maybe a little funny at first but holy shit when the lawyer came in vegan became fucking intolerable, he wont stop talking over literally everyone who tries to speak, he keeps saying make an argument and they try and he just shuts them down over and over again. He acts like he wants a debate but he wont let anyone actually make any points without just bullshitting and being a little bitch in general.
It's so sad Pisco and Dan just wanted to yell at VeganGains bc they don't like him lmao iont like him either but his explaination of why Hasan has no legal ownership was spot on
@@AlecWyld Ethan's takes are usually correct, unless he's emotionally invested and then he goes way too hard to the left. Other "bad takes" are generally jokes that gym bros clipchimp.
Hes literally CRYING @ 57:52! I didn't even realize that it was him, I thought it was some nerdy little kid who sounded like they were arguing with their parents & when it was proven that they were wrong they just started screaming, "THIS IS IRRELEVANT". He was actually so ignorant here & acted like a child, hes supposed to be a debater? Wtf?
Because he's a narcissist. He does this pretty often. And then he says "idk why you're here when you don't know what you're talking about". While 20 minutes before he admits that he didn't know what he's talking about. He's kind of insufferable. It's bad enough that he doesn't know what he's talking about. But it's fucking detestable how confident he is about these things that he even admits he doesn't know shit about Idk what to call that other than narcissistic.
@@robertradford4707 Thats true. Doesnt have to be a crazy thing to think but it absolutely could be crazy also. Someone could have that exact thought you just gave an example of and just be talking out their ass, which im reasonably sure is what Dan did. Did Dan KNOW that it wasnt as simple and clear as VG thought it was? Was this something he's spent a lot of time in and knows for a fact there isn't precedent on? Or was he just pretty sure because of gut feeling, and whether he just so happens to be correct in the end or not has no bearing on how wild those two statements can be when its something you know nothing about. Also correct me if im wrong (i aint re-watching this again) but does Dan say that VG is is flat-out wrong in response to Vg saying its clear cut or in response to something else?
It's so funny when these people get this angry over such meaningless shit. Adin Ross copyright claims a video Hasan uploaded and they're freaking out at each other about it. Sometimes you just gotta let shit go, even if you know you're right.
Then Dan going on his charade about how he thing VG is dumb while vomiting confidently incorrect shit was absolutely L. Unironically this made me lose so much respect for him. Not like he gives a fuck, but still, yikes.
@Alex are you 13, bruh? You're making the most disjointed and vapid points. Clearly your opinion(s) on whether or not someone "DeBaTe GoOd" is irrelevant.
Destiny has mastered the art of getting an hour or more of content while being almost entirely hands off and almost essentially just being a member of the streams chat. It's a work of art. probably protected by copyright laws.
🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation: 00:00 🎥 Hasan and Adin Ross engage in a heated debate about copyright issues, where Hasan questions the ownership and copyright rights of streamed content involving multiple parties. 13:11 🧾 Destiny explains the concept of fair use and the legal complexities surrounding copyright claims on streamed content, emphasizing the importance of understanding copyright laws in the streaming industry. 16:41 📜 The discussion delves into the ambiguity of copyright ownership when multiple individuals are involved in a streamed conversation, raising questions about legal responsibilities and potential court outcomes. 15:52 🎥 A debate ensues over copyright ownership when streaming content with multiple participants. The discussion revolves around who owns the rights to the stream and its distribution. 18:55 📸 Using the example of photography, it is clarified that the person who physically captures the content, such as taking a photo, owns the copyright, regardless of the similarity to others' work. 20:32 🎵 Owning a performance on a stream, like playing a song, does not grant exclusive copyright. It's about capturing unique content, not merely reproducing a broadcasted performance. 25:44 🎤 Discussions continue about media releases, embargoes, and liability waivers, highlighting different legal aspects of participation in shows andstreams. 26:13 🦞 A hypothetical scenario involving lobsters pressing a camera shutter button illustrates the absence of copyright ownership for non-sentient beings. 32:56 📽️ A debate scenario is presented where someone uploads a segment of a stream to their channel, raising questions about copyright, ownership, and fair use. 36:48 🎬 The concept of joint authorship is discussed, suggesting that co-participants in a stream might claim ownership, although the legal specifics remain unclear. 38:15 ⚖️ Clarification is made about authorship and copyright, emphasizing that being an author does not automatically grant copyright protection. 39:13 🤝 A comparison is drawn between commissioned work and the authorship of streaming content, highlighting the distinct rules governing ownership and copyright protection. 39:27 🎥 The discussion revolves around Hassan's potential authorship of Aiden Ross's stream and its relation to copyright. 40:07 🤔 The debate focuses on whether Hassan has authorship over Aiden Ross's stream, a prerequisite for copyright ownership. 41:16 🎙️ The conversation delves into ownership rights in situations like street interviews conducted by news stations. 42:24 💡 Discussion on the complexity of copyright, fair use, and authorship, emphasizing the ambiguity in streaming scenarios. 43:09 📜 Hassan doesn't own a license to his likeness or political opinions, debunking the claim of his copyright over Aiden Ross's stream. 47:25 🎬 Comparing stream ownership to film director James Cameron's creative influence in the movie "Titanic." 48:22 🕺 Explaining the protection of choreographic works under copyright law and highlighting the need for fixation in tangible mediums. 51:23 📸 Debunking the misconception that photographers in street photography situations would own joint copyrights with subjects. 55:46 🔍 Clarifying the concept of joint authorship and its relevance to copyright entitlements. 59:18 🎭 Addressing the potential argument for Hassan's joint authorship based on his creative input, despite lacking significant involvement. 01:01:08 🎙️ Copyright law and fair use are complex, and there's limited legal precedent on many issues, especially regarding live streaming and creative content. 01:01:21 ⚖️ Fair use is a nuanced concept, and applying it to streaming, especially without transformative commentary, can be legally ambiguous. 01:01:34 🏛️ There's a scarcity of legal precedents for live streaming cases, making it challenging to predict outcomes with certainty. 01:02:03 📸 Copyright protection varies based on creative input, even in public spaces. Taking a picture of someone's unique dress can be protected under copyright law. 01:02:31 🖼️ Copyright protection extends to the angle, composition, and creative elements in a photograph, emphasizing the complexity of copyright law. 01:03:11 🤯 Misunderstanding copyright law can lead to misguided legal arguments and confusion about the nuances of creative ownership. 01:04:27 🎙️ Legal discussions require a clear understanding of the law, and uninformed arguments can lead to frustration and miscommunication. 01:06:41 🤝 Joint authorship and ownership can be complex, especially in collaborative projects, requiring clear agreements to avoid legal disputes. 01:07:25 ⚖️ In the specific case of copyright infringement in live streaming, the person initiating the broadcast typically holds the copyright, raising questions about rebroadcasting rights. Made with HARPA AI
@@IAmAllEyes back in the older days of youtube, Ethan made a parody video making fun of some pick up guy (Who was beyond cringe) The guy tried taking ethan to court over it, Ethan won obviously and it became a big win for youtube content creators especially when it comes to copyright laws.
I murdered a guy with a spoon, luckily Pisco is my lawyer. He told me "well, like, the laws complicated and there hasn't been a spoon related murder before. So it might not even be illegal. Who knows?"
@@ThePompell doesn't matter tho. This dude just pulled the typical lawyer bs. Why would you hop on stream in the middle of a debate to quite LITERALLY say nothing... As deranged as vegan gainz is, he has a point when he correctly points out that the lawyer dude is actively not making an argument. Hence in the meta sense he's hilariously enough right lol
@@ThePompell that doesn't mean that anything flies. There are certain aspects that are cut and dry. Adin was running the discord call, he recorded the video, got everyone their, edited the video, etc. This is EXACTLY the same as if a news org had a prominent figure on for a segment, but the guest tried to reupload the segment. The guest (Hasan) didn't have ANY agency over the creation of the video. thus would automatically disqualify the guest from ownership. They were simply a tool/employee
@@Jerryfromtheblocm apparently Hasan wasn't even streaming so, this worsens his case immensely as he can't even the say the platform it was broadcasted on was mutual. It seems all the organization and results from this convo came from Aidens end/ efforts.
@@fuukmesidewayz250 he just spent 40 minutes interrupting people trying to talk with him and started screaming that he doesn't care when Peepeeco was trying to talk. Pretty unlikeable behavior
@@MrMcTinkles It was really funny though, and he was right as the lawyer admitted in the end. I mean the lawyer didn't even know the context of the video before making arguments, I would've been frustrated too.
Vegan gains needed to realize that Pisco was under the assumption that both Hasan and Aiden had been recording. I can see why he got mad when Pisco kept trying to bring up two people hitting a shutter at the same time and coauthors.
