement still has a minimum penalty of 200$. so if it ends up a non fair use infringement case where willfull infringment cant be proven, he could still see some money
@21warmasters lol. 200 bucks? Thats nice. Lets make some math on the profits +Profit from the lawsuit = $200 -Lawyer fees = $100,000 Damn. Anthony sure showed everyone
@@21warmastersyour mind is incredibly diluted, please just think about what you said, 200 dollars isnt even crumbs for 90% of Americans, ESPECIALLY in today's age. Your observation was pointless and shows your ignorance when it comes to living in the real world
The commercial sound library on Tiktok is different to their standard sound library. It’s a more limited selection of sounds for business and brands that can be used commercially and doesn’t include most popular songs
Anthony shoulda just accepted that they took down the post out of respect when they didn’t have to. Instead he crossed the line and threatened legal action. He better pray that they accept a settlement.
It's kind of an interesting area because wouldn't other companies be required to pay to use other peoples content? Like call him greedy but what he is doing seems pretty standard.
@@Lastofthefreenamesmorally i don't think people are saying fantano is in the wrong, but the fact is that if his actions are accepted and normalized it will negatively affect a lot of other people due to the precedent. he's also just legally wrong besides that
@@ladyinwightNot necessarily. Fantano winning is only bad if he argues from his ownership of the meme. If he argues that the ad using him is misleading and wins that's pretty much objectively a good thing. What's bad for corporations is typically good for humans.
Well what do you think people do when they don't receive what they think they deserve? Not sue? lol. Not getting money is the reason for 95% of people suing other people/companies.
@@pinkanimositygaming No it's standard discussions before a lawsuit. Most lawsuits are resolved like this before taking it to a judge and essentially all before taking it to trial. $100k is cheap compared to going to trial.
@@volundrfrey896 my main point was about the wording. I pursued contract law in college. When an ultimatum is issued, the wording needs to be taken into account. If it’s worded in that blunt of terms, a judge or a jury might interpret that as a hostile money grab. They could interpret the ultimatum to be made in bad faith depending on if the wording seems hostile.
@@sodanakinYou clearly don't know Fantano as tik tok is just a small thing he started doing besides his youtube channel. Definitely not a "tik tok brain rot user"
the thing i've heard that makes the most sense is that if someone else, either accidentally or intentionally, uploaded it to the commercial sound library, they should be held liable. if it was accidental, i think tiktok could be held liable too for letting something like that happen so easily.
If Anthony didn’t upload the audio, then another point of contention will be the duration of time Anthony has spent not actively attempting to remove the audio from the library. If he knew about it, but only to action selectively to big companies while not taking any action to remove it from the library, it could look bad for him still.
@@Jaywin228 While screwing everyone else if he ever does tho. This is beyond "bad publicity", but he's literally claiming he doesn't care if he needs to harm every other creator out there for some money.
TikTok Sounds for Business has apparently only been launched less than six months ago. Could be that TikTok failed to obtain consent for old content and accidentally cleared it for commercial use without having an appropriate license in place. That would explain why other companies have apparently previously settled similar cases.
No he might legitimately not know in which case he, the copy right holder, would not have consented to putting his copyrighted produce into the library so it would be legally invalid. Idk if he'd get much out of Activision for that though since there's no way to show they knew that.
If Activision wins, and if it’s true that Fantano got other companies to pay him those “similar 6 figure amounts”, would they be able to come back and countersue?
Probably not, settlements are supposed to *settle* the case, no matter what happens in the future. They would likely have to prove outright fraud to get the money back.
idk im not a lawyer. What? You think anybody in this comment section is gonna start pulling up website links to cases or laws created from... Name a year in 1900s. Like shit, I can just say yes with no evidence to support my claim or I can say no with no evidence to support my claim. I didn't pass the bar, I didn't go to law school. Not only that but I highly doubt there are any lawyers here. Now of course this isn't me saying that there is a 100% guarantee theirs not an individual with sufficient knowledge in the law because there might be.
Honestly, if Anthony is caught up and somehow admits to knowingly put it into the "Commercial Sounds", he loses. The only way I can really see him winning this dispute is if someone else stole his audio and published it there without him knowing, which can raise the question "Why didn't they get sued?". People can argue that Activation used it for "promotional purposes", but that is immediately discarded since it's apparently in the "Commercial Sounds"
Think for a second; if Fantano agreed - why would Activision take the video down and not contest it at that point? Why wait for a countersuit in which they've already admitted fault?
@@kaingates It's common for people to take down content that uses content from other creators even if it's fair use if the other creator asks. Nothing new or damning there.
@@karthis5911 What people are missing here is Fanto IS his brand and you can have Business Branded Accounts.(googled) My guess is he upload that using a Business Brand Account which doesn't seem to have the same Term of serve that's probably why he was able to get those amounts from other companies. Activision either knew of little of him or did and just didn't want to fit a collab bill and just decided to steal the meme for the ad cause they knew it'd get taken down LATER after hour or days and by then the ad time is over since they probably paid for it to be pushed up and all that on the frontend (as many eyes on it at launch) would be over by the time it would be taken down at backend (when that money to upsell the ad timeframe ends). Plus why didn't Activision Connect with Fanto he's a big enough creator NOT to try to get into connect first or at least you'd think NOPE, They just sent the ad and now making like He's the bad guy, yet if your seeing him on Twitter or YT or FB or TicToc those are ALL definitely Business Brands, nothing personal, so when he twits or threads or post on YT or TicToc THEY ARE ALL business brands accounts. So if he uploaded the meme from his Business Brand Account I doubt they same term of service apply especially when sharing. Otherwise why would Celebrities or Musician use TicToc if they themselves or anyone else puts them in the music library well now your likenss and vioce could then be claimed fair use and/or obliviousness to use for a time being. So every celebrity and musicians' voice and likeness as well are fair game when? Well I bet TicToc thought of that with branded business accounts that way those types of people or companies don't have to have their voices sampled or likeness used in commercial ways they wouldn't want or shared without their approval.
I wonder if activison used the ad on a different platform. If they did it’s possible that he has a claim to damages for nontiktok ads since he (allegedly) only agreed to have his sound bite used on TikTok
Fair use of a copyrighted work applies to teaching, comment or criticism, and has to be changed enough from the original work such that it is a distinctly different thing. They’re not right because they’re using a copyrighted work under fair use (spoiler, they’re not), its that it was in the commercial sounds library so copyright law doesn’t apply the same way.
It's not about fair use though. You can't (especially commercially) exploit IP owned by another party without an appropriate right to use usually obtained via a license. That's literally why IPR exists in the first place.
@@MultresMusicChannel If that's the case, then Anthony shouldn't have uploaded his sound bite to TikTok's CML. Doing so revokes any rights he retained to the content and allows others (including brands) to use it for commercial purposes, as stated in TikTok's ToS.
@@TheHuskyK9 True, if Fantano has in fact reuploaded the sound bite to the CML or otherwise consented to the right of use of third parties. TikTok's Sounds for Business segment of CML was apparently launched last February whereas the sound bite has been originally uploaded to the platform years ago. There is a possibility that TikTok hasn't cleared old content appropriately for commercial use in SfB which would explain why other companies have apparently settled similar claims.
@@theo6741 US Copyright Law doesn't apply for Public Domain Works. You don't own the art nor can you claim copyright over it. Situations like this, new artists should know. Creative Commons is like this too. And TOS in America is not legally upheld. Since US Copyright Law exceeds it and you need a proper contract for Contract Law to be legally enforced. Especially when "free labor" is simply daylight robbery in a form of TOS... Illegal but not unexpected for corporations to do.
@@user-jl7xj5iz9k aside from this lawsuit (which he absolutely is in the wrong with), there's not much reason to hate him outside of some misinformed people who dont actually watch his reviews and just scroll down to see the score on his most controversial ones. Even if he has a weird opinion, he usually justifies it pretty well outside of a few odd cases. he's very overhated
Honestly, Anthony should've stopped after they had already ceased - they stepped on his toes and they practically apologized. Now Anthony decided to take things too far by trying to shake their pockets.
they already made god knows how much money from their ad before being taken down. I see copyright on TH-cam being abused by companies, I don't want them to limit compensation for the people on tiktok they use, while the people get eff all.
@@lachicoblanco He uploaded it to a public library and surrendered his rights to it. His fault. He doesn't deserve compensation. If he did receive compensation from Activision, that means he could get money from EVERY SINGLE PERSON that used his sound clip on Tik Tok. Copyright is also abused on TH-cam by individuals doing the same thing Activision is going against.
Yeah this public library bs is just annoying. The reason that Anthony can’t just sue everyone using his sound is because Activision used it for an ad. Let’s say for example that Twitch wanted to create an ad using creator clips, they would need to ask permission first. EVEN THOUGH they’re literally clips from Twitch, DOES NOT MEAN THEY CAN USE THEM FOR ADS.
the thing is, the "tiktok music critic" forgot one thing. Their a multi million dollar company, even if they where to lose the case, they could postpone the case as long as they want, and lawyers are payed by the hour, so they could technically make him lose all his money and all his savings to win this case. They are loaded, so they don't care about spending.
Nah, companies have money but it’s not just sitting around waiting to be flushed down the drain. They likely have a budget for this operation, much more than the creator does, but especially in this case where they can easily win there’s no reason for them to stall.
@@sebastianriz4703 yes... done multiple times every year by big companys against people... the lawyers will always find something to prolong cases, push courtdates back and file motions about everythig... they simply bleed you out
I think a lot of newer creators are confused about copyright as it is and the intricacies of it. So to have, what should be, a safe place and suddenly that is not to be safe anymore, just adds to the confusion and also adds to the ways scammers can try to make money off unsuspecting people. Sometimes the bad guy is in the right.
It's fairly concerning that now the way a lot of people consume the news is via someone learning about the topic in real time while reading a single article.
That goes to show that not only big companies can be scummy. A lot of the times people do shit like this, it just doesn't get publicized. Stay on the side of what is fair and just, not just against companies just because.
Surface Mount Device (SMD): An electronic component that mounts on the surface of a printed circuit board (as opposed to "through-hole" components which have pins that are inserted into holes). SMDs typically allow more components per square centimeter of PC board, but their scale is such that hand assembly and prototyping may be difficult. I think this is what he meant idk.
