REACT TO FINE BROS CONTROVERSY

[Ross Scott]

Yeah, after seeing that, it is the EXACT STUPIDITY I WAS TALKING ABOUT. Random things being taken down by copyright strikes that they have no proof are at all related. Just like they were a week ago, a month ago, a year ago and a decade ago. I fucking give up.

This is the best reference I've seen on what thefinebros are doing. This was written up by a copyright law attorney:

 

 

The short line is they're lying in their videos. Their actions indicate that they are doing takedowns of people and it's confirmed they're trying to trademark the word "react", I think you might have been misinformed as to what the reality is. You can't always believe what people are saying, that goes triple for large organizations. Hell, this is why I encourage people to fact-check me for anything I say in Game Dungeon or other videos, in case I make a mistake.

 

I find this whole situation kind of amazing. It would be like if I tried to trademark "Mind" and did copyright takedowns of Barney's Mind, Shephard's Mind, etc., despite Freeman's Mind being derivative of stuff like MST3K.

 

EDIT:

Nevermind, rarity posted the exact same link and I didn't notice. That's the best starting point to look at if you think they're doing nothing wrong.

[Heliocentrical]

CGPGrey posted two videos making fun on of the FineBros incident. Figured I'd post them here. They're hilarious.

 

Z-Zr7c-J6qE

 

9dPnaAt-Rbs

[Blightmare]

Yeah, after seeing that, it is the EXACT STUPIDITY I WAS TALKING ABOUT. Random things being taken down by copyright strikes that they have no proof are at all related. Just like they were a week ago, a month ago, a year ago and a decade ago. I fucking give up.

This is the best reference I've seen on what thefinebros are doing. This was written up by a copyright law attorney:

 

 

The short line is they're lying in their videos. Their actions indicate that they are doing takedowns of people and it's confirmed they're trying to trademark the word "react", I think you might have been misinformed as to what the reality is. You can't always believe what people are saying, that goes triple for large organizations. Hell, this is why I encourage people to fact-check me for anything I say in Game Dungeon or other videos, in case I make a mistake.

 

I find this whole situation kind of amazing. It would be like if I tried to trademark "Mind" and did copyright takedowns of Barney's Mind, Shephard's Mind, etc., despite Freeman's Mind being derivative of stuff like MST3K.

 

EDIT:

Nevermind, rarity posted the exact same link and I didn't notice. That's the best starting point to look at if you think they're doing nothing wrong.

You set it up better since I really just left a link floating with no real context.

 

But yeah, the more I look into this, the more mindblowing it is. These guys are really full of themselves. O_o I'm also pretty stunned at the feedback on this. A lawyer's even offering Pro Bono services to those affected by the Fine Bros. copyright abuse even.

[Vapymid]

Hehe, I have no idea who these blokes are and have no intention to find out - but it has made headline news on the BBC, so must be a big thing :

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-35470159

 

Regards

[Meelis13]

Just pointing out, that i find whole drama quite stupid. I honhestly havent bothered to look into it much, but isnt this like, way less drama worthy than PS trying to trademark let's play? I mean, arent there ton less reactors out there than there are of let's players?

So my question- why was there no HUGE drama over sony trying to trademark let's play, but there is over this (which doesnt seem like doing anything other than setting up network to me- like i said, i havent bothered to look into it much, so i could be wrong)? Is it because that sony is huge corporation or something? I am geniuenly interested why one and not another, while another seems much bigger deal to me.

[Jeb_CC]

@Meelis: Problem is, EVERYONE reacts to things. If it's stupid to trademark eating, then it's stupid to trademark reacting. Everyone does it, and people should have the rights to record it and put it up on YouTube. But with Let's Plays, not everyone plays games. So I guess that's probably why?

[Blightmare]

Drama loves to fuel itself. While no doubt this is being blown a little bigger than it needs to be (considering it's almost certain they've lost at this point) I feel the difference in execution is what's making the difference between Sony and these guys. Sony did it rather quietly and it was resolved as such, where as not only did these guys make an announcement to the world, but they made follow up claims attempting, and ultimately failing, to save face and make their idea look better.

 

Not only that, but trademarking the word "React" with no real context added to it leads to a much wider range of potential problems than the phrase "Let's Play". Say that someone releases a video titled "this kid's reaction is hilarious" that has actually nothing to do with the react video format and is just a video of some kid flipping his shit over something, then, if they for some reason wanted to, they could copyright claim that video for name copying or even simply uploading a "reaction". This is of course a hypothetical worst case scenario but it's the possibility none-the-less that's scary. On top of that, they're taking action before it's even finalized and have in the past exploited Youtube's broken copyright system to shut down people who've already been doing what they want to do, just so they can lay claim to it themselves (see the link Ross put up and the part about Elders React.)