That aside some stuff he brought up is completely wrong. Him trying to equate it with Star Wars, a licensed product, shows that he just is either extremely bad faith or actually clueless here.
he was only saying that to justify that in some cases who has ownership of the work is shared or not easily discernible, then his argument would have been “under what circumstances does this apply”
Bro argued for like 30 minutes with vegan without even knowing what he was even arguing for. Like I heard half of what Dan said so I’m coming to argue on half a vague example he gave 😪
Dan was insufferable in this, "yeah I don't know much about releases or this stuff BUT" proceeds to tell Destiny and the other guy they're wrong when they try to explain Dan has the wrong idea.
He spends too much time online, like Destiny. They have a tendency to blow up in random conversations like moody teenagers. At least Destiny can tone it down in conversations with non terminally online people, for the most part.
It was funny as hell cause dan told destiny why vegan was wrong and vegan felt like he had a moral edge, then in came pisco and he devolved into doing the same thing dan was doing. LOL. They were both idiots the only difference is that dan is usually likeable lmao.
Yea i think he just worded it like shit. He needed to say you cant have a copyright over a work that is a recording of another persons copyrighted work unless its fair use.
What about recording someone’s street performance of something they wrote? If you wanted to monetise that footage you’d probably at the very least need to ask permission…
Yeah but that's not the only thing he was saying. He was wrong in more places than he was right. He was wrong about most things when it came to the law & he's arguing with a LAWYER who went to law school! How arrogant can one be? He was wrong when he said dances couldn't be copyrighted & when they looked it up its written RIGHT INTO THE STATUATE that dances are protected under copyright laws. Then he doesn't wanna admit he's wrong & actually STARTS CRYING @57:52. I didn't even realize it was vegan gains until after all this. He's also wrong when he says that there's lot of precedent & case law when it comes to this stuff. There factually is not & he doesn't know any of these supposed cases himself clearly. I normally argue against piscos takes but when it comes to law the guy knows a lot more than fuckin vegan gains does who tries to yell over everyone the second it's found out that he's wrong by saying, "wah wah I don't care anymore" like a teenager throwing a temper tantrum. Can't believe he's supposed to be good at debating
Dan and Pisco never made an argument against that. They just said, when it comes to streaming, we were moving in uncharted territory. And for for some reason that triggered tf out of VG which was funny. Even though they clarified a few times that Adin Ross was pbly on the right here.
I personally liked the part around 20:00 D was shitposting in chat about Dan's obsession with star wars : "what if I was in my Chewbacca costume and took a picture, wHAt tHeN????"
Yeah it is, thanks to Dan himself, he is bringing some random ass shit about lobsters and Pisco goes "are you a lawyer" while bringing shit that is just wrong.
What he means by "false copystrike" is that the person filing the claim is filing a claim on a clip they know is covered by fair use. Hasan's possible misconceptions about his clip aside, that's clearly what happened to internet anarchist. More importantly Adin literally said "we stole from" making it clear he knows the claim was illegitimate and went on to say he was going to strike "anybody he doesn't F with", which also makes it explicitly clear that his choice to strike has nothing to do with legality, whether it's transformative, and or fair use.
Woah, you mean you can infer intent from the words of the most transparent illiterate dirtbag online? Naaah, let's have a serious discussion on the legality of the for over ONE HOUR. Holy shit, Destiny making content out of absolutely inane shit is dull AF.
How come Reaction TH-camr Channels can take any video & reupload it wth commentary & then monetize it? Can the original creator file a False Copyright Strike against the Reaction Channel?
@@cougsjohnson1 It would depend on how much it is changed. I would imagine most are not changed enough and are therefor illegal but TH-cam doesnt proactively fight it and most people just doesnt understand the law. Destinys, for example, most likely is far more than enough to be considered changed enough. There is also the idea that most TH-camrs would never copyright strike reaction videos because while it may cost them in the short term but it can attract more viewers to the rest of their content in the long term. Streaming video games may also technically be illegal but developers dont go after it because it drastically increases sales.
The part that annoys me the most about Destiny's "Orbiters" is that they argue semantics more than they do the actual issue: "You didn't give an argument. Thats an analogy" "You are not granting that this is even a colorful argument" "You are just wasting my time, you are the one or made the premise" Like wtf
I know right, super gay, like that guy Destiny debated around a month ago about toxic masculinity - but 99% of the argument was just trying to agree on what the term even means, like the dude could not separate the word from its meaning so when destiny laid out his understanding of the word's meaning, even though he totally agreed with destiny, he couldn't get over it the term so he just kept disagreeing for no reason and stalling the argument. Makes for some funny debates though. But I swear half the time i'm just listening to people who already agree with each other argue for no reason.
The "lawyer" just wants to talk. Guy makes an ironclad argument for Dan having no claim. Dan and lawyer "what if a lobster is watching a football game"
@@cheatyoutuber285but bro that’s everyone all these so called political streamers never do proper research use big words and just think they know what they are talking about 😂😂😂😂
1:23:30 The "lawyer" literally just agreed with his point that Adin has protection over his stream that he recorded. Which is the entire argument. He didn't even realize it cause he wanted to be a child and continue to trigger Vegan. The problem is that the lawyer dude is arguing against it without any actual knowledge of the incident.
"I dont know anything about the (hassan's) stream I'm just here to say dan's right" Issue is dan was talking about the fucking stream. Pisco came and argued a bunch of stuff, a lot of which doesnt apply to what vegangains was talking about
Do any of you have any idea what you're talking about? Pisco's main argument is that there is no precedent for this situation so Vegan Gains' certainty was unwarranted.
@@narcissistichumility1269 do you know what we're talking about? Because OP and I commented on the fact that pisco came in with a bunch of hot shit but later on agreed with VG about the hassan situation once destiny filled him in on it. So then him coming in and being a dick really wasn't necessary. He came in, argued stuff that was tangentially related and then was an asshole for most of the time he was there
normally not a fan of vegan gains but this was actually hilarious 1:06:15 "he's a lawyer, yeah" "okay, is he a copyright lawyer?" "no" "well then fuck you" top tier bants
Him and his lawyer had their position thoroughly destroyed, and were trolled simultaneously. The projection and bullying near the end was icing on the cake.
@@matttttttttttttt685 what do you mean?? All vegan gains did is steam roll every time they tried to make a point and then went “you never made an argument” guy argues like he is a right winger from 2016
Idk why Dan has trouble with the streaming part If it were back in the day it would be using adins cameras and set, even if hasan and shit called in it’s still his production It’s just that today everyone can have access to an “official broadcast setting” if we are considering streamers professional
Vegan Gains won. Adin recording and streaming hassan while him and others are talking doesn't mean hassan owns the stream any more than a news channel streaming street interviews means the interviewees own the stream and pisco even admits it at the end and admits that VG is probably correct and that a court would need to rule against the legal reasoning in other precedents. Dan's original claim was that because Hassan didn't sign a "release" therefore he owns a recording of a conversation Adin made where hassan was talking , which was complete baloney. Pisco's final argument besides all the posturing was "well since it's up to the courts you can never tell for sure what they'll say so maybe they'll decide that Hassan owns the copyright to a conversation someone else made just because he was in that conversation even though that's not how any other media with participants likenesses works at all"
The truth is that there is a distinct lack of legislation and authorship regarding streaming. Pisco and Dan are right in that regard. If we open Pandora's Box, it may be the end of both gaming streams and reaction ones
@@TheFluffyKitty Sackhead Ed said it best. "I murdered a guy with a spoon, luckily Piss Co is my lawyer. He told me "well, like, the laws complicated and there hasn't been a spoon related murder before. So it might not even be illegal. Who knows?" "
I just love that they think Hasan‘s position is wrong but they still argue with Vegan how Hasan might have grounds to object the copyrights claim. THIS IS WHY WE WATCH THIS STREAM!!!
Hasan doesnt need to object to the copyright claim itself. If he does the case is over. However if Hasan sues for a personality rights violation, it could be an easy win for him.
In this video: Vegan Gains asks Pisco the same question for almost an hour and Pisco refuses to answer. Dan and Pisco think they're above Vegan Gains, while Vegan Gains still waits for an answer to the single question that will make the case.
They did answer it tho.. they believe it's not clear cut and that the case could go both sides. Vegan says that is not the case despite having no knowledge about copyright laws, that is what they are taking issue with.
What? Constantly asking how Hasan could have a license to his own contribution in the stream never made sense because the argument was about possible co-ownership being decided by creative input, not by who recorded the conversation. When Vegan was forced to drop the license question by admitting Pisco was right about not actually needing a license for copyright, he then resorted to demanding proof that Hasan has co-ownership, something Pisco can’t do because (as he said before) he never watched the stream. I don’t see how you can argue in favor of Vegan’s performance here.