I've been a fan of Fantano for a long time so it's really strange to see him do something like this, especially when it seems like he doesn't really have a case here. I hope there are some more details that will make it make more sense but right now this kinda seems like an L for Fantano.
Just to specify, there are two different sound libraries on TikTok; commercial sounds and the standard sounds. The average TikToker won’t be affected either way by this court case. Activision’s framing is intellectually dishonest. That being said, if Fantano did add the sound itself to the commercial sounds library, it’s an open-and-shut case. But it’s also entirely possible that another TikToker copied his sound (which happens all the time) and opted into the commercial sounds library.
yeah, but I think Anthony Fantano put his own video in the library sound. plus, I think Activision lawyers can try to argue no matter if it's in the commercial library for fair use as a parody or something.
Well it does change it because if fantano wins that means any person that used sounds on the PUBLIC commercial sounds can be taken to court and sued by the original creator witch is bad for everyone.
Been trying to tell that to people If the avg normie is seeing it it's a Fanto Business Account you're seeing his private stuff is way smaller for family and friends. With all his dealings in music I'd call him idiot too if it wasn't posted in someway by him through the Business Brand TicToc then onto the commercial sounds library by that Business Brand TicToc. Sounds like Activsion was just being a scum company and pushed out an ad with hot meme for the insights and didn't either know enough about Fanto or care enough they got the ad out and probably pushed it with extra analytics for most eyes instead messaging him about a collab or they did he quoted them that big price and they said screw it what's he going to do force the takedown that's only ONCE he see's it oh well then we'll get our money worth while it's up before it gets taken down the MANY hours or DAYS later. My guess Fanto lets normie post and use it but when he see's a company especially ones that don't reach out to him, he gets pissed has every right if he posted as a business brand TicToc and was entered by him into the Commercial Library too by his business brand TicToc. For companys to steal and use for there own ads.
@@oliverbs0417 your getting it confused there are literally two library... Would you agree if Charlie made a business brand account TicToc made a TicToc he then added that mp3 to the COMMERCIAL SOUNDS LIBRARY which is DIFFERENT from the just Public SOUNDS Library which is more for like for normies share....You don't see celebrity or there voices being sampled or used for ADs or Products because being a meme doesn't entail the company to use the celebrities or musician voice or likeness to be used for ADs for companies they don't endorse and cats out of the bag even on Fanto even if taken down. Just like any other say Celebrity Meme companies aren't using those willy-nilly why should should Fantos be any different. Would you tell Charlie his singular only TicToc ever (say it's him talking about something he likes) so now his voice can be sampled on TicToc by anyone for anyone to use? That's fair use in your mind his likeness should be able to be used for commercial venture for ADs with no say because oh it's a meme now?? NO And no Activision KNEW what they were doing BEFORE they sent the meme it was just cheaper the way they did it....
Yea he’s not a bad guy for doing what companies do ever my day. It’s just activision paying sheep’s to be mad because they don’t want to lose va Anthony. Even though he’s in the right
It is annoying to have a company who you may or may not agree with use your videos or clips. However if he submitted it and allowed it to be used by anyone then he really has no say in it. If you put something in what is essentially the public domain then anyone should be able to use it despite you not agreeing with them.
POSTING 👏ONLINE👏IS👏NOT👏PUBLIC👏DOMAIN. Even lots of declared "free" content online is still licensed. Like royalty free music, or Creative Commons media, or GPL/MIT/freeware/shareware licensed software that might say stuff like "hey you can distribute this software but you can't charge money for it"
@@chatboss000bruh he didn't say its public domain. He said its ESSENTIALLY that. Meaning not that, but with similar attributes. You need to work on your reading comprehension
If Fantano loses, then if you ever put your face or voice on that library it basically means they can use your voice for anything they want. Is that really reasonable?
Should ActiBlizard be praised for not being Evil in this case? Yes, absolutely. It's called positive reinforcement, we want to encourage the behaviour we like, and discourage the behaviour we don't.
They're a company, not a person, positive reinforcement doesn't apply to a faceless conglomerate that's just trying to make money, especially since this lawsuit was done in their own self-interest, and not for the good of other creators and users, it just so happens that preventing abuse of copyright claims here benefits other people in addition to themselves, but let's not pretend like they're doing this for the good of others.
@@kingkami1739 To my knowledge Fantano didn't actully sue ActiBlizzard, he sent legal threats, and ActiBlizzard sued him in response, this isn't a counter-suit it's a pre-emptive suit.
I'm at the exact point as everyone else where I live Fantano and despise corporations that act like Activision does, but it's ridiculous to tell someone to pay someone after doing something they didn't know was wrong. Reminds me of a popular scam in India where someone will drop paint on your shoe a few steps from a shoe cleaner they're in cahoots with.
A company can be terrible. Companies can only care about themselves. They may be in the wrong a million times. But they can occasionally be in the right. Companies love doing wrong to others and wrong can be done back to them. I personally like it when wrong is done to them, but I don't pretend like they are in wrong in every scenario imaginable.
@kagemarushun7378 it is fine to hate Activision but on this point they are right a terrible company? Absolutely but they are still in the right this time
@kagemarushun7378 even if you, like Charlie and myself, cannot care less about the monetary loss of huge companies, it is still good to care about this case + want Activision to win. If they don't, like Charlie said, this could end up hurting a huge amount of random, average Tiktokers by allowing greedy song makers to take legal action against them for something that is a huge part of TikTok and was before considered a perfectly safe act.
shouldn't corporations be held to a different standard than people? if you put your shit in the library it should be free game for normal creators but not for corporations. I'm sick of companies being treated like they're people and not nebulous entities, especially in laws and contracts
It's worth noting that there are different licensing and "Creative Commons" for this EXACT topic. There is the "commercial license" which is used when you are using say, a sound for monetary gain. Then there is the creative commons license, where you can only use it if you are not looking to make a profit. I see no reason why tiktok can't add a feature to let users choose which license they are uploading it under. I believe youtube ALREADY has this feature in place.
@Usererror1919 Here is a quote from the creative commons website: For third-party platforms: Many media platforms like Flickr, TH-cam, and SoundCloud have built-in Creative Commons capabilities, letting users mark their material with a CC license through their account settings. The benefit of using this functionality is that it allows other people to find your content when searching on those platforms for CC-licensed material. If the platform where you’re uploading your content does not support CC licensing, you can still identify your content as CC-licensed in the text description of your content. Legally, these three options are the same. The only difference between applying a CC license offline rather than online is that marking a work online with metadata will ensure that users will be able to find it through CC-enabled search engines. CC offers resources on the best practices for marking your material and on how to mark material in different media (.pdf). Do I need to register with Creative Commons before I obtain a license? No. CC offers its licenses, code, and tools to the public free of charge, without obligation. You do not need to register with Creative Commons to apply a CC license to your material; it is legally valid as soon as you apply it to any material you have the legal right to license. CC does not require or provide any means for creators or other rights holders to register use of a CC license, nor does CC maintain a database of works distributed under Creative Commons licenses. CC also does not require registration of the work with a national copyright agency. _TL;DR:_ He just has to edit the description of the original video to state that it is and it will be so by default since tiktok is one of those platforms that do not have a built-in way to file it. You literally just have to say it is so and it legally is designated as such. It doesn't matter where it was uploaded to if he labels it as such BEFORE the court case goes to trial as the licensing holds the authority over any of tiktoks fine print as tiktok would not be the license holder and thus would not have authority over said license.
@@Hadeks_Marow I don’t know. Tiktok says its commercial use library is “pre-cleared”-by whom I don’t know. As for the general use library, I couldn’t get much info on that.
@@guyanomaly That's commercial use. Commercial use is the thing we DON'T want. What we want is creative commons. Aka only to be used in not-for-profit creations. A commercial license is FOR-profit. >_> The whole reason why I pointed out what I said in the OP was because of this exact reason and is the entire point of the reply I sent to the other guy >.> I'm sorry, but your misunderstanding is like, if 2 guys were having a conversation about how the government doesn't have anything setup in place for people who can't afford to buy a house, and then you walk in saying "yes they do, it's called the housing market, all they gotta do is just buy a house". You can see how incredibly annoying that is, even if it's just a simple mistake. What matters here is that one detail. What kind of "license" is it and who owns the license.
I'm not too familiar with US law, but I have an english law degree and there is some overlap. In such a case where Fantano uploaded intentionally or not, the sound to the library, Activision used it in good faith, as they had no way of knowing the level of his consent. He can't sue a good faith actor for damages especially after they took down the advertisement, as a concept called equity intervenes. It's hardly fair to punish activision for following the rules just because Fantano didn't know what he was doing. Whilst you think the case is messy, it's actually rather straight forward, because no matter Fantano's intentions, he can't sue for damages for his own errors in judgement.
Charlie, I’d like to thank you for creating the best content to take a sh!t to. The length of videos is perfect and your content really gets my gears grinding. Unlike scrolling through Reels or TikTok, i find myself pondering over whatever dilemma/ drama you decide to make a video. And yes, I’m currently sitting with my sweatshorts wrapped around my ankles on the porcelain throne.
@@sownheard ok, and? I didn't say they were technically wrong. Why are you defending a multi billion dollar company that started this whole thing by stealing someone else's content and using it for a promotion to make money? Why are you trying to minimise the fact that they're one of the greediest, morally corrupt video game companies that exist? Context matters
@@kwoni3337Lil bro losing his mind over a corporation that will never change nor give him any mind lmao. I don’t like Activision but this comment is so corny. Like did you even watch the video ☠️they didn’t steal nothing and was under fair use. It’s cool to hate corps but don’t start crying over nothing 🤣
I think there should be a healthy middle ground where it can be used but not for the advertisement of goods or products. In those cases, explicit rights would need to be obtained like in all other cases. This way giant companies can't exploit the policies to use trending music/vids/memes to push their products.
As someone who has brown eyes, i hate having brown eyes. They aren't even good looking. My parents said if i get 2k followers they'll get me an eye color surgery 🥺🙏
This reminds me of a photograph a college classmate took and stumble upon being used to sell a product. They took a photo of some macarons and preceded to upload the image to a website named ‘undplash.’ Later, she saw the photo that she took used as the stock image in picture frames that were for sale at a box store (Target, if I remember correctly). Long story short, it is within the rights on Unsplash to take an image that someone else posted, tweak it, and then use it to promote your own product. She looked into suing, but it became apparent immediately that the terms of service were followed.