 

Fine Bros have basically made themselves the convenient target for everyone's frustrations. Not only has this angered people with it's dangerous possibilities, but it's also attracted the attention of those pissed off about shady copyright exploits on YT as well. So in essence, 2 dams broke and Fine Bros are stuck in the middle of it. Out of proportion or not, they kinda deserve what they're getting as it was their conscious actions that have led them to this point.

 

Edit: Ninja Jeb Ninja'd me.

[UndeadNecro]

Incorrect. When I replied to your comment, that was the only sentence there.

 

Unless you got there less than two minutes after I posted, which you didn't, that's a complete and barefaced lie. And oh, look at the timestamps.

 

 

Besides, the issue is what the Finebros are doing as a whole (as there are a ton of "reaction videos" that aren't just "Ooh, watch me watch this video!" and actually contribute to the topic of the video). People like pyrocynical and the newly popular Leafyishere are good examples. They at least talk about the video and make jokes and side-notes/side-stories alongside a minority of their videos being the video, at the very most small clips from the videos. They also show their own footage (e.g. CSGO surfing, footage of CSGO matches, CoD footage, etc.). "Reaction videos" is a very broad genre in any case.

 

And Finebros IS NOT FUCKING COPYRIGHTING THE FUCKING GENRE. They have explained exactly what they're ACTUALLY doing, and people like you are FLAT-OUT FUCKING IGNORING IT. The only "evidence" you sheeple have is "But reaction videos are being taken down!", and that was ALREADY HAPPENING.

 

The Finebros did NOTHING WRONG HERE. They are JUST making a network, that is ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING THEY ARE DOING. They are just being SCAPEGOATED for something that was ALREADY GOING ON for YEARS before their channel EVEN EXISTED. This has been happening since Youtube was FIRST CREATED.

 

How is this SO hard to wrap your mind around? PROBLEM THERE BEFORE PEOPLE SAY THING, SO PEOPLE SAY THING NOT CAUSE OF PROBLEM. Is THAT easier for you? Is THAT an adequate explanation? Or am I COMPLETELY WASTING MY FUCKING TIME trying to explain this EXTREMELY SIMPLE CONCEPT to you?

 

Of course I am. You have bought so deeply into this narrative that, remember, has NO SUPPORT FROM THE FACTS, that reason and logic are completely lost on you and you've convinced yourself either that this issue that is almost eleven years old is somehow brand new or otherwise come to the conclusion that Finebros can send copyright strikes BACKWORDS IN TIME. And either way, you're really starting to PISS ME OFF.

 

Well, now you're just being rude. I posted that comment before you edited it. At least on my screen, all I saw was that one sentence. If you're only going to accept what benefits you, you can piss off yourself.

 

Copyrighting the word "REACT" is taking the word REACT and saying "Oops, you can't use that! Sorry!". What, are people going to say "Examination and Inspection" for their videos? If the word is copyrighted, they can (and, reportedly, have) threaten their lawyers against you for using it.

 

The issue you fail to grasp is that the *RECENT* reports that are exclusive to the Fine Bros themselves aren't simply "You made a react video, it got a copyright strike by a channel with 1000 subscribers". There are people straight up giving examples of the Fine Bros using their lawyers to threaten others when "abusing" their namesake. It's ridiculous.

 

Anyways, you're clearly not going to accept any other opinions and you are incredibly biased on such a topic.

 

The "Let's just not yell about the the react trademark" reddit post is all the evidence you need, both the OP and the comments within the thread.

 

EDIT: Also, I posted the comment at 6:24, you edited at 6:47. If you care about any kind of impression of yourself, you'd at least apologize for such an insulting accusation. Who would lie about such a small thing?

 

EDIT2: Anyways, more on-topic, the whole ordeal is ridiculous. Regardless of their intentions, trying to copyright words such as "react", similar to the supposed sony fiasco of "Let's Play", is a ridiculous idea. The way they've dealt with it (for example the update video) just paints them with a stuck-up and entitled vibe. Perhaps they thought they were truly doing a good thing (Which would be odd, considering what they were actually doing and affecting) but the update video has no sincerity to it and you can see it in their faces. That being said, the update video was removed so you'll have to see other videos with the specific clips (like with the emotionless face of the guy wearing the glasses).

Edited February