@ZackyCat another example they used in this very video, just because you were a guest on the price is right, doesn't mean you have rights over that video and hold any rights over that broadcast. You still can't stream it publicly for profit, you still can't broadcast it on your own channel, you still can't sell that material. You don't own it, I don't care if you were the main star of that episode. You don't own shit. Hasan has no grounds here.
@@billyjean8176 yes because on the price is right u sign consent forms. If hasan signed something saying adin could profit off his image it wouldnt be a problem. But if creative imput is one merit of ownership then its not clear adin is the complete owner just bc he broadcasts it and would have no right to dmca
@@ni9274 Whining, bad takes, and just overall really cringe. Pretty sure most people outside of a high school level of comprehension can see that in Hassan.
You're allowed to clip anything for copyright purposes and you don't copyright people who clip parts of your content unless your content is paid content.
Pisco came in to argue for dan even tho he knew nothing relevant to the conversation, got butthurt and defensive when he realized he was wrong, but only concedes his argument when destiny tells him hes wrong.. I couldn't imagine having scars on my knees like that
Not sure these losers names but photographer boys has no idea how unwritten laws are deliberated. Lawyar came in amd tried to express that the law isn't written and this is how it shoukd be deliberated.
Dan mocking vegan gains being a crybaby while pisco is jabbing at vegans master debater skills overlayed with destiny playing Zelda music is just Perfection
Everything I learned about copyright/media law and ethics in college (a fair bit) says that Hasan and Dan are 100% incorrect about how this works. VG’s first example of how photographers own the copyright for their pictures, not the subject is also the perfect example; rich and powerful celebrities have literally lost legal battles for uploading pics taken of them without proper credit.
I also went to school and learned a fair bit about litigation and copyright law. It humors me you would say, "Hasan and Dan are 100% incorrect" given that copyright disputes happen on a case by case basis. There is not enough legal precedent to talk about these things definitively so every case is treated individually. Copyright is complicated anyone who talks about it so cut and dry is a fucking idiot. Literally entire ass Attorneys that specialize in Copyright.
The one big issue here is that while I agree hasan probably doesn't have a case. The internet anarchist video was 100% fair use and no ones seems to comment on that part at all. Also, I don't know if this is true but hasan is claiming that his editors heavily edited the video so it's not torn straight from Adin but that could be wrong since it's hasan saying it.
@@Sikidd206 It's fine to say that Hasan is making it about himself (he always does) but it's still important to separate that from the internet anarchist situation otherwise it all get jumbled together. I could be wrong but I don't think anywhere in the video do they ever even comment on internet anarchist which makes it seems like it's just an Hasan issue.
@@mikemills326 Sargon of Akkad uploaded a video that was entirely without commentary and merely used footage from another creator It was taken down for copyright infringement He won in court
Dan and the non copywriter lawyer are so annoying. Remember folks, hire the right lawyer for the right job... Don’t get a family court lawyer for your copy write case...
Interesting seeing how Destiny still doesnt fully understand the TH-cam space enough to understand what a false copyright is. Not saying that he is dumb btw, its just fun fo watch.
I don't think he doesn't understand what false copyright is. I think he was more questioning WHAT is false in the claim, Adin claimed a reaction to his content - what's false about that?
@@RokuNyx I think the main thing everyone is fighting about is Hasans claim. Bc it wasn't a reaction but he actually was the star of the video and he tried to reupload. Most TH-camrs prolly don't care if a guest reuploads the same vid, but not all influencers do this. From a technical perspective, Adin is 100% right. His platform, his edits, his agency/idea that created the work.
@@itsreallydna I know it wasn't a reaction but Hasan is still 100% in the wrong, regardless of if he was the "star" at that moment in time, he owns no claim to Adin's platform, and none to that specific stream regardless of his appearance on said stream. If Hasan had recorded it and uploaded his recording, that's different and perfectly legal as Hasan would own the rights to that footage and he hadn't signed any agreements waiving all the rights to the convo to Adin or anyone else.
@@RokuNyx 100% facts. It's so funny how Dan and Pisco act like they're the smartest orbiters; hoping Destiny will suck them off about how based they are. Meanwhile everyone else is just clowning them for the adhoms, lack of clarity, and especially Pisco's arogance as a lawyer. Idk how they could possibly think Hasan had any claim to the footage lmao
Dan is so annoying sometimes, he’s a great example of someone who because they are successful in a certain area, they then think they are a subject matter expert on literally everything they speak about.
This is unfair I dont think Dan sees himself as aan expert on the subject matter just that he knows he himself is not an idiot and has confidence enough to believe his ownn take that its not a definite. Previous success in other areas should absolutely allow someone to be confident in their ability to understand different areas within reason.
@@xVorTecKz No that’s called hubris, just because you’re an expert or have had success in one or two areas you shouldn’t then have the confidence to think you would know fucking anything in a totally unrelated subject. That’s a fucking wild mindset to just confidently talk out your ass about shit you know you don’t know anything about lol.
25:45 So this guy spergs out every time you ask a clarifying question then he asks this ridiculous hypothetical and acts like that's a gotcha... jesus.
Ok but the lawyer literally admitted that a court would most likely side with Adin and that the only thing hasan goes for him is his input being “colorful” and that the waters were muddy all while yelling “are you a layer?” And sidetracking. Felt more like he was sucking off a friend than being against what Vegan gains was saying.
I feel like a lot of people are missing an aspect of this conversation. A lot of people have very black and white thinking. I have had this problem when discussing gray issues before. If someone says, "There are no black swans." And I reply, "I'm not sure that that's true." A common response is "Oh, so you think there are black swans? Prove it. Show me a black swan!" My position was that I don't know that it's the case that there are none. Not that there are. These are distinct positions. This was Pisco's position. He was agreeing with what Dan had said that it was untested. Dan made some pretty strong statements early on. But he did say that he thought this was untested. Vegan was rejecting the idea that it was untested. But when Pisco asserted that it was indeed untested. Vegan kept trying to bait Pisco into defending the extreme position that Hasan DID own the work by asking for proof of Hasan's ownership of the work. This is a nonsensical request given Pisco's position that it is untested. Dan is wrong about Vegan. Vegan is an intelligent guy, I think his main issue here was he was being very aggressive and cutting everyone off and not listening.
@@greySESH Vegan gains lost his shit the moment a real lawyer came in and challenged him, then he started talking over everyone. Dan at least admitted "both of us don't know what we're talking about we're just going on gut feeling" That's as honest as you can get, the best "debate style' (cringe term)
@@amazin7006 "a real lawyer" - Pisco is not a copyright lawyer though and his premise was based on both Hasan and Adin recording - which Hasan wasn't recording.
@@chrisbosh584 It's impossible to tell with Vegan Gains. He acts like this semi-consistently but he could also be a career troll. Regardless it's impressive how infuriating he can be.
I work in video production and every single job I do I have to sign a “work for hire” agreement that basically exists to explicitly state that I do not own the content that I am creating
Vegan Gaines (a person i generally don't care for) effectively win this partially due to the others not actually listening to what he eat explaining about the immediate creation of copywrite, and how it is initiated. The rest, he's also correct about most of what he was saying. The act of recording is what makes it yours, the placement on an account belonging to you (the account itself) is the second part of that. Being present in your art in a vacuum doesn't instantly allow the subject to yoink some of it creatively. Every instance is business, news, film, or otherwise have this stuff contacted and sorted prior. Or the company can just lose that stuff on technicalities. The football stadium example is brilliant because the footage *playing on the screen* is already set up and the contacts of ownership are applied. If you simply record the screen, you're vulnerable to the company making a claim against you, as you recorded the SCREEN, not the game itself otherwise.
It's just wild to me that they are making terrible analogies the entire time and nobody is seriously calling them out on it. If you record a call yourself, YES that is yours, but that has nothing to do with the scenario that happened here. Hasan didn't record or stream anything, he literally just reuploaded adins stream as a video. And I'm sorry but I'm so annoyed by someone who is a lawyer always being given credit when they talk about things they don't know anything about either lol my dentist IS a doctor, that doesn't mean their opinion on vaccines or what surgical advice he has about things other than oral surgery should be given any more value than a random person on the street.
@@rufusrupo the example is terrible since it doesn't even slightly relate to the actual situation. Even in his example, there is someone who is contracted to record (and then give a copy to both news stations) this is so different it shouldn't even be brought up.
@@swordyshield the problem is vegan was making absolutist statements without knowing much about the legal process, so pisco jumped in to correct him on that. pisco was specifically defending dans point that there isnt precedent on this yet, not whether adin is right or wrong. vegan resorting to shouting over pisco and interrupting everything he was saying rather than engaging in a mature or logical conversation about authorship, copyrights, the legal process, etc. prevented any kind of clarification of the facts. pisco even stated multiple times "i dont know the specific facts, im not here to argue that, im only saying that the law isnt as settled as you claim it to be"
@@bcp-7 yea vegan was being a complete clown. It's just annoying how because he was being a complete clown people are assuming his claim was wrong. It wouldn't be super clear cut obviously but it seems quite likely that he would be right and hasan would lose the case
Hasan openly admitted to ripping the video from Adin Ross' channel because he didn't record the debate... Hasan is in such an echo chamber he's having a hard time recognizing how terrible his takes actually are.