For a closed system. That's legally correct under Contract Law. If it was an open system. Then that would be illegal under Contract Law. Case in point... TH-cam/Google cannot do this unless you waved your Copyright away under Contract Law that you signed. If you didn't sign/consent to the contract, then it would be illegal. And if someone else took your art and put it into any system. Then that is also illegal. (US Copyright Law is complex so I'm just explaining a basic example.)
@@Milharoooco If the issue was 'They used something that he owns and he sued them' then we'd definitely be on his side. The problem was he (allegedly) uploaded it somewhere that he had to agree could be used by anyone, explicitly including paid advertisements, and then he said 'Wait, hang on, you can't do that, give me money for it.' just because the one using it was making money from it in a paid advertisement. It's like if I painted a beautiful piece of art then donated it to the museum, and the museum said 'Alright, we love it. But just so you know, if you donate it here, people can come in and take selfies with it and use it to advertise.' I can't then send a demand for the CEO of Activision who took a selfie with my painting and edited 'CRASH BANDICOOT LOL' on it to give me money just because he's a big shot. I agreed that was OK the moment I donated the art piece. It's like Charlie said. It's not that I love Activision. But if they lose this, it sets a precedent that someone can then do the same thing in bad taste, suing little Tina because she happened to use their sound that they uploaded and she blew up big on TikTok and sue her for everything she's worth because 'Well, he did it and the court said it was OK.' When a court rules in a case like this, it can be used in evidence in every further case similar to it.
@@Zack-vi7is I dont think you understand the term "boot licker" Also the majority of people are against Fantano. No one likes losers who try to copyright memes
10:18 Nah. That being true would not affect THIS case. From Activision's side, it either was or wasn't in that library. How it got there changes nothing for their defense. Fantano would have to bring that as its own lawsuit.
It would affect the case. Their claims are that he is the one uploading the file and that he, with this knowledge, is abusing the system for financial gains. But the entire thing hinges on his consent for the file to be in the library.
@@darkwitnesslxx Yes, that's the thing, that argument would only work against the platform itself, for being loose in their verification process, it has nothing to do with Activision. And as another commenter pointed out, if he is not reaching out to TikTok to take it out and leaving it there, it's basically admitting he's the one who uploaded it, so he'd have screwed his only chance for it.
It would absolutely change it, it's be like if someone else took a copyrighted song and put it on a copyright free website for others to think it's okay to use. And when others use it and the copyright holder comes after them. Someone reuploaded something doesn't make it legally binding. Anthony would than have to point that out to show his sound was spread by others. However there's a response video of someone asking him to make the video into a shareable sound with the sound attached to HIS tiktok so yeah. He shared it
I honestly feel like there is a pretty big difference between small creators making videos with tik tok sounds and direct advertisements. Especially when it uses someone's face or voice.
In any of those cases, this was a matter of copyright and free use laws. Activision did the right thing by taking it down upon Fantano's request. There was no chance they were going to pay him for "damages" over a widely shared tik tok meme, though. Then to threaten a lawsuit if they don't pay up? That's literally extortion. Fantano fucked up reeeaaal bad.
There's two possible avenue for him: 1. Activision used edited version, not the version uploaded on Library. 2. Content was uploaded to Library without his permission(doubt it). Upd. I looked up the ToS and it's rather long process to add content to this library.
Even if they used an edited version. It has nothing to do with him after all it's a public domain ( you lose all rights of your product when you put it in public domain)
@@ayouberriouch5973 sure, so because an artist uploads a song to yt or whatever other platform they have no rights upon their intelectual property, 4head.
@@ayouberriouch5973it's not public domain, it's tictoc's library. Tictoc owns it but are deliberately very permissive and allow anyone to use it *in tictocs* freely Almost the same thing
@@Memorial24 can you give examples of this? not accusing you or anything, but ive been watching his videos for a long time and he's usually pretty, if not very articulate about his opinions, even if they may be unorthodox sometimes.
@@stewiegriffinfortnight2160 In his tier list for 2013 songs he ranted about Thrift Shop for just being an annoying fad and just a novelty for it’s time which I guess I can see but in his 2019 video he praises Old Town Road for the exact same reasons he criticized Thrift Shop
What sounds the most crazy is that it seems like he has extorted others for money in the past and Activision might be saying, were big enough we’re going to stick up for the little guy.
It's more like they're sticking up for themselves and just using the examples of other people being extorted by him as more proof of Anthony abusing IP laws.
It's pretty ballsy to try and hold a corporation to ransom. It's one thing to demand they stop using it, which they did. It's quite another to then demand money from them.
The fact Melon has already reportedly strong-armed a couple companies into six figure settlements is wild. I hope Activision’s lawyers absolutely bury him.
He is a bad person, crappy to his fanbase when they disagree with his points. His arguments against viewers on TH-cam or comments on Twitter exemplify that he thinks he’s smarter and better than everyone else. No shock he’s trying to abuse systems to make a ton of money.
@@Sindrella. I like it when a creator doesn't stroke off his audience like they're never wrong. Those "arguments" you're crying about are purposely put forward by the audience specifically so he can argue against them. The name of the segment is literally "let's argue". That's like saying someone roasting people who submitted themselves to a "let me roast you" video thinks he's smarter and better. You have completely missed the point.
@@OrbObserverI don’t recall any of those arguments making it onto let’s argue. They weren’t even related to a let’s argue section. Is this a misdirect? And even if they were about let’s argue, couldn’t he just cherry-pick the ones that make him look good? Cmon man you’re being disingenuous
@@Sindrella.He’s a retired meme cringe lord. Bro never grew up. That already tells you enough about a person. He’s falling off this is just desperation for money.
@@OrbObserverI like him to an extent but you gotta be real that he is a pretentious douche. That’s sort of his brand. So it can be entertaining but I’m not surprised that a guy who has a dickish personality is doing dickish stuff.
If Activision is smart and knows their history. They (And every other company on Earth) will just look at the Nike v. Beatles lawsuit of the 80's, it's pretty much the landmark case of advertisement vs creative expression; Nike having gone through all the proper legal filings to use the song in their advertisement but still being sued because of artistic expression being damaged by corporate advertisment.
But they didn't ask him ? Did they ? Cause I understand the "using his voice without his knowledge or giving compensation" but for example if they just used someone else's voice recreating the meme it wold be fine
Wait so you think because the tiktok was used by 55k people, it should be allowed to be used in paid promotions without credit or payment? Thats like saying Activision should be able to use any song they want without compensation to the artist, as long as it goes viral on tiktok prior
That”s why there are two sound libraries on TikTok - one for the general public to use and the commercial sound library which is curated by TikTok. The latter is what brands and businesses use to make ads and Fantano isn’t on there.
![BOWKYLION - วิงวอน (ex-change) [Official MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/cLdnZWDaO-w/mqdefault.jpg)
I'm sure Anthony's lawyers have told him not to talk about this case. But they never said he couldn't 𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘨 about it
Oh my god he’s found the loophole
Then that song is entered into the fair game library and the process begins all over again.
pls no 😭
*ALL ABOARD!!!!!*
"Anyway, here's wonderwall"
So happy to hear that small creators like Activision are able to finally stand up against big corporations like fantano
Hey if someone is in the wrong they're in the wrong
Small or big doesn't matter, they are in the right this time. h💁
Happy to see you are mouth breathing and can't tell right from wrong.
Cheers
crying about fairness but asking for an unfair resolution, ironic
This is only a "confusing case" because people are so biased against Activision like this. Look, I fucking hate Activision, but people are trying their damn hardest to somehow make Activision wrong in a situation where Fantano is clearly being the piece of shit, even if that harms other small creators in the process.
Imagine getting called greedy by an activision lawyer
Imagine that lawyer being right.
@@mitchjames9350 Wasn't that the whole point of boots comment?? Translation: Activision calling the Kettle black.
the lawyer isnt lying
@@City1Tigerlawyer is balling
@discerningmood2674 no Mitch is just saying the pot is calling the kettle black. Everything else you shoehorned in there on your own 😂
Activision: oh you're a villain alright...
just not a super one
beginner villain
Sounds like Anthony flew too close to the sun. He got Activision to remove their video, relatively easily, but went too far with the lawsuit.
Probably wanted to take their money while he was at it
@@theravenlordyep, I don’t really see a bad guy in this story, Anthony wanted some cash from activision cus fuck them, and activision just said no.
Despite Anthony objectively being in the wrong, I still hope he wins this. Just so Activision doesn't.
@@Brianna_Q how is that any good for anyone?
It literally affects everyone else badly
don't pray on someone's downfall because you hate them when it affects others at least
that's not how it works
@@namajeff4199 Actually, that's precisely how it works.
Kinda sucks when you have to admit that the worst person in the room might actually be right
Yeah lol this situation is the embodiment of that article that's like "Heartbreaking: The worst person you know just made a great point"
fantano is easily the most annoying person in the room though
DOesnt matter, if they are right they are right, even if they suck in general
He isn't right, there's thousands if not tens of thousands of companies that do the exact same thing every day, him being the first one to be a giant crybaby about it doesn't lend much credit I'm afraid
Who is the worst person? Fantano?
Getting Activision to comply in the first place and take the og ad down was a feat in and of itself, I don't know why he felt the need to press his luck like that..
They kinda HAVE to by law. That is what a seize and desist is for....
@@jeltje50 that's not what a cease and desist is.
@jeltje50 That's not a cease and desist. That would imply Fantano knew the commercial using his bit was being created, and he probably didn't. This is a copyright claim, where the claimant can request the person who maybe in violation to take down the work. It must stay down until a counter notification is filed or is taken to court and ruled that the property is fair use. Fantano most likely doesn't have a case since it's fair use.
Vanity.
@@AllThingsEntertaining the article states that fantano send out a cease and desist letter.
I like how Fantano decided that picking a fight with a multi-billion dollar game development studio with a bottomless pit of money to throw at a lawsuit was a GREAT idea.
It’s also a bottomless pit of money to throw at a settlement… the side people always forget.