This is still fair use ? That’s why the claim was stopped by TH-cam, you can’t copyright claim someone that reacted to your video and added commentary all over. We all are in an echo chamber people claiming otherwise are delusional.
@@ni9274 he didn't react or add commentary though. He just ripped adins stream, in which he was present. It has an adin ross watermark in the corner for the entirety of the video. Hasan even said he should have removed the watermark. Which is supremely retarded lmao
@@ni9274 he didn't do that.... He literally just ripped the part with him and uploaded it. There was no commentary added. Did you even watch the video???
I love how pisco agrees with vegan gains about hasan having no grounds cause 1º he wasnt the mastermind 2º He doesnt own copyright about his likeness 3º He doesnt own copyright about his political commentary. But keeps arguing and saying that vegan gains is an idiot. It was as easy as to say "I 90% agree with you, I am just part unsure cause this particular scenario hasnt been tested in court"
Pisco literally said that multiple times, VG insisted on Pisco defending Hasan. If that plantfucker actually shut up for once he would have known far earlier..
It's kinda annoying how Dan and then VG just resorted to "no you're wrong", and didn't even really engage with some of the arguments of who they're talking to.
YOU'RE BLOWING MY MIND! Destiny And Aba Dive Into Interesting Schizo Convo
►th-cam.com/video/Kt36fYGBUMM/w-d-xo.html
W conversation
This is why i love Dan
Hey destiny can you please tell me what the game your playing is?
demonetize all your videos reacting to other streams and videos you dont own destiny. lol
@@DIRTYD33DSDON3DIRTCHEAP 😊😅😊
Dan getting stunlocked by Vegan Gains while Destiny trolls in chat just to piss him off was too funny. Quality content
Could you timestsamp. I dont watch just listen to these videos while doing random things so I miss stuff like what happens in chat.
@@slamdunker77 trolling starts at 18:03
maybe a little funny at first but holy shit when the lawyer came in vegan became fucking intolerable, he wont stop talking over literally everyone who tries to speak, he keeps saying make an argument and they try and he just shuts them down over and over again. He acts like he wants a debate but he wont let anyone actually make any points without just bullshitting and being a little bitch in general.
Finally seeing Dan be so wildly off base is far more satisfying then I ever thought it would be.
@@ChunkyJo really?? Dan gets pretty strongly vindicated here lol, my first time actually appreciating one of Dan's takes
From Xqc asking ChatGPT for lawyer advice to absolute schizo screaming matches with Vegan Gains of all people. This season of the DGG show is cracked.
Chatgpt passed the bar right ?
It's so sad Pisco and Dan just wanted to yell at VeganGains bc they don't like him lmao iont like him either but his explaination of why Hasan has no legal ownership was spot on
This is why i love Dan
@@itsreallydna obvious bait
Please timestamp the part with X I'm not going to watch this waste of time without the chapters and most replayed. Destiny is sour
lmfao that cut to ethan completely contradicting hasan was hilarious.
The only current-era Ethan take I've ever agreed with.
@@AlecWyld Ethan's takes are usually correct, unless he's emotionally invested and then he goes way too hard to the left. Other "bad takes" are generally jokes that gym bros clipchimp.
Holy shit lololololol😂😂😂😂😂
That was funny shit
@@GetArkdwhatever helps you sleep at night
Vegan Gains accent combined with him being mad kills me every time. LOL
Vegan Gains voice is what ThIs FoNt StYlE would sound like irl 😂😂
@@Imperial_Squid 😂😂😂
Mad Canadians are hilarious
Have you seen his older more unhinged videos? Probably some of my best laughs.
Hes literally CRYING @ 57:52! I didn't even realize that it was him, I thought it was some nerdy little kid who sounded like they were arguing with their parents & when it was proven that they were wrong they just started screaming, "THIS IS IRRELEVANT". He was actually so ignorant here & acted like a child, hes supposed to be a debater? Wtf?
Why is Dan so passionate about something he knows nothing about other than what's in his gut?
He does this all the time.
I remember the debate with aba where he simultaneously admits "i dont know anything" and "i know you're wrong"
Because he's a narcissist. He does this pretty often. And then he says "idk why you're here when you don't know what you're talking about". While 20 minutes before he admits that he didn't know what he's talking about. He's kind of insufferable. It's bad enough that he doesn't know what he's talking about. But it's fucking detestable how confident he is about these things that he even admits he doesn't know shit about Idk what to call that other than narcissistic.
@@scarfhat1 It's not crazy to say I do not know the exact details, but I know it isn't as simple and firm as you think it is.
@@robertradford4707 Thats true. Doesnt have to be a crazy thing to think but it absolutely could be crazy also. Someone could have that exact thought you just gave an example of and just be talking out their ass, which im reasonably sure is what Dan did. Did Dan KNOW that it wasnt as simple and clear as VG thought it was? Was this something he's spent a lot of time in and knows for a fact there isn't precedent on? Or was he just pretty sure because of gut feeling, and whether he just so happens to be correct in the end or not has no bearing on how wild those two statements can be when its something you know nothing about.
Also correct me if im wrong (i aint re-watching this again) but does Dan say that VG is is flat-out wrong in response to Vg saying its clear cut or in response to something else?
@@scarfhat1 you're referring to when him and Aba were discussing music label deals right?
This has been one of THE best uploads in a while. This got so heated for no real reason. I loved it.
It's so funny when these people get this angry over such meaningless shit. Adin Ross copyright claims a video Hasan uploaded and they're freaking out at each other about it. Sometimes you just gotta let shit go, even if you know you're right.
Dan is a terrible debater, which makes it so much clearer how bad this Destiny woman is
@@DinosaurSuccess sooooooo he's a terrible debator
@@Alex-kt8qe But you can be skilled at debating despite ignorance on a subject. Politicians do it almost exclusively.
@@ENomad there is a difference between being ignorant or bad faith vs being clueless on the subject matter
Then Dan going on his charade about how he thing VG is dumb while vomiting confidently incorrect shit was absolutely L. Unironically this made me lose so much respect for him. Not like he gives a fuck, but still, yikes.
@Alex are you 13, bruh? You're making the most disjointed and vapid points. Clearly your opinion(s) on whether or not someone "DeBaTe GoOd" is irrelevant.
Sometimes I feel like Dan needs to be knocked down a few pegs.
Destiny has mastered the art of getting an hour or more of content while being almost entirely hands off and almost essentially just being a member of the streams chat. It's a work of art. probably protected by copyright laws.
I mean im a photographer so maybe not but possibly so
@@Hydranox no
well he recorded so yeah
Destiny is the mastermind 😂😂
🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation:
00:00 🎥 Hasan and Adin Ross engage in a heated debate about copyright issues, where Hasan questions the ownership and copyright rights of streamed content involving multiple parties.
13:11 🧾 Destiny explains the concept of fair use and the legal complexities surrounding copyright claims on streamed content, emphasizing the importance of understanding copyright laws in the streaming industry.
16:41 📜 The discussion delves into the ambiguity of copyright ownership when multiple individuals are involved in a streamed conversation, raising questions about legal responsibilities and potential court outcomes.
15:52 🎥 A debate ensues over copyright ownership when streaming content with multiple participants. The discussion revolves around who owns the rights to the stream and its distribution.
18:55 📸 Using the example of photography, it is clarified that the person who physically captures the content, such as taking a photo, owns the copyright, regardless of the similarity to others' work.
20:32 🎵 Owning a performance on a stream, like playing a song, does not grant exclusive copyright. It's about capturing unique content, not merely reproducing a broadcasted performance.
25:44 🎤 Discussions continue about media releases, embargoes, and liability waivers, highlighting different legal aspects of participation in shows andstreams.
26:13 🦞 A hypothetical scenario involving lobsters pressing a camera shutter button illustrates the absence of copyright ownership for non-sentient beings.
32:56 📽️ A debate scenario is presented where someone uploads a segment of a stream to their channel, raising questions about copyright, ownership, and fair use.
36:48 🎬 The concept of joint authorship is discussed, suggesting that co-participants in a stream might claim ownership, although the legal specifics remain unclear.
38:15 ⚖️ Clarification is made about authorship and copyright, emphasizing that being an author does not automatically grant copyright protection.
39:13 🤝 A comparison is drawn between commissioned work and the authorship of streaming content, highlighting the distinct rules governing ownership and copyright protection.
39:27 🎥 The discussion revolves around Hassan's potential authorship of Aiden Ross's stream and its relation to copyright.
40:07 🤔 The debate focuses on whether Hassan has authorship over Aiden Ross's stream, a prerequisite for copyright ownership.
41:16 🎙️ The conversation delves into ownership rights in situations like street interviews conducted by news stations.
42:24 💡 Discussion on the complexity of copyright, fair use, and authorship, emphasizing the ambiguity in streaming scenarios.
43:09 📜 Hassan doesn't own a license to his likeness or political opinions, debunking the claim of his copyright over Aiden Ross's stream.
47:25 🎬 Comparing stream ownership to film director James Cameron's creative influence in the movie "Titanic."
48:22 🕺 Explaining the protection of choreographic works under copyright law and highlighting the need for fixation in tangible mediums.
51:23 📸 Debunking the misconception that photographers in street photography situations would own joint copyrights with subjects.
55:46 🔍 Clarifying the concept of joint authorship and its relevance to copyright entitlements.
59:18 🎭 Addressing the potential argument for Hassan's joint authorship based on his creative input, despite lacking significant involvement.
01:01:08 🎙️ Copyright law and fair use are complex, and there's limited legal precedent on many issues, especially regarding live streaming and creative content.
01:01:21 ⚖️ Fair use is a nuanced concept, and applying it to streaming, especially without transformative commentary, can be legally ambiguous.
01:01:34 🏛️ There's a scarcity of legal precedents for live streaming cases, making it challenging to predict outcomes with certainty.
01:02:03 📸 Copyright protection varies based on creative input, even in public spaces. Taking a picture of someone's unique dress can be protected under copyright law.
01:02:31 🖼️ Copyright protection extends to the angle, composition, and creative elements in a photograph, emphasizing the complexity of copyright law.
01:03:11 🤯 Misunderstanding copyright law can lead to misguided legal arguments and confusion about the nuances of creative ownership.
01:04:27 🎙️ Legal discussions require a clear understanding of the law, and uninformed arguments can lead to frustration and miscommunication.
01:06:41 🤝 Joint authorship and ownership can be complex, especially in collaborative projects, requiring clear agreements to avoid legal disputes.
01:07:25 ⚖️ In the specific case of copyright infringement in live streaming, the person initiating the broadcast typically holds the copyright, raising questions about rebroadcasting rights.
Made with HARPA AI
Damn. 90% of this whole convo can be summed up as "nuh uh, you are wrong"
The clip of Ethan Klein debunking Hasan's own argument is so funny
Timestamp please 🥺
@@Spencerwalker21 8:07
What case is Hasan talking about?
@@IAmAllEyes back in the older days of youtube, Ethan made a parody video making fun of some pick up guy (Who was beyond cringe) The guy tried taking ethan to court over it, Ethan won obviously and it became a big win for youtube content creators especially when it comes to copyright laws.
@@tyewilliams7113back before Ethan became a terminal cringelord
I murdered a guy with a spoon, luckily Pisco is my lawyer. He told me "well, like, the laws complicated and there hasn't been a spoon related murder before. So it might not even be illegal. Who knows?"
"I don't know the answer, so clearly anyone who believes they do know the answer is an idiot, a moron, an absolute imbecile. I rest my case."
You understand Ethan Klein case was the first having to do with and he fought for years on it. Murder is pretty flushed out copyright is not
@@ThePompell doesn't matter tho. This dude just pulled the typical lawyer bs. Why would you hop on stream in the middle of a debate to quite LITERALLY say nothing... As deranged as vegan gainz is, he has a point when he correctly points out that the lawyer dude is actively not making an argument. Hence in the meta sense he's hilariously enough right lol
@@ThePompell that doesn't mean that anything flies. There are certain aspects that are cut and dry. Adin was running the discord call, he recorded the video, got everyone their, edited the video, etc. This is EXACTLY the same as if a news org had a prominent figure on for a segment, but the guest tried to reupload the segment. The guest (Hasan) didn't have ANY agency over the creation of the video. thus would automatically disqualify the guest from ownership. They were simply a tool/employee
@@Jerryfromtheblocm apparently Hasan wasn't even streaming so, this worsens his case immensely as he can't even the say the platform it was broadcasted on was mutual. It seems all the organization and results from this convo came from Aidens end/ efforts.
If anyone is wondering, ChatGPT agrees with Vegan gains's take on this.
I actually was curious. thanks
gg ai overlord has spoken
Xqc's gpt didn't. The bot doesn't have a single stance on anything you can get every answer on a matter like this.
And this matters why?
@@couldyou4745 chatGPT is in the top 2 percentile in passing bar exams.
Every time I hear Dan’s voice I imagine him as a worm coming out of an apple 😂 🪱
Like Shelby in adventure time? lol
Best fuckin comment ever. why does that work so well?
greetings from apple world!
Like “The Busy World of Richard Scarry” 💀
Dan just starts complaining about some sort of meta-aspect of the conversation when he doesn't have a good answer lol. Infuriating
I may hate VG but DAMN Dan is just so wrong it’s incredible
why do you hate VG?
@@fuukmesidewayz250 he just spent 40 minutes interrupting people trying to talk with him and started screaming that he doesn't care when Peepeeco was trying to talk. Pretty unlikeable behavior
@@MrMcTinkles tbf pisco was being really condescending so i give him a pass
@@MrMcTinkles It was really funny though, and he was right as the lawyer admitted in the end. I mean the lawyer didn't even know the context of the video before making arguments, I would've been frustrated too.
Vegan gains needed to realize that Pisco was under the assumption that both Hasan and Aiden had been recording. I can see why he got mad when Pisco kept trying to bring up two people hitting a shutter at the same time and coauthors.
That aside some stuff he brought up is completely wrong. Him trying to equate it with Star Wars, a licensed product, shows that he just is either extremely bad faith or actually clueless here.
Why did he need to understand the Picso had no idea what he was talking about
he was only saying that to justify that in some cases who has ownership of the work is shared or not easily discernible, then his argument would have been “under what circumstances does this apply”
@@123oddish (?)
Bro argued for like 30 minutes with vegan without even knowing what he was even arguing for. Like I heard half of what Dan said so I’m coming to argue on half a vague example he gave 😪
Dan was insufferable in this, "yeah I don't know much about releases or this stuff BUT" proceeds to tell Destiny and the other guy they're wrong when they try to explain Dan has the wrong idea.
He spends too much time online, like Destiny. They have a tendency to blow up in random conversations like moody teenagers. At least Destiny can tone it down in conversations with non terminally online people, for the most part.
@@jarofpickles4057 agreed
Dan is a God and can do no wrong. 😡
It was funny as hell cause dan told destiny why vegan was wrong and vegan felt like he had a moral edge, then in came pisco and he devolved into doing the same thing dan was doing. LOL. They were both idiots the only difference is that dan is usually likeable lmao.
@@Hydranoxthey were both still likeable cause vegan gains is so unlikable.
Vegan Gains is 100% right here, there’s a difference between recording Star Wars which has a license vs something that just has his likeness.
Yea i think he just worded it like shit. He needed to say you cant have a copyright over a work that is a recording of another persons copyrighted work unless its fair use.
@PieGuy2525 Like MST3000, they get a license to use the movie and then create their own copyrighted original work.
What about recording someone’s street performance of something they wrote? If you wanted to monetise that footage you’d probably at the very least need to ask permission…
Yeah but that's not the only thing he was saying. He was wrong in more places than he was right. He was wrong about most things when it came to the law & he's arguing with a LAWYER who went to law school! How arrogant can one be? He was wrong when he said dances couldn't be copyrighted & when they looked it up its written RIGHT INTO THE STATUATE that dances are protected under copyright laws. Then he doesn't wanna admit he's wrong & actually STARTS CRYING @57:52. I didn't even realize it was vegan gains until after all this.
He's also wrong when he says that there's lot of precedent & case law when it comes to this stuff. There factually is not & he doesn't know any of these supposed cases himself clearly. I normally argue against piscos takes but when it comes to law the guy knows a lot more than fuckin vegan gains does who tries to yell over everyone the second it's found out that he's wrong by saying, "wah wah I don't care anymore" like a teenager throwing a temper tantrum. Can't believe he's supposed to be good at debating
Dan and Pisco never made an argument against that. They just said, when it comes to streaming, we were moving in uncharted territory. And for for some reason that triggered tf out of VG which was funny. Even though they clarified a few times that Adin Ross was pbly on the right here.
Funny moments in the debate
40:20 to 40:56
43:10 to 43:43
53:37 to 54:58
55:13 to 56:54
57:21 to 58:44
1:03:00 to 1:03:40
1:06:06 to 1:06:36
1:17:44 to 1:18:58
1:19:15 to 1:19:38
But overall this entire video is pure gold
It's so fucking good. The best workout material I've had yet.
Ty so much
Is this what you do with your life?
@@couldyou4745 ?