I haven’t finished the video so I’m not going to side against Fantano like everyone apparently has, just saying, I’m sure Fantano’s network have a decently large law firm on retainer that decided to take this on, on its merits. It’s not like Fantano just saw the ad and got mad and decided to sue, someone on his end brought it to his attention with the purpose of asking him to sue, that’s how these things go 99% of the time
@@blazaybla22after watching the video what is your opinion now
@blazaybla22 Should’ve watched the video friend
That ideas gonna get a NOT GOOD review
I feel like youtubers don't really know how the world works
Details aside, sending a C&D to a multi-billion dollar corporation is pretty foolish. They will always find a way to make the lawsuit more costly than it’s worth
I feel like in recent years Fantano's ego has grown.
fantano has never been smart to begin with. he gave MBDTF a 6
@@otto_vonbased
That wasn't that problem they actually listened to the dude, it was when he asked for money from them for wtv reason
The cease and desist alone was fair. Fantano didn't want his likeness associated with Activision. Activision complied (surprisingly) and took it down. Fantano took it too far by demanding compensation after it was taken down, though. That was just incredibly dumb. Someone else in the comments said Fantano pulled an Icarus, I completely agree.
I know its a small pleasure, but I always love it when a guy in the Twitch chat gets Charlie to look up a news article and it leads to a full face to cam video
FTC ATM
Big facts
Oh we love a money hungry charlie
@@PlanOfActionz Charlie doesn't make money from these videos. Last I checked he donates his ad revenue on youtube to charities. He only makes money from twitch
This happens a lot. His audience is great.
Activision is inadvertently doing a good thing by serving its best interest. It's like Godzilla destroying a city but the city is actually a cartel compound.
Lmao that’s a good analogy
Lol best comment
🤦🏽♂️ this is actually a great comment.
Rofl
This comment had me wheezing 😭😭😭
TikTok policy works like this: Business accounts (these are accounts registered to businesses) aren’t legally allowed to use anything outside of the CML (commercial music library) even on organic posts. If they want to use non-CML sounds, they have to show that they acquired the rights to use that sound. TikTok’s standard sound library licensing agreement only protects non-business accounts. Activision is claiming that they got the sound from the CML, I can assure you, the CML is highly curated and would never have Fantanos audio recording within it. TikTok policy is written that way for exactly that reason. They’re confusing the standard TikTok audio library (non-business use only) with the CML (free for business use).
Finally someone who fucking gets it. The echo chamber is real man, kinda disappointing to see
@@Junya01 otherwise Walmart could use a Taylor Swift song to promote Walmart products for free on TikTok, skirting the licensing agreements they’d have to go through ordinarily. It’s why TikTok makes the distinction between standard users and business accounts, TH-cam does something similar where standard users you can upload copyrighted music, but you can’t monetize it.
Wouldn't it be literally the easiest thing on the planet for Fantano to simply prove the sound is not on the CML if that were the case? I don't think "the lawyers of this giant corporation are all basing their defense on the idea that nobody will bother checking this publicly available resource" is a particularly likely scenario here.
@@Junya01Dev Lemons echo chamber is way worse. And yes fatano is in the wrong. This information is publicly available go look it up yourself
@@HunterTracks no idea, I guess we’ll wait and find out
Impressive how Anthony managed to be the greedy side in a battle against Activision
He's got a big ego for only reviewing like 3 genres of music not a fan of him at all but this totally shocked me he's pulling an Ethan Klein
Wait these last two comments, how can you side with him? Did you not watch the video at all? You can't pick and choose. He gave up his exclusive rights for protection by putting this video up. That means any one can use it regardless. I'm pretty anti corp and I'm siding with Activision here because they're right this time. He got greedy and now must pay the price.
@@devizesolstice4617 I feel like, when it comes to a legal view, Fantano is 100% wrong and screwed, even in an ideal world, you wouldn't go about it the way he did. But morally speaking, I don't see why not? I think if I want to say "Individuals can use my music for free, corporations and ultra rich people can't because they obviously have the money lol", I think that would seem fair to most people intuitively, I feel like that should be allowed. It sort of is, that's WinRAR's entire business model.
So as long as people concede that in the real world, Fantano isn't getting anywhere and was stupid to put his stuff in the CM Library if this is how he really feels, I think it's fair for people to have the view that morally Activision owes him because he says so, it is his work.
@@anthbills307saying I'm ok with meme or TikTok videos of me isn't the same as saying im ok with my likeness or anything I created being used in an ad these 2 things aren't comparable
@@devizesolstice4617Activision is pretending that fantano is going after small TikTok creators which he isn't and just like you I imagine don't want your likeness or creations to be used in an ad without permission. I remember when we shat on companies when they used footage of people "playing" there shitty mobile game how the tables have turned
Thanks Anthony, you have put us in an awkward predicament, you made us side with Activision.
I’m not in an awkward position, I never liked Fantano as he seemed like a douche, which seems to be the case.
@@maxdoom3521agree he's a clown.
@@maxdoom3521not suprised at the slightest
Activision is in the wrong here.
@@poopy-333yup
Geez. It takes a lot for people to side with Activision. He definitely pulled an Icarus with this one.
Mf flying directly to the sun
Anthony Fanscammo.
I’m gonna have to give fantano a strong 3 to a light 4 on this one
Man fuck being like icarus, he's going straight into the sun at mach 10
This is actually settled case law. Once you create content it becomes your IP, however once you put it into a royalty free library you surrender rights to control of said IP. The case this is based on is from a woman who posted an image to a royalty free library, however she later found a stock photo company selling her IP, she took legal action, and the court ruled in favor of the defendant stating that the creator surrenders rights to control their IP upon posting it to a royalty free library.
yo could also point your finger at a number of cases that were ruled the opposite such as the model who ended up as the face of hiv treatment billboards and won. it's all dependent and not actually set case law.
@@allanpeterson1137 right & Activision has about the same reputation as HIV so he may actually have a case 😂😂
I've heard that It may not actually have been in the CSL to begin with though which would DRAMATICALLY change this case
@allanpeterson1137 yeah that actually makes sense though. It wouldn't be a ruling on intellectual property rights. I would be a ruling on defamation as nobody who saw that advertisement would believe you don't have HIV
Ya except this isn’t how TikTok CML works.
Dude doesn’t have much of a case, but I do find it hilarious a company like Activision preaching about fair use when they’ve fraudulently copyright claimed hundreds of videos for reviewing their games negatively.
@@Pesky_Anonno the op's comment is funnier
@@Pesky_Anon I'm astonished that you're trying to equate a small influencer abusing fair use policies to a multi-billion dollar company doing so.
@@Uifonthey’re not equating it they’re just acknowledging the nuance there is a difference silly
@@deceased988 They're equating the importance of it. Otherwise, why bring it up when it's not the point of OP's comment?
The "small influencers" you guys keep talking about are multi millionaire 1 percenters you realize that right lol
It bugs me that people are genuinely not in the know on how copyright law works. It’s there for a reason. People aren’t better than the law just because they’re famous.
Reality says otherwise.
As someone who has brown eyes, i hate having brown eyes. They aren't even good looking. My parents said if i get 2k followers they'll get me an eye color surgery 🥺🙏
yeah, well it’s hard to keep track of the details of things you don’t respect or care about like copyright lmao
Uhhh people with money are absolutely better than the law. Are you not aware of how the American justice system works?
Copyright is a good thing. Copyright abuse is not.
Let's be realistic, he saw this as a way to try to get an out of court settlement based on silliness and now he's finding out the hard way.
While this makes sense. The dude has a lot of subs. He's been around a long time and I'm willing to bet has made a damn good living being a YT'er. I don't think this is a cash grab for that reason and the fact that well, he just doesn't seem like that kind of guy (though I could be totally wrong on that second one, not like I know him personally).
@@JayBigDadyCy Why does him being around for a while and you not knowing who he is make you think it's not a cash grab? The fact that he has multiple out of court settlements for similar things against large companies definitely raises my eyebrow while your reasonings simply makes me roll my eyes.
@@JayBigDadyCyyeah this is absolutely a message he is trying to send. Like whatever lil money activision may have neen willing to throw his way is irrelevant to him.
Charlie? More like dummy am better
Bros the activison glazer lmao imagine glazing and supporting a corporation thats super terrible
he trapped himself, anthony has to make himself lose.
I don’t know what timeline we’re in, but Melon and Activision fighting with each other wasn’t the one I was expecting
Charlie’s content is amazing and anyone who compares this to trash is trash themselves for watching this lol
And melon being in the wrong
@@mikedocemrick9497 well he do that sometimes. Aside from the Fader thing. That was just a hit piece against him.
@@GloomTapes facts
And Activision are.. kinda right? For now anyway
I hope this actually goes to court. It’s an open and shut case, but it’s important that it is made into law.
It's already law that you have to abide by the contracts you make though. What else is there to this?
@@LuciusC Law supersedes contracts which break the law....
You can sign a contract with unenforceable clauses...
It probably won't
It has to go to a supreme court/constitutional court for that; first instance verdicts don't make jurisprudence
Achualy, it would have to go to the senate or the house; the courts do not make law. 🤓
leave it to Anthony Fantano to make Activision seem like a reasonable company.
Someone didn’t like an album review
@@itsjohnnyr8560 maybe but you can't deny that fantano's case is ridiculous
@@itsjohnnyr8560 I don't think I have seen an album review of Fantano in years. I'm fine with most reviews I remember. I do not like his character though.
@@syinari8266 Oh it absolutely is ridiculous
@@itsjohnnyr8560 fantano is an L
Activision, Anthony Fantano, and Tiktok are three things i never expected to get talked about continuously in the same breath
It sure is weird seeing Activision NOT being the scum side of a lawsuit. What strange times.
@PavelTayTay please explain why
@PavelTayTay how are they in the wrong... i feel like this is bait but whatever explain your point of view
@Kisame.Hoshigaki "Activision bad" that's why
He's a braindead donut and biased
lmao@dirt-kw7cy
especially since it’s against Fantano, who’s been the “good guy” in other beefs (the Drake’s vegetarian cookies drama for example)
Super smart of Activision's lawyers to spin the case in a way that actually gets public opinion on THEIR side
Either way it’s spun, Fantano is still in the wrong
nah, fantano is just a walking turd, he just tried to steal satan's money and satan decided to teach him a lesson
goood for ACTIVISION . sometimes these influencers think that just because they have small following of people they can get away with anything. i bet he will try to defame activision and ask his 9 year old fans to post troll comments on activision social media once he loses the cases. (of course he will not deliberately tell his fans to do that because he knows his ass will be in jail but he will definitely try to isuniate hate towards acitvision and it only take small hint for his 9 year old fans to wreck havoc on social media thats how it works nowadays . you dont even have you command your dumb followers . just say that big corporation bad im good and his unga bunga fans are ready to go)
@@bendover-bz4bc You have no idea who Anthony Fantano is, do you? Small following? Try... millions. He is a music critic/reviewer that's been around for years. Pretty sure he has almost no child following either.