I personally liked the part around 20:00
D was shitposting in chat about Dan's obsession with star wars : "what if I was in my Chewbacca costume and took a picture, wHAt tHeN????"
Bro this convo with Vegan Gains was so cancer, Dan was losing it. LMAOO 🤣
Yeah it is, thanks to Dan himself, he is bringing some random ass shit about lobsters and Pisco goes "are you a lawyer" while bringing shit that is just wrong.
@@Koooles the lobster thing is a reference to vegan gains clip where he said lobsters have brains (they do not)
Pissco is just soy
@@Koooles what did pisco say thats wrong 1 example
@@jessecorrell996 him trying to equate filming on Star Wars set to you just filming something without any prior contract, for one.
@@Koooles Dan "I'm trying to have a good faith conversation"
Also Dan
"wHaT iF i ReCoRd StAr WaRs?"
What he means by "false copystrike" is that the person filing the claim is filing a claim on a clip they know is covered by fair use. Hasan's possible misconceptions about his clip aside, that's clearly what happened to internet anarchist. More importantly Adin literally said "we stole from" making it clear he knows the claim was illegitimate and went on to say he was going to strike "anybody he doesn't F with", which also makes it explicitly clear that his choice to strike has nothing to do with legality, whether it's transformative, and or fair use.
Hit it on the head
Woah, you mean you can infer intent from the words of the most transparent illiterate dirtbag online? Naaah, let's have a serious discussion on the legality of the for over ONE HOUR. Holy shit, Destiny making content out of absolutely inane shit is dull AF.
How come Reaction TH-camr Channels can take any video & reupload it wth commentary & then monetize it? Can the original creator file a False Copyright Strike against the Reaction Channel?
@@cougsjohnson1 It would depend on how much it is changed. I would imagine most are not changed enough and are therefor illegal but TH-cam doesnt proactively fight it and most people just doesnt understand the law. Destinys, for example, most likely is far more than enough to be considered changed enough.
There is also the idea that most TH-camrs would never copyright strike reaction videos because while it may cost them in the short term but it can attract more viewers to the rest of their content in the long term. Streaming video games may also technically be illegal but developers dont go after it because it drastically increases sales.
@@chpgmr1372 you’re not even making a argument
The part that annoys me the most about Destiny's "Orbiters" is that they argue semantics more than they do the actual issue:
"You didn't give an argument. Thats an analogy"
"You are not granting that this is even a colorful argument"
"You are just wasting my time, you are the one or made the premise"
Like wtf
I know right, super gay, like that guy Destiny debated around a month ago about toxic masculinity - but 99% of the argument was just trying to agree on what the term even means, like the dude could not separate the word from its meaning so when destiny laid out his understanding of the word's meaning, even though he totally agreed with destiny, he couldn't get over it the term so he just kept disagreeing for no reason and stalling the argument. Makes for some funny debates though. But I swear half the time i'm just listening to people who already agree with each other argue for no reason.
Yea its hilsriously rediculous lmaoo
Vegan gains saying: "How do you listen to these guys waste your time all day" was so incredibly accurate lmaoo
53:44 - 54:20 😂😂😂
logicbros are hilarious
The "lawyer" just wants to talk.
Guy makes an ironclad argument for Dan having no claim.
Dan and lawyer "what if a lobster is watching a football game"
Dan calling Vegan Gainz the dumbest person he’s ever met while being wrong the entire time IS FUCKING CRAZY😳
That's Dan though. It's kinda his thing.
I mean he was right the whole time but go off
@@jkdragonjk6895
Nope. Even the lawyer agreed with VG at the end.
@@shredgod6394 Lmao what, he basically said both him and Dan were right, did you even watch the vid??
@@jkdragonjk6895 he didn't even know the context of the adin ross stream
Pisco at any point in time: Are you a lawyer bro????
Pisco "you didnt even answer my question!"
Also pisco before and after this statement
*dodging questions*
Imagine listening to any kind of legal talk coming from Hasan 😂😂
@@cheatyoutuber285but bro that’s everyone all these so called political streamers never do proper research use big words and just think they know what they are talking about 😂😂😂😂
@@cheatyoutuber285 tbf, if you read like 3 wikipedia articles on something you're more educated on a topic than like 95% of people.
Destiny the Wikipedia warrior is much better am i right?
@@cheatyoutuber285 the meat riding is strong with this one 🍖🎠
@@cheatyoutuber285 Coming to Destiny's channel to dick ride Hasan lmaooo
1:23:30 The "lawyer" literally just agreed with his point that Adin has protection over his stream that he recorded. Which is the entire argument. He didn't even realize it cause he wanted to be a child and continue to trigger Vegan. The problem is that the lawyer dude is arguing against it without any actual knowledge of the incident.
"I dont know anything about the (hassan's) stream I'm just here to say dan's right"
Issue is dan was talking about the fucking stream. Pisco came and argued a bunch of stuff, a lot of which doesnt apply to what vegangains was talking about
@@scarfhat1 I know...he should have been asked why he was there then? Its insane.
Do any of you have any idea what you're talking about? Pisco's main argument is that there is no precedent for this situation so Vegan Gains' certainty was unwarranted.
@@narcissistichumility1269 do you know what we're talking about? Because OP and I commented on the fact that pisco came in with a bunch of hot shit but later on agreed with VG about the hassan situation once destiny filled him in on it. So then him coming in and being a dick really wasn't necessary. He came in, argued stuff that was tangentially related and then was an asshole for most of the time he was there
@@scarfhat1 It's not tangentially related. He came in to say that this is an untested area of law. It is directly relevant lol.
“How can Hasan not understand this?”
I say this to myself 10 times a week
Wow you think about Hasan alot
Found the Hasan Stan
@@vindikaktus Ofcourse we think about Hassan a lot. He is the blond girl of twitch.
normally not a fan of vegan gains but this was actually hilarious
1:06:15
"he's a lawyer, yeah"
"okay, is he a copyright lawyer?"
"no"
"well then fuck you"
top tier bants
In the end the other guy never even came up with a counter argument
If a painter paints your portrait you cant just take the painting because you are in it. The painter still has ownership over his work.
New rule: you don’t get to tell someone to “calm down” when you’re the one who riled them up in the first place
When did Destiny tell Vegan to calm down?
@@pothead9963 i don’t think he talks about destiny
ON THIS WEEKS EPISODE OF DAN CAN NEVER BE WRONG....
Him and his lawyer had their position thoroughly destroyed, and were trolled simultaneously. The projection and bullying near the end was icing on the cake.
The soy guy is also soy in debates? Who could have seen this coming?
Lol bodied by Vegan gains... Pathetic. Idk how destiny can even stand Dan. He's an insufferable arrogant dim wit like 80 percent of the time.
@@matttttttttttttt685 what do you mean?? All vegan gains did is steam roll every time they tried to make a point and then went “you never made an argument” guy argues like he is a right winger from 2016
dan became being annoyingly defensive when gains joined
THIS PISCO DUDE IS INSUFERABLE
pisco and dan are stupid as fuck all pisco did was try to lawyer his way out of actually argue anything lmao
It's Piss Co. Get it right.
Been here for years and I have to agree
You’re a crack addict if you think Vegan Gains looks better here LOL
much better than vegangains tho
Piscina or whatever was being so willfully obtuse in this conversation, Jesus he was being an smug asshole for no reason
Dan was wrong and his whole argument against vegan was a waste of time. Dan was just saying “I don’t know anything so don’t say you know”.
Idk why Dan has trouble with the streaming part
If it were back in the day it would be using adins cameras and set, even if hasan and shit called in it’s still his production
It’s just that today everyone can have access to an “official broadcast setting” if we are considering streamers professional
Vegan Gains won. Adin recording and streaming hassan while him and others are talking doesn't mean hassan owns the stream any more than a news channel streaming street interviews means the interviewees own the stream and pisco even admits it at the end and admits that VG is probably correct and that a court would need to rule against the legal reasoning in other precedents. Dan's original claim was that because Hassan didn't sign a "release" therefore he owns a recording of a conversation Adin made where hassan was talking , which was complete baloney. Pisco's final argument besides all the posturing was "well since it's up to the courts you can never tell for sure what they'll say so maybe they'll decide that Hassan owns the copyright to a conversation someone else made just because he was in that conversation even though that's not how any other media with participants likenesses works at all"
The truth is that there is a distinct lack of legislation and authorship regarding streaming. Pisco and Dan are right in that regard. If we open Pandora's Box, it may be the end of both gaming streams and reaction ones
@@TheFluffyKitty Sackhead Ed said it best. "I murdered a guy with a spoon, luckily Piss Co is my lawyer. He told me "well, like, the laws complicated and there hasn't been a spoon related murder before. So it might not even be illegal. Who knows?" "
I just love that they think Hasan‘s position is wrong but they still argue with Vegan how Hasan might have grounds to object the copyrights claim. THIS IS WHY WE WATCH THIS STREAM!!!
Hasan doesnt need to object to the copyright claim itself. If he does the case is over. However if Hasan sues for a personality rights violation, it could be an easy win for him.
In this video: Vegan Gains asks Pisco the same question for almost an hour and Pisco refuses to answer. Dan and Pisco think they're above Vegan Gains, while Vegan Gains still waits for an answer to the single question that will make the case.
Yes. The patience of Vegan Gains is unreal. My head would have exploded.
They did answer it tho.. they believe it's not clear cut and that the case could go both sides. Vegan says that is not the case despite having no knowledge about copyright laws, that is what they are taking issue with.
What? Constantly asking how Hasan could have a license to his own contribution in the stream never made sense because the argument was about possible co-ownership being decided by creative input, not by who recorded the conversation. When Vegan was forced to drop the license question by admitting Pisco was right about not actually needing a license for copyright, he then resorted to demanding proof that Hasan has co-ownership, something Pisco can’t do because (as he said before) he never watched the stream. I don’t see how you can argue in favor of Vegan’s performance here.
@ZackyCat another example they used in this very video, just because you were a guest on the price is right, doesn't mean you have rights over that video and hold any rights over that broadcast. You still can't stream it publicly for profit, you still can't broadcast it on your own channel, you still can't sell that material. You don't own it, I don't care if you were the main star of that episode. You don't own shit. Hasan has no grounds here.
@@billyjean8176 yes because on the price is right u sign consent forms. If hasan signed something saying adin could profit off his image it wouldnt be a problem. But if creative imput is one merit of ownership then its not clear adin is the complete owner just bc he broadcasts it and would have no right to dmca
Never seen a clip of Hassan not whining like a 9 year old. This man is 32 by the way.
When Hassan does cringe voice impressions it’s also insufferable
Why do you hate him so much
@@ni9274 Whining, bad takes, and just overall really cringe. Pretty sure most people outside of a high school level of comprehension can see that in Hassan.
@@Devin____99 who do you watch besides Destiny?
Destiny does the same shit.
You're allowed to clip anything for copyright purposes and you don't copyright people who clip parts of your content unless your content is paid content.
Pisco came in to argue for dan even tho he knew nothing relevant to the conversation, got butthurt and defensive when he realized he was wrong, but only concedes his argument when destiny tells him hes wrong.. I couldn't imagine having scars on my knees like that
Not sure these losers names but photographer boys has no idea how unwritten laws are deliberated. Lawyar came in amd tried to express that the law isn't written and this is how it shoukd be deliberated.
To be honest: Pisco is getting more and more annoying.
I like how Dan realized halfway through it wasn’t worth it and just let Pisco and VG mald at eachother for content
I low key want gym streams with Vegan Gains and Destiny 🤔
Isn’t Vegan gains a little fatty these days?
The worst
Big L from Dan in this one.
Who would of thunk a Millionaire Communist would protect copyright law. loz
Socialism is when no copyright law
Strawman argument
Dan mocking vegan gains being a crybaby while pisco is jabbing at vegans master debater skills overlayed with destiny playing Zelda music is just Perfection
The editors are doing a bangup job with the intros
Everything I learned about copyright/media law and ethics in college (a fair bit) says that Hasan and Dan are 100% incorrect about how this works. VG’s first example of how photographers own the copyright for their pictures, not the subject is also the perfect example; rich and powerful celebrities have literally lost legal battles for uploading pics taken of them without proper credit.
I also went to school and learned a fair bit about litigation and copyright law. It humors me you would say, "Hasan and Dan are 100% incorrect" given that copyright disputes happen on a case by case basis. There is not enough legal precedent to talk about these things definitively so every case is treated individually. Copyright is complicated anyone who talks about it so cut and dry is a fucking idiot. Literally entire ass Attorneys that specialize in Copyright.
The one big issue here is that while I agree hasan probably doesn't have a case. The internet anarchist video was 100% fair use and no ones seems to comment on that part at all. Also, I don't know if this is true but hasan is claiming that his editors heavily edited the video so it's not torn straight from Adin but that could be wrong since it's hasan saying it.
There are jump cuts and images overlaid in the video but it’s definitely not heavily edited, not enough to claim fair use imo
Nobody talking about it because we all know it was fair use, hasan is just making the whole situation about himself as usual
@@mikemills326 Thanks for letting me know, like I said I never saw Hasan video so was just going on his words.
@@Sikidd206 It's fine to say that Hasan is making it about himself (he always does) but it's still important to separate that from the internet anarchist situation otherwise it all get jumbled together. I could be wrong but I don't think anywhere in the video do they ever even comment on internet anarchist which makes it seems like it's just an Hasan issue.
@@mikemills326 Sargon of Akkad uploaded a video that was entirely without commentary and merely used footage from another creator
It was taken down for copyright infringement
He won in court
21:33 “i don’t need a soy voice explainer” 😂😂
Why every time Dan gets on the call, it turns into 50 of the dumbest hypotheticals? He needs to stop trying to be destiny
I think nobody should own the copyright if you upload it to TH-cam and it's not paid content. Make that a new law.
Dan and the non copywriter lawyer are so annoying. Remember folks, hire the right lawyer for the right job... Don’t get a family court lawyer for your copy write case...
Yes, dude literally doesn't even know the basics of licensing.
Interesting seeing how Destiny still doesnt fully understand the TH-cam space enough to understand what a false copyright is. Not saying that he is dumb btw, its just fun fo watch.
He’s kinda dumb.
I don't think he doesn't understand what false copyright is. I think he was more questioning WHAT is false in the claim, Adin claimed a reaction to his content - what's false about that?
@@RokuNyx I think the main thing everyone is fighting about is Hasans claim. Bc it wasn't a reaction but he actually was the star of the video and he tried to reupload. Most TH-camrs prolly don't care if a guest reuploads the same vid, but not all influencers do this. From a technical perspective, Adin is 100% right. His platform, his edits, his agency/idea that created the work.
@@itsreallydna I know it wasn't a reaction but Hasan is still 100% in the wrong, regardless of if he was the "star" at that moment in time, he owns no claim to Adin's platform, and none to that specific stream regardless of his appearance on said stream.
If Hasan had recorded it and uploaded his recording, that's different and perfectly legal as Hasan would own the rights to that footage and he hadn't signed any agreements waiving all the rights to the convo to Adin or anyone else.
@@RokuNyx 100% facts. It's so funny how Dan and Pisco act like they're the smartest orbiters; hoping Destiny will suck them off about how based they are. Meanwhile everyone else is just clowning them for the adhoms, lack of clarity, and especially Pisco's arogance as a lawyer. Idk how they could possibly think Hasan had any claim to the footage lmao
41:39 Omg it took me so long to realize this was vegan gains I’m crying cause now I know he’s not memeing
58:13 ok maybe he is memeing cause homie is holding in laugh
you realize he's the correct one in the debate
Everyday it’s the same circus with different clowns… buttt I still watch
"2 lobsters take a photo, who owns the copyright?"
Jordan Peterson, king of lobsters.
Vegan Gains and Destiny with the good cop, bad cop GASLIGHT 🗿
Dan is so annoying sometimes, he’s a great example of someone who because they are successful in a certain area, they then think they are a subject matter expert on literally everything they speak about.
Dan is annoying all the time, literally never heard him speak in a way that didn't make me extremely uncomfortable
This is unfair I dont think Dan sees himself as aan expert on the subject matter just that he knows he himself is not an idiot and has confidence enough to believe his ownn take that its not a definite. Previous success in other areas should absolutely allow someone to be confident in their ability to understand different areas within reason.
@@xVorTecKz No that’s called hubris, just because you’re an expert or have had success in one or two areas you shouldn’t then have the confidence to think you would know fucking anything in a totally unrelated subject. That’s a fucking wild mindset to just confidently talk out your ass about shit you know you don’t know anything about lol.
aw naw bro look at my lawyer dawg. im losing this court battle. 😭😭😭😭
25:45 So this guy spergs out every time you ask a clarifying question then he asks this ridiculous hypothetical and acts like that's a gotcha... jesus.
Ok but the lawyer literally admitted that a court would most likely side with Adin and that the only thing hasan goes for him is his input being “colorful” and that the waters were muddy all while yelling “are you a layer?” And sidetracking. Felt more like he was sucking off a friend than being against what Vegan gains was saying.
100%
Dude was annoying asf. They were trolling
I feel like a lot of people are missing an aspect of this conversation.
A lot of people have very black and white thinking. I have had this problem when discussing gray issues before.
If someone says, "There are no black swans."
And I reply, "I'm not sure that that's true."
A common response is "Oh, so you think there are black swans? Prove it. Show me a black swan!"
My position was that I don't know that it's the case that there are none. Not that there are. These are distinct positions.