He's a piece of shit, yes, but to discredit Anthony as some typical run of the mill Tiktok influencer is just disingenuous and makes me think you are just an Activision fanboy, which, btw, none of us here are, so you are not gonna get a lot of support either way. Is Activision right in this instance? Yes, they are, but that doesn't mean we like Activision.
bro what? how did they spin the case? public opinion wouldve always been on their side because the original tiktok sound has 55k videos under it how come he didnt go sue all those people?
I don't respect Activision as a company but they've got a point on this one. Anthony got way too greedy. He was lucky to even get the Crash Bandicoot video using his meme clip taken down in the first place. I wouldn't be surprised if he dropped the lawsuit before it could go to trial. If not, he'd likely lose and his reputation would be shot!
His reputation wouldn’t really be affected because his fans don’t really care
Reminds me of an onion article that is called “the worst person you know made an actually good point”
Anyone who knows anything about fantano knows he has a reputation of being an idiot
@@ccslider5755 can confirm, zero fucks given
It doesn't matter if he drops it, Activision countersued and it's pretty clear they want a ruling, meaning no settlements
I was under the impression that Anthony himself didn't create the meme, but someone actually clipped it and turned it into one and it went viral. So I don't don't think he entered it into the commercial sounds library, but this will be super interesting to follow
I never thought activision would make a good point for once
@Susnation532 We do not care.
I don't like having brown eyes
My parents said they'll get me in a surgery to change my eye color if i hit 2k followers
@@CJ_Dook Again, we do not care.
@@DJV-97 why you replying to bots bro
@@sirdurph3021 bots are amazing
Even if Fantano can prove he didn’t put the clip in the commercial library Activision has plausible deniability and their initial comply of the C&D as means to dismiss any further action. Overall it’s a power move for everyone, they get to know if he uploaded it or not and they also get to use that as their plausible deniability. Fantano can’t even win anything monetary in court as he has no registration number for enough slices. He’d win an injunction preventing further use at most.
Congrats on having the only reasonable take in this comment section.
If he didn’t upload it then activision can fall back on the fact that the sound has been used millions of times and he only takes issue with it being uploaded now. They would still have to take down the clip but there is no avenue for financial gain for Fantano that I could see.
@@megladon6that doesn't sound viable in court. "Oh everyone else used it so we figured we could too"
@@Seven-tk7spthat’s not the defense. The defense is that to keep certain rights you have to defend them and you can’t be choosy about whom you defend them from. I’m not a lawyer and even I have read about this numerous times lol it’s nothing unusual. People with no idea of how things work and whom have read nothing about it : “that couldn’t ever work that way!”
😂😂
The people who know the least will always talk first and loudly lol
@@mrjjman2010 "The people who know the least will always talk first and loudly lol" Not quite looking in the mirror there are we bud?
When it comes to advertising, a company would need explicit permission to use the likeness of an individual or organization, either visual or audio, regardless of the origin of said likeness. The defense of certain rights that you mention is only applicable in copyrights, of upholding and defending copyrights via suits or DMCA in most cases. This does not fall under copyright defense as you claim as one: Fantano most likely does not have a copyright on the "that's enough slices" clip, i believe that is partially taken by TikTok actually under their terms, two: there is a vast difference between what could fall under fair use or be argued as "defamatory" ie what Activision is counter suing here, and three: Activision used the clip in a advertisement sense, which allows for a lot more broadness in protections of individuals when it comes to their individual rights.
Even if Anthony could establish he didn’t put his meme into the library Activision can clearly show that they used it fairly since they had no way of knowing that was the case and furthermore they acted in good faith by immediately stop using it once he contacted them about his objection. Anthony isn’t going to get a dime.
Innocent infringement still has a minimum penalty of 200$. so if it ends up a non fair use infringement case where willfull infringment cant be proven, he could still see some money
@@21warmasters I'm sure Activision will laugh their guts off if they have to pay around 200 bucks.
In that case wouldn't Anthony need to sue Tiktok as well, since they had publicised his property?
@21warmasters lol. 200 bucks? Thats nice. Lets make some math on the profits
+Profit from the lawsuit = $200
-Lawyer fees = $100,000
Damn. Anthony sure showed everyone
@@21warmastersyour mind is incredibly diluted, please just think about what you said, 200 dollars isnt even crumbs for 90% of Americans, ESPECIALLY in today's age. Your observation was pointless and shows your ignorance when it comes to living in the real world
The commercial sound library on Tiktok is different to their standard sound library. It’s a more limited selection of sounds for business and brands that can be used commercially and doesn’t include most popular songs
Anthony shoulda just accepted that they took down the post out of respect when they didn’t have to. Instead he crossed the line and threatened legal action. He better pray that they accept a settlement.
It's kind of an interesting area because wouldn't other companies be required to pay to use other peoples content? Like call him greedy but what he is doing seems pretty standard.
@@Lastofthefreenamesmorally i don't think people are saying fantano is in the wrong, but the fact is that if his actions are accepted and normalized it will negatively affect a lot of other people due to the precedent. he's also just legally wrong besides that
@@ladyinwightmorally demanding more and more is called greed and is wrong.
@@ladyinwightNot necessarily. Fantano winning is only bad if he argues from his ownership of the meme. If he argues that the ad using him is misleading and wins that's pretty much objectively a good thing. What's bad for corporations is typically good for humans.
@@captainjames4649from a big company, oooo sooo morally wrong
"Pay me $100k or I'll sue you." The judge is not going to like that threat.
Especially because that’s almost a textbook example of extortion.
Well what do you think people do when they don't receive what they think they deserve? Not sue? lol. Not getting money is the reason for 95% of people suing other people/companies.
@@pinkanimositygaming No it's standard discussions before a lawsuit. Most lawsuits are resolved like this before taking it to a judge and essentially all before taking it to trial. $100k is cheap compared to going to trial.
@@volundrfrey896 my main point was about the wording. I pursued contract law in college. When an ultimatum is issued, the wording needs to be taken into account. If it’s worded in that blunt of terms, a judge or a jury might interpret that as a hostile money grab. They could interpret the ultimatum to be made in bad faith depending on if the wording seems hostile.
Congratulations to this guy, he made us root for Activision
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This , I aint defending a tik tok brain rot user.
They don't call him melon head for nothing.
@@sodanakinyou’re not better than everyone else don’t be such a wanker
@@sodanakinYou clearly don't know Fantano as tik tok is just a small thing he started doing besides his youtube channel. Definitely not a "tik tok brain rot user"
@@tijgertjekonijnwordopgegetenhe is.
the thing i've heard that makes the most sense is that if someone else, either accidentally or intentionally, uploaded it to the commercial sound library, they should be held liable. if it was accidental, i think tiktok could be held liable too for letting something like that happen so easily.
If Anthony didn’t upload the audio, then another point of contention will be the duration of time Anthony has spent not actively attempting to remove the audio from the library. If he knew about it, but only to action selectively to big companies while not taking any action to remove it from the library, it could look bad for him still.
Of course he didn’t. Any kind of publicity is good publicity, he’s just trying to make money off a big company
@@Jaywin228 While screwing everyone else if he ever does tho.
This is beyond "bad publicity", but he's literally claiming he doesn't care if he needs to harm every other creator out there for some money.
TikTok Sounds for Business has apparently only been launched less than six months ago. Could be that TikTok failed to obtain consent for old content and accidentally cleared it for commercial use without having an appropriate license in place. That would explain why other companies have apparently previously settled similar cases.
He can't claim ignorance either since with how popular of a meme it became it would be impossible for him not to find out
No he might legitimately not know in which case he, the copy right holder, would not have consented to putting his copyrighted produce into the library so it would be legally invalid. Idk if he'd get much out of Activision for that though since there's no way to show they knew that.
If Activision wins, and if it’s true that Fantano got other companies to pay him those “similar 6 figure amounts”, would they be able to come back and countersue?
Yep they can go after him.
Good activision and other company dick riding. I’m sure this will be brought up at youre next company meeting.
Probably not, settlements are supposed to *settle* the case, no matter what happens in the future. They would likely have to prove outright fraud to get the money back.
idk im not a lawyer. What? You think anybody in this comment section is gonna start pulling up website links to cases or laws created from... Name a year in 1900s. Like shit, I can just say yes with no evidence to support my claim or I can say no with no evidence to support my claim. I didn't pass the bar, I didn't go to law school. Not only that but I highly doubt there are any lawyers here. Now of course this isn't me saying that there is a 100% guarantee theirs not an individual with sufficient knowledge in the law because there might be.
@@thelegendaryloaf9285 damn bro
Honestly, if Anthony is caught up and somehow admits to knowingly put it into the "Commercial Sounds", he loses. The only way I can really see him winning this dispute is if someone else stole his audio and published it there without him knowing, which can raise the question "Why didn't they get sued?". People can argue that Activation used it for "promotional purposes", but that is immediately discarded since it's apparently in the "Commercial Sounds"
Think for a second; if Fantano agreed - why would Activision take the video down and not contest it at that point? Why wait for a countersuit in which they've already admitted fault?
@@kaingates It's common for people to take down content that uses content from other creators even if it's fair use if the other creator asks. Nothing new or damning there.
@@karthis5911 What people are missing here is Fanto IS his brand and you can have Business Branded Accounts.(googled) My guess is he upload that using a Business Brand Account which doesn't seem to have the same Term of serve that's probably why he was able to get those amounts from other companies. Activision either knew of little of him or did and just didn't want to fit a collab bill and just decided to steal the meme for the ad cause they knew it'd get taken down LATER after hour or days and by then the ad time is over since they probably paid for it to be pushed up and all that on the frontend (as many eyes on it at launch) would be over by the time it would be taken down at backend (when that money to upsell the ad timeframe ends). Plus why didn't Activision Connect with Fanto he's a big enough creator NOT to try to get into connect first or at least you'd think NOPE, They just sent the ad and now making like He's the bad guy, yet if your seeing him on Twitter or YT or FB or TicToc those are ALL definitely Business Brands, nothing personal, so when he twits or threads or post on YT or TicToc THEY ARE ALL business brands accounts. So if he uploaded the meme from his Business Brand Account I doubt they same term of service apply especially when sharing. Otherwise why would Celebrities or Musician use TicToc if they themselves or anyone else puts them in the music library well now your likenss and vioce could then be claimed fair use and/or obliviousness to use for a time being. So every celebrity and musicians' voice and likeness as well are fair game when? Well I bet TicToc thought of that with branded business accounts that way those types of people or companies don't have to have their voices sampled or likeness used in commercial ways they wouldn't want or shared without their approval.
@@kaingatesthink for a second if fantano didn’t agree then why is it apart of the commercial sounds library?
I wonder if activison used the ad on a different platform. If they did it’s possible that he has a claim to damages for nontiktok ads since he (allegedly) only agreed to have his sound bite used on TikTok
I really appreciate how you first show all the facts as they are, AND THEN show the stream where you guys all figured it out. Very informative
This is the greatest lawsuit of all time
@Susnation532 shut up clout clown
I have brown eyes but I don't want brown eyes. my parents said if i get 2k followers they'll take me to an eye color changing surgery thing 🙏
@@CJ_Dookyou have great eyes
@@CJ_DookBro you could at least say something more convincing than "eye color changing surgery thing"
Yup that and Depp vs Heard
It isn’t about corporation vs an individual, It’s about protecting fair use. Support the correct decision for everyone and not a person.
Fair use of a copyrighted work applies to teaching, comment or criticism, and has to be changed enough from the original work such that it is a distinctly different thing. They’re not right because they’re using a copyrighted work under fair use (spoiler, they’re not), its that it was in the commercial sounds library so copyright law doesn’t apply the same way.
It's not about fair use though. You can't (especially commercially) exploit IP owned by another party without an appropriate right to use usually obtained via a license. That's literally why IPR exists in the first place.
@@MultresMusicChannel If that's the case, then Anthony shouldn't have uploaded his sound bite to TikTok's CML. Doing so revokes any rights he retained to the content and allows others (including brands) to use it for commercial purposes, as stated in TikTok's ToS.
@@TheHuskyK9 True, if Fantano has in fact reuploaded the sound bite to the CML or otherwise consented to the right of use of third parties. TikTok's Sounds for Business segment of CML was apparently launched last February whereas the sound bite has been originally uploaded to the platform years ago. There is a possibility that TikTok hasn't cleared old content appropriately for commercial use in SfB which would explain why other companies have apparently settled similar claims.
@@theo6741
US Copyright Law doesn't apply for Public Domain Works. You don't own the art nor can you claim copyright over it.
Situations like this, new artists should know.
Creative Commons is like this too.
And TOS in America is not legally upheld. Since US Copyright Law exceeds it and you need a proper contract for Contract Law to be legally enforced. Especially when "free labor" is simply daylight robbery in a form of TOS... Illegal but not unexpected for corporations to do.
The random person I don't like for no reason has done something to justify my feelings. Thank you Anthony
@@user-jl7xj5iz9k aside from this lawsuit (which he absolutely is in the wrong with), there's not much reason to hate him outside of some misinformed people who dont actually watch his reviews and just scroll down to see the score on his most controversial ones. Even if he has a weird opinion, he usually justifies it pretty well outside of a few odd cases. he's very overhated
@@user-jl7xj5iz9klike what
@@user-jl7xj5iz9k So true.
lmao me too
He's insufferable. Very punchable face.
"Give me money"
"No, now you're getting sued for asking"
Doesnt really make sense to me, but go off America..
Honestly, Anthony should've stopped after they had already ceased - they stepped on his toes and they practically apologized. Now Anthony decided to take things too far by trying to shake their pockets.
they already made god knows how much money from their ad before being taken down. I see copyright on TH-cam being abused by companies, I don't want them to limit compensation for the people on tiktok they use, while the people get eff all.
@@lachicoblanco He uploaded it to a public library and surrendered his rights to it. His fault. He doesn't deserve compensation. If he did receive compensation from Activision, that means he could get money from EVERY SINGLE PERSON that used his sound clip on Tik Tok. Copyright is also abused on TH-cam by individuals doing the same thing Activision is going against.
@@Aaronn-je8cx then again we don't really know if he was the one to upload it in there.
@@Aaronn-je8cxThat’s not how commercial sounds work. You can’t choose if it gets uploaded as a commercial sound or not.
Yeah this public library bs is just annoying. The reason that Anthony can’t just sue everyone using his sound is because Activision used it for an ad. Let’s say for example that Twitch wanted to create an ad using creator clips, they would need to ask permission first. EVEN THOUGH they’re literally clips from Twitch, DOES NOT MEAN THEY CAN USE THEM FOR ADS.
the thing is, the "tiktok music critic" forgot one thing. Their a multi million dollar company, even if they where to lose the case, they could postpone the case as long as they want, and lawyers are payed by the hour, so they could technically make him lose all his money and all his savings to win this case. They are loaded, so they don't care about spending.
You have no idea how the law works
@@spicewiener7767 neither do you
Uhhhh no...thats not really how this works. They can milk him dry but not by doing that.
Nah, companies have money but it’s not just sitting around waiting to be flushed down the drain. They likely have a budget for this operation, much more than the creator does, but especially in this case where they can easily win there’s no reason for them to stall.
@@sebastianriz4703 yes... done multiple times every year by big companys against people... the lawyers will always find something to prolong cases, push courtdates back and file motions about everythig... they simply bleed you out
I think a lot of newer creators are confused about copyright as it is and the intricacies of it. So to have, what should be, a safe place and suddenly that is not to be safe anymore, just adds to the confusion and also adds to the ways scammers can try to make money off unsuspecting people. Sometimes the bad guy is in the right.
>newer creators
It's always been the case
It's fairly concerning that now the way a lot of people consume the news is via someone learning about the topic in real time while reading a single article.
Welcome to 2023! We have a veritable buffet of sources for those with limited media literacy!
A company I hate VS a youtuber I can't stand 😂
His opinion on music is 🗑️ too
Lol, same
BIG feel, Fam
Just curious, what do you guys not like about fantano? I don't really watch his content myself so I don't care either way, just wondering
@@mmmwhatchasayyyyy2021They’re mad he gave their favorite album a light 3
Activision is absolutely packed with high profile lawyers since the merger. I wonder which lawyer did advise Fantano to sue them.
It was she-hulk.
now this leaves me genuinely wondering who would be more likely to advise anthony fantano to sue activison... saul goodman or she-hulk?
@@Melancholy308saul knows he cant be activision bit she hulk would think girl power is enough to be a multibillion dollar company
@@collincaperton6718She would twerk against the patriarchy in the courtroom. That would show everyone.
one of Activision's
That goes to show that not only big companies can be scummy. A lot of the times people do shit like this, it just doesn't get publicized. Stay on the side of what is fair and just, not just against companies just because.
Nah Activision can SMD
@@HCG Super Mario Dros?
Surface Mount Device (SMD): An electronic component that mounts on the surface of a printed circuit board (as opposed to "through-hole" components which have pins that are inserted into holes). SMDs typically allow more components per square centimeter of PC board, but their scale is such that hand assembly and prototyping may be difficult.
I think this is what he meant idk.
are you really scummy if youre suing a billion dollar company thats done similar things?
Companies are just more people doing something. Just normal people
Anthony Fantano, the internet's busiest copyright troll.
Love the Richard Hong shoutout. He’s a great TH-cam that covers gaming law primarily and recently suffered a stroke but his recovery is going well!
I've been a fan of Fantano for a long time so it's really strange to see him do something like this, especially when it seems like he doesn't really have a case here. I hope there are some more details that will make it make more sense but right now this kinda seems like an L for Fantano.
Not only an L, but us Melon fans will never EVER let him forget about it...
he's been an L ever since he bent over for that Fader article
@@angel_of_rust😂
@@hand_and_justin_entertainmentoh, it's not something that he will be able to forget either. I don't think activision will go easy on him.
@@angel_of_rustcontext?
Just to specify, there are two different sound libraries on TikTok; commercial sounds and the standard sounds. The average TikToker won’t be affected either way by this court case. Activision’s framing is intellectually dishonest. That being said, if Fantano did add the sound itself to the commercial sounds library, it’s an open-and-shut case. But it’s also entirely possible that another TikToker copied his sound (which happens all the time) and opted into the commercial sounds library.
yeah, but I think Anthony Fantano put his own video in the library sound. plus, I think Activision lawyers can try to argue no matter if it's in the commercial library for fair use as a parody or something.
still doesn’t change anything
Well it does change it because if fantano wins that means any person that used sounds on the PUBLIC commercial sounds can be taken to court and sued by the original creator witch is bad for everyone.
Been trying to tell that to people If the avg normie is seeing it it's a Fanto Business Account you're seeing his private stuff is way smaller for family and friends. With all his dealings in music I'd call him idiot too if it wasn't posted in someway by him through the Business Brand TicToc then onto the commercial sounds library by that Business Brand TicToc. Sounds like Activsion was just being a scum company and pushed out an ad with hot meme for the insights and didn't either know enough about Fanto or care enough they got the ad out and probably pushed it with extra analytics for most eyes instead messaging him about a collab or they did he quoted them that big price and they said screw it what's he going to do force the takedown that's only ONCE he see's it oh well then we'll get our money worth while it's up before it gets taken down the MANY hours or DAYS later.
My guess Fanto lets normie post and use it but when he see's a company especially ones that don't reach out to him, he gets pissed has every right if he posted as a business brand TicToc and was entered by him into the Commercial Library too by his business brand TicToc. For companys to steal and use for there own ads.
@@oliverbs0417 your getting it confused there are literally two library... Would you agree if Charlie made a business brand account TicToc made a TicToc he then added that mp3 to the COMMERCIAL SOUNDS LIBRARY which is DIFFERENT from the just Public SOUNDS Library which is more for like for normies share....You don't see celebrity or there voices being sampled or used for ADs or Products because being a meme doesn't entail the company to use the celebrities or musician voice or likeness to be used for ADs for companies they don't endorse and cats out of the bag even on Fanto even if taken down. Just like any other say Celebrity Meme companies aren't using those willy-nilly why should should Fantos be any different.
Would you tell Charlie his singular only TicToc ever (say it's him talking about something he likes) so now his voice can be sampled on TicToc by anyone for anyone to use? That's fair use in your mind his likeness should be able to be used for commercial venture for ADs with no say because oh it's a meme now?? NO
And no Activision KNEW what they were doing BEFORE they sent the meme it was just cheaper the way they did it....
remixing sounds and using them in a different context is how tiktok works 😭 idk why Fantano is so pressed
Can't believe that *Activision* is the good side in this lawsuit. Anthony got greedy and now he's paying the price...literally.
I cant beliebe fantano tried going toe to toe with craptivision 😊
@@itsnotjayboipedovision*
hes just playing their game
Yea he’s not a bad guy for doing what companies do ever my day. It’s just activision paying sheep’s to be mad because they don’t want to lose va Anthony. Even though he’s in the right
@@anthonyrosse5925He’s not right lol
It is annoying to have a company who you may or may not agree with use your videos or clips. However if he submitted it and allowed it to be used by anyone then he really has no say in it. If you put something in what is essentially the public domain then anyone should be able to use it despite you not agreeing with them.
POSTING 👏ONLINE👏IS👏NOT👏PUBLIC👏DOMAIN.
Even lots of declared "free" content online is still licensed.
Like royalty free music, or Creative Commons media, or GPL/MIT/freeware/shareware licensed software that might say stuff like "hey you can distribute this software but you can't charge money for it"
@@chatboss000 But this one did say they could. So it would be like Public Domain. You did read my comment right?
@@chatboss000bruh he didn't say its public domain. He said its ESSENTIALLY that. Meaning not that, but with similar attributes. You need to work on your reading comprehension
@@chatboss000he put the sound in the Commercial Sounds Library
If Fantano loses, then if you ever put your face or voice on that library it basically means they can use your voice for anything they want. Is that really reasonable?
I love everyone immediately saying Activision is in the wrong and don’t know the situation lmao
I have brown eyes but I don't want brown eyes. my parents said if i get 2k followers they'll take me to an eye color changing surgery thing 🙏
We truly live in a society
@@CJ_Dooksorry bud, you’re gonna have brown eyes
First time?
Facts i was thinking the same thing reading the comments 😂
activision is lying about the sound being in the commercial library. the commercial library is only music cleared by tiktok themselves
Should ActiBlizard be praised for not being Evil in this case?
Yes, absolutely. It's called positive reinforcement, we want to encourage the behaviour we like, and discourage the behaviour we don't.
So now we praise for doing the bare minimum?
@@seapeajones Compared to what ActiBlizzard has been doing for the last decade? Yes.
They're not gonna change tho
They're a company, not a person, positive reinforcement doesn't apply to a faceless conglomerate that's just trying to make money, especially since this lawsuit was done in their own self-interest, and not for the good of other creators and users, it just so happens that preventing abuse of copyright claims here benefits other people in addition to themselves, but let's not pretend like they're doing this for the good of others.
@@kingkami1739 To my knowledge Fantano didn't actully sue ActiBlizzard, he sent legal threats, and ActiBlizzard sued him in response, this isn't a counter-suit it's a pre-emptive suit.
I'm at the exact point as everyone else where I live Fantano and despise corporations that act like Activision does, but it's ridiculous to tell someone to pay someone after doing something they didn't know was wrong. Reminds me of a popular scam in India where someone will drop paint on your shoe a few steps from a shoe cleaner they're in cahoots with.
Fantano is ass
I don't get why people love Fantano he's kinda just a massive douche bag. I hope he wins but that doesn't make him any less of a tosser.
What the hell these mfs low key geniuses
Imagine liking Anthony Fantano
What happens if you drop paint in their throat afterwards does the shoe cleaner help with that aswell?
If it was named “To Pimp an Activision” this would’ve never happened.
Hahahahaha
@@frawgz4802Yeah, I agree
Sounds like a classic case of fuck around and find out for Anthony
If Activision titled their video “To Slice a Melon,” none of this would’ve happened.
I rate this lawsuit a solid 7/10
Too much water
It's uh... rough
Not good
Nah it's around 6.69/10
I....agree!
A company can be terrible. Companies can only care about themselves. They may be in the wrong a million times. But they can occasionally be in the right. Companies love doing wrong to others and wrong can be done back to them. I personally like it when wrong is done to them, but I don't pretend like they are in wrong in every scenario imaginable.
li
Well i dont give a damn. I hate Activision
@kagemarushun7378 it is fine to hate Activision but on this point they are right a terrible company? Absolutely but they are still in the right this time
@kagemarushun7378 even if you, like Charlie and myself, cannot care less about the monetary loss of huge companies, it is still good to care about this case + want Activision to win.
If they don't, like Charlie said, this could end up hurting a huge amount of random, average Tiktokers by allowing greedy song makers to take legal action against them for something that is a huge part of TikTok and was before considered a perfectly safe act.
shouldn't corporations be held to a different standard than people? if you put your shit in the library it should be free game for normal creators but not for corporations. I'm sick of companies being treated like they're people and not nebulous entities, especially in laws and contracts
It's worth noting that there are different licensing and "Creative Commons" for this EXACT topic. There is the "commercial license" which is used when you are using say, a sound for monetary gain. Then there is the creative commons license, where you can only use it if you are not looking to make a profit.
I see no reason why tiktok can't add a feature to let users choose which license they are uploading it under. I believe youtube ALREADY has this feature in place.
@Usererror1919 Here is a quote from the creative commons website:
For third-party platforms: Many media platforms like Flickr, TH-cam, and SoundCloud have built-in Creative Commons capabilities, letting users mark their material with a CC license through their account settings. The benefit of using this functionality is that it allows other people to find your content when searching on those platforms for CC-licensed material. If the platform where you’re uploading your content does not support CC licensing, you can still identify your content as CC-licensed in the text description of your content.
Legally, these three options are the same. The only difference between applying a CC license offline rather than online is that marking a work online with metadata will ensure that users will be able to find it through CC-enabled search engines.
CC offers resources on the best practices for marking your material and on how to mark material in different media (.pdf).
Do I need to register with Creative Commons before I obtain a license?
No. CC offers its licenses, code, and tools to the public free of charge, without obligation. You do not need to register with Creative Commons to apply a CC license to your material; it is legally valid as soon as you apply it to any material you have the legal right to license.
CC does not require or provide any means for creators or other rights holders to register use of a CC license, nor does CC maintain a database of works distributed under Creative Commons licenses. CC also does not require registration of the work with a national copyright agency.
_TL;DR:_
He just has to edit the description of the original video to state that it is and it will be so by default since tiktok is one of those platforms that do not have a built-in way to file it. You literally just have to say it is so and it legally is designated as such. It doesn't matter where it was uploaded to if he labels it as such BEFORE the court case goes to trial as the licensing holds the authority over any of tiktoks fine print as tiktok would not be the license holder and thus would not have authority over said license.
They do already, actually! There’s a general use library for normal TikTok users and a commercial use library for businesses.
@@guyanomaly But is it SPECEFICALLY partnered with the Creative Commons organization? Leaving it in tiktoks hands means that the work isn't protected.
@@Hadeks_Marow I don’t know. Tiktok says its commercial use library is “pre-cleared”-by whom I don’t know. As for the general use library, I couldn’t get much info on that.
@@guyanomaly That's commercial use. Commercial use is the thing we DON'T want. What we want is creative commons. Aka only to be used in not-for-profit creations. A commercial license is FOR-profit. >_>
The whole reason why I pointed out what I said in the OP was because of this exact reason and is the entire point of the reply I sent to the other guy >.>
I'm sorry, but your misunderstanding is like, if 2 guys were having a conversation about how the government doesn't have anything setup in place for people who can't afford to buy a house, and then you walk in saying "yes they do, it's called the housing market, all they gotta do is just buy a house". You can see how incredibly annoying that is, even if it's just a simple mistake. What matters here is that one detail. What kind of "license" is it and who owns the license.
Moral of today’s story: Putting too many slices on a pizza never leads to anything good
I'm with the company on this one. the fact that they even took down the video, even if they had the right to use the sound
I'm not too familiar with US law, but I have an english law degree and there is some overlap. In such a case where Fantano uploaded intentionally or not, the sound to the library, Activision used it in good faith, as they had no way of knowing the level of his consent. He can't sue a good faith actor for damages especially after they took down the advertisement, as a concept called equity intervenes. It's hardly fair to punish activision for following the rules just because Fantano didn't know what he was doing. Whilst you think the case is messy, it's actually rather straight forward, because no matter Fantano's intentions, he can't sue for damages for his own errors in judgement.
Charlie, I’d like to thank you for creating the best content to take a sh!t to. The length of videos is perfect and your content really gets my gears grinding. Unlike scrolling through Reels or TikTok, i find myself pondering over whatever dilemma/ drama you decide to make a video. And yes, I’m currently sitting with my sweatshorts wrapped around my ankles on the porcelain throne.
Are you still dropping your log
@@NeonBeeCat i know how long I’m into a poop by looking at the time I’ve spent watching the video. Always am done by the end.
Why not down to the ankles?
21 minute shit? impressive...
you should eat more fibre. shits shouldn't take that long
I love the irony of Activision trying to call someone else greedy lmao
takes one to know one
in this law suite Activision is 100% in the right
@@sownheard ok, and? I didn't say they were technically wrong. Why are you defending a multi billion dollar company that started this whole thing by stealing someone else's content and using it for a promotion to make money? Why are you trying to minimise the fact that they're one of the greediest, morally corrupt video game companies that exist? Context matters
@@kwoni3337Lil bro losing his mind over a corporation that will never change nor give him any mind lmao. I don’t like Activision but this comment is so corny. Like did you even watch the video ☠️they didn’t steal nothing and was under fair use. It’s cool to hate corps but don’t start crying over nothing 🤣
@@kwoni3337 how can you write "Context matters" and also say they were stealing shit which is the opposite of what happened?
Silento couldn't sue them for putting the whip and nay nay in BO3, don't know why Fantano thought he could.
I think there should be a healthy middle ground where it can be used but not for the advertisement of goods or products. In those cases, explicit rights would need to be obtained like in all other cases. This way giant companies can't exploit the policies to use trending music/vids/memes to push their products.
Can't stand Anthony Fantano or Activision, so I'm just gonna grab the popcorn and see what the hell happens
For real!
As someone who has brown eyes, i hate having brown eyes. They aren't even good looking. My parents said if i get 2k followers they'll get me an eye color surgery 🥺🙏
He ranked Venomous Villain as a better MF DOOM album than Operation: Doomsday, the man has to be stopped
@Susnation532cringe
@@stephtastic4515 It's a bot
This reminds me of a photograph a college classmate took and stumble upon being used to sell a product.
They took a photo of some macarons and preceded to upload the image to a website named ‘undplash.’ Later, she saw the photo that she took used as the stock image in picture frames that were for sale at a box store (Target, if I remember correctly).
Long story short, it is within the rights on Unsplash to take an image that someone else posted, tweak it, and then use it to promote your own product. She looked into suing, but it became apparent immediately that the terms of service were followed.
Unfortunate
Yes all images on unsplash are fair game, and giving credits is optional
For a closed system. That's legally correct under Contract Law.
If it was an open system. Then that would be illegal under Contract Law.
Case in point... TH-cam/Google cannot do this unless you waved your Copyright away under Contract Law that you signed. If you didn't sign/consent to the contract, then it would be illegal.
And if someone else took your art and put it into any system. Then that is also illegal.
(US Copyright Law is complex so I'm just explaining a basic example.)
Activision was angry at Anthony Fantano for giving MBDTF a 6/10
You know what, I've always said Melon should be sued for his horrible mbdtf take
That man has never and will never have a good kanYe take 💀
@Tap_me_for_robuxjust stab your damn eyes instead of bothering people in the comments
@@GhoulPastei mean, he gave The Life of Pablo an 8 which is a good take
It should be 4/10
When my favorite TH-camr talks about my other favorite TH-camr💀
Seriously though I was not expecting Charlie to mention melon but here we are
Does he have any idea how bad he has to be to get the general public on Activision's side?
*ACTIVISION!!!*
General public is on his side. Only this comment section full of bootlickers is on Activision's side.
They used something that he owns and he sued then. How is that bad?
@@Milharoooco It seems pretty standard imo. Seems no different that what we see anywhere else, only difference is it's little guy vs big corporation.
@@Milharoooco If the issue was 'They used something that he owns and he sued them' then we'd definitely be on his side. The problem was he (allegedly) uploaded it somewhere that he had to agree could be used by anyone, explicitly including paid advertisements, and then he said 'Wait, hang on, you can't do that, give me money for it.' just because the one using it was making money from it in a paid advertisement.
It's like if I painted a beautiful piece of art then donated it to the museum, and the museum said 'Alright, we love it. But just so you know, if you donate it here, people can come in and take selfies with it and use it to advertise.' I can't then send a demand for the CEO of Activision who took a selfie with my painting and edited 'CRASH BANDICOOT LOL' on it to give me money just because he's a big shot. I agreed that was OK the moment I donated the art piece.
It's like Charlie said. It's not that I love Activision. But if they lose this, it sets a precedent that someone can then do the same thing in bad taste, suing little Tina because she happened to use their sound that they uploaded and she blew up big on TikTok and sue her for everything she's worth because 'Well, he did it and the court said it was OK.' When a court rules in a case like this, it can be used in evidence in every further case similar to it.
@@Zack-vi7is I dont think you understand the term "boot licker"
Also the majority of people are against Fantano. No one likes losers who try to copyright memes
Ethan joked about sueing companies using his audio on tiktok and it’s crazy to see someone actually did it.
Klien somehow less jewish than Fantano in this situation
@@brandonandujar2289 J moment
@@brandonandujar2289damn
10:18 Nah. That being true would not affect THIS case. From Activision's side, it either was or wasn't in that library. How it got there changes nothing for their defense. Fantano would have to bring that as its own lawsuit.
It would affect the case. Their claims are that he is the one uploading the file and that he, with this knowledge, is abusing the system for financial gains. But the entire thing hinges on his consent for the file to be in the library.
So basically that scenario would make it where both lawsuits are probably dropped.
He'd have to sue the TikTok sound library wouldn't he?
@@darkwitnesslxx Yes, that's the thing, that argument would only work against the platform itself, for being loose in their verification process, it has nothing to do with Activision.
And as another commenter pointed out, if he is not reaching out to TikTok to take it out and leaving it there, it's basically admitting he's the one who uploaded it, so he'd have screwed his only chance for it.
It would absolutely change it, it's be like if someone else took a copyrighted song and put it on a copyright free website for others to think it's okay to use. And when others use it and the copyright holder comes after them. Someone reuploaded something doesn't make it legally binding. Anthony would than have to point that out to show his sound was spread by others. However there's a response video of someone asking him to make the video into a shareable sound with the sound attached to HIS tiktok so yeah. He shared it
I honestly feel like there is a pretty big difference between small creators making videos with tik tok sounds and direct advertisements. Especially when it uses someone's face or voice.
In before Activision used it outside of Tittok, an intern lied about it being in the library or Fantano actually didn't upload it to the library.
In any of those cases, this was a matter of copyright and free use laws. Activision did the right thing by taking it down upon Fantano's request. There was no chance they were going to pay him for "damages" over a widely shared tik tok meme, though. Then to threaten a lawsuit if they don't pay up? That's literally extortion. Fantano fucked up reeeaaal bad.
There's two possible avenue for him:
1. Activision used edited version, not the version uploaded on Library.
2. Content was uploaded to Library without his permission(doubt it).
Upd. I looked up the ToS and it's rather long process to add content to this library.
If they used an edited version, it's even more fair use
Even if they used an edited version. It has nothing to do with him after all it's a public domain ( you lose all rights of your product when you put it in public domain)
@@ayouberriouch5973 sure, so because an artist uploads a song to yt or whatever other platform they have no rights upon their intelectual property, 4head.
@@ayouberriouch5973it's not public domain, it's tictoc's library. Tictoc owns it but are deliberately very permissive and allow anyone to use it *in tictocs* freely
Almost the same thing
this is like when someone you don't like tells a funny joke
fantano’s gonna rate activation a light 2.
Insufferable entity sues extremely insufferable entity
I detest fantano. I hope he loses big.
grr he say record i like bad
@@papayerHis takes are just pretentious trite shit with a sprinkle of memetic editing to be in touch with current generation.
I didn't expect fantano to do something so knowingly dumb.
He is a hypocrite in his reviews and tends to flip flop on whatever makes good music so I’ve known that he’s not very smart
@@Memorial24 can you give examples of this? not accusing you or anything, but ive been watching his videos for a long time and he's usually pretty, if not very articulate about his opinions, even if they may be unorthodox sometimes.
@@stewiegriffinfortnight2160 In his tier list for 2013 songs he ranted about Thrift Shop for just being an annoying fad and just a novelty for it’s time which I guess I can see but in his 2019 video he praises Old Town Road for the exact same reasons he criticized Thrift Shop
@@Memorial24did he call old town road "annoying"?
@Memorial24 to be fair, even if he did, that's a 6 year difference. Someone's stance to approaching music can alter greatly in that time.
What sounds the most crazy is that it seems like he has extorted others for money in the past and Activision might be saying, were big enough we’re going to stick up for the little guy.
It's more like they're sticking up for themselves and just using the examples of other people being extorted by him as more proof of Anthony abusing IP laws.
@@the_furry_inside_your_walls639is it ok if you explain what this company has done? I don’t know lol
Activision has done the same thing too so they’d not the heroes either though tbf taking down that vid was pretty generous of them
I wanna sue Fantano for giving MBDTF a 6
It's pretty ballsy to try and hold a corporation to ransom. It's one thing to demand they stop using it, which they did. It's quite another to then demand money from them.
i'd do it if it were me.
All you have to do is ask is him if he uploaded it to the library and see if any psyche-locks pop up.
Activision really pulled the UNO reverse card lmao
Fantano never recovered from that Pitchfork article
The fact Melon has already reportedly strong-armed a couple companies into six figure settlements is wild. I hope Activision’s lawyers absolutely bury him.
He is a bad person, crappy to his fanbase when they disagree with his points. His arguments against viewers on TH-cam or comments on Twitter exemplify that he thinks he’s smarter and better than everyone else. No shock he’s trying to abuse systems to make a ton of money.
@@Sindrella. I like it when a creator doesn't stroke off his audience like they're never wrong. Those "arguments" you're crying about are purposely put forward by the audience specifically so he can argue against them. The name of the segment is literally "let's argue". That's like saying someone roasting people who submitted themselves to a "let me roast you" video thinks he's smarter and better. You have completely missed the point.
@@OrbObserverI don’t recall any of those arguments making it onto let’s argue. They weren’t even related to a let’s argue section. Is this a misdirect? And even if they were about let’s argue, couldn’t he just cherry-pick the ones that make him look good? Cmon man you’re being disingenuous
@@Sindrella.He’s a retired meme cringe lord. Bro never grew up. That already tells you enough about a person. He’s falling off this is just desperation for money.
@@OrbObserverI like him to an extent but you gotta be real that he is a pretentious douche. That’s sort of his brand. So it can be entertaining but I’m not surprised that a guy who has a dickish personality is doing dickish stuff.
If Activision is smart and knows their history. They (And every other company on Earth) will just look at the Nike v. Beatles lawsuit of the 80's, it's pretty much the landmark case of advertisement vs creative expression; Nike having gone through all the proper legal filings to use the song in their advertisement but still being sued because of artistic expression being damaged by corporate advertisment.
But they didn't ask him ? Did they ? Cause I understand the "using his voice without his knowledge or giving compensation" but for example if they just used someone else's voice recreating the meme it wold be fine
@@mariaeduarda-rk4hrbut it was consensual he put in in the commercial library
@@mariaeduarda-rk4hr next time watch the whole video before leaving comments
Wait so you think because the tiktok was used by 55k people, it should be allowed to be used in paid promotions without credit or payment? Thats like saying Activision should be able to use any song they want without compensation to the artist, as long as it goes viral on tiktok prior
That”s why there are two sound libraries on TikTok - one for the general public to use and the commercial sound library which is curated by TikTok. The latter is what brands and businesses use to make ads and Fantano isn’t on there.
@@Junya01 So I don't understand these comments and Charlie. Fantano is absolutely in the right
Finally he’s getting sued, he deserves it after giving ‘the notorious dunk’ a 7/10
Now is melon who is getting dunked, how the turntables
Over a song review? WTF. I've never watched a video from him ever but holy shit that's childish 🤦♀️
@@LalaRojas-jd5rcissa joke
@@LalaRojas-jd5rc it's a meme, most of his fans just dunk on him constantly for his scores
@@retronimo Oh ok sorry like I said I don't really know him. Again, sorry