This was Pisco's position. He was agreeing with what Dan had said that it was untested. Dan made some pretty strong statements early on. But he did say that he thought this was untested. Vegan was rejecting the idea that it was untested. But when Pisco asserted that it was indeed untested. Vegan kept trying to bait Pisco into defending the extreme position that Hasan DID own the work by asking for proof of Hasan's ownership of the work. This is a nonsensical request given Pisco's position that it is untested. Dan is wrong about Vegan. Vegan is an intelligent guy, I think his main issue here was he was being very aggressive and cutting everyone off and not listening.
@@Thedamped ok but what is your argument
It's colorbable claim, not colorful claim
This is the best content in three years.
True
VG's interrupting while someone is just trying to clearly explain the point that HE ASKED THEM TO VERBALIZE is so obnoxious.
Dan has the most irritating/annoying debate style so condescending straight to insults
You spelled Vegan Gains wrong
@@mikemills326 well also true both annoying as fuck
@@mikemills326 Vegan Gains seemed very calm tempered until he just couldn't be anymore, Dan went immediately to wahhing
@@greySESH Vegan gains lost his shit the moment a real lawyer came in and challenged him, then he started talking over everyone. Dan at least admitted "both of us don't know what we're talking about we're just going on gut feeling" That's as honest as you can get, the best "debate style' (cringe term)
@@amazin7006 "a real lawyer" - Pisco is not a copyright lawyer though and his premise was based on both Hasan and Adin recording - which Hasan wasn't recording.
6:21 Hasan calling anyone a Baboon will always be hilarious to me.
The mask slipped for a sec
@@zerg2820 What do you mean
@@vindikaktus Cuz Hasan is a closet racist ad does a really bad job of hiding it.
“Are you a copyright lawyer?”
“No”
“Then fuck you!”
The shit at ~21:00 is the worst part of online conversations. People pretending they do not understand just to try and win.
I thought that one guy was trolling until I realized it was vegan gains
wait was he not trolling?
@@chrisbosh584 It's impossible to tell with Vegan Gains. He acts like this semi-consistently but he could also be a career troll.
Regardless it's impressive how infuriating he can be.
@@chrisbosh584 no he is not and that’s why he’s a legend.
@@MrCowman57 by literally almost crying?
I work in video production and every single job I do I have to sign a “work for hire” agreement that basically exists to explicitly state that I do not own the content that I am creating
Not gunna lie this photographer is destroying Dan and the other guy…and Destiny knows this too
It's crazy that I spend 30 minutes here before I realize that I am listening to 3 non lawyers trying to intuit copyright laws...
What is this fucking game Destiny is so addicted to?
@@SynchronicitySequence last spell
Pisco is a lawyer. But I think he’s wrong on this one, though his position may have merit
@@IHSchwingo He's a lawyer but not a copyright one, therefore his opinion on the matter means nothing and holds nothing.
@@RokuNyx true if only he did photography for 5 years
Dan is insufferable here
Edit: This is the special olympics of insufferability.
Vegan gains voice is equivalent to nails on a chalkboard.
I was crying at work listening to this. Thank you so much.
i was trying not to die while in class, shit was beautiful
Vegan Gaines (a person i generally don't care for) effectively win this partially due to the others not actually listening to what he eat explaining about the immediate creation of copywrite, and how it is initiated.
The rest, he's also correct about most of what he was saying.
The act of recording is what makes it yours, the placement on an account belonging to you (the account itself) is the second part of that.
Being present in your art in a vacuum doesn't instantly allow the subject to yoink some of it creatively.
Every instance is business, news, film, or otherwise have this stuff contacted and sorted prior. Or the company can just lose that stuff on technicalities.
The football stadium example is brilliant because the footage *playing on the screen* is already set up and the contacts of ownership are applied. If you simply record the screen, you're vulnerable to the company making a claim against you, as you recorded the SCREEN, not the game itself otherwise.
Dan acting like hes right when he's clearly wrong, then pisco jumping in to defend a point that isn't even true (both recording) had my head spinnig
I doubt someone is making 8k from straight reuploading someone's video.
Lmao, I'm convinced (through the intro), that destiny is the new Jerry Springer, just online. RIP Jerry Springer.
Wouldve made an above average orbitor
Dan, nobody wants to hear your gut feeling about how the legal system works.
Normally Dan is super smart but wtf is this thought process here it literally makes no sense 🤣
too much soy sauce!!
But what about gameshows
It's just wild to me that they are making terrible analogies the entire time and nobody is seriously calling them out on it. If you record a call yourself, YES that is yours, but that has nothing to do with the scenario that happened here. Hasan didn't record or stream anything, he literally just reuploaded adins stream as a video. And I'm sorry but I'm so annoyed by someone who is a lawyer always being given credit when they talk about things they don't know anything about either lol my dentist IS a doctor, that doesn't mean their opinion on vaccines or what surgical advice he has about things other than oral surgery should be given any more value than a random person on the street.
Dan, how the fuck do you get me to join VEGAN GAINS SIDE??????
Im pretty sure the lawyer guy is arguing from the standpoint that hasan has his own recording of the stream but he doesn't
Yea he def thought hassan also recorded lol
Hes not, he's just giving that as an example of joint authorship
@@rufusrupo the example is terrible since it doesn't even slightly relate to the actual situation. Even in his example, there is someone who is contracted to record (and then give a copy to both news stations) this is so different it shouldn't even be brought up.
@@swordyshield the problem is vegan was making absolutist statements without knowing much about the legal process, so pisco jumped in to correct him on that. pisco was specifically defending dans point that there isnt precedent on this yet, not whether adin is right or wrong. vegan resorting to shouting over pisco and interrupting everything he was saying rather than engaging in a mature or logical conversation about authorship, copyrights, the legal process, etc. prevented any kind of clarification of the facts. pisco even stated multiple times "i dont know the specific facts, im not here to argue that, im only saying that the law isnt as settled as you claim it to be"
@@bcp-7 yea vegan was being a complete clown. It's just annoying how because he was being a complete clown people are assuming his claim was wrong. It wouldn't be super clear cut obviously but it seems quite likely that he would be right and hasan would lose the case
Hasan openly admitted to ripping the video from Adin Ross' channel because he didn't record the debate... Hasan is in such an echo chamber he's having a hard time recognizing how terrible his takes actually are.
This is still fair use ? That’s why the claim was stopped by TH-cam, you can’t copyright claim someone that reacted to your video and added commentary all over.
We all are in an echo chamber people claiming otherwise are delusional.
@@ni9274 he didn't react or add commentary though. He just ripped adins stream, in which he was present. It has an adin ross watermark in the corner for the entirety of the video. Hasan even said he should have removed the watermark. Which is supremely retarded lmao
@@ni9274 bruh uploading someone elses vod with a couple of cuts isn’t fair use 💀
@@ni9274 in order for it to be fair use Hasan has to make transformational changes to the content.
@@ni9274 he didn't do that.... He literally just ripped the part with him and uploaded it. There was no commentary added. Did you even watch the video???
Huh Dan made some weird points. Seems to me that he doesn't know a lot about IP
August is going crazy in this intro. A true gem.
It's not August
Debate: *Devolves into insults and screaming*
August: *Rubs hands*
@@kumar01234 then who tf is it?
@@lillaine7309 the editor is august, the people speaking are dan, pisco and vegan gains
@@DIRTYD33DSDON3DIRTCHEAP
Ah shit I fucked up I thought it was one of them editing it
the combo of these characters debating makes this gold
I love how pisco agrees with vegan gains about hasan having no grounds cause 1º he wasnt the mastermind 2º He doesnt own copyright about his likeness 3º He doesnt own copyright about his political commentary.
But keeps arguing and saying that vegan gains is an idiot. It was as easy as to say "I 90% agree with you, I am just part unsure cause this particular scenario hasnt been tested in court"
He would have been able to if VG wasn’t so aggressive right off the bat
Pissco is cringe every appearance
Pisco literally said that multiple times, VG insisted on Pisco defending Hasan. If that plantfucker actually shut up for once he would have known far earlier..
Vegan gain is stoic 😂😂😂, dude is awesome. He mushed them all. Legend.
"What is the claim hasan would have to say he's an author to this work"
"Are you a lawyer?"
So tilting lol
It's kinda annoying how Dan and then VG just resorted to "no you're wrong", and didn't even really engage with some of the arguments of who they're talking to.
Its funny that a legal lawyer licensed by new york can be so wrong
Just another nepotistic jew hire.
That one lawyer friend sounds like a moron. He doesn’t know what he is talking about. He is just pretending like he does by throwing out legal terms.
Vegan gains won this hands down -
Vegan Meme was rolling Dan and Pisco. He was even being polite at first but started losing it because Dan was being an ass from the very start.
VG used to be annoying but now he’s absolutely hilarious lol
Naw he still annoyin bruh voice get on my nerves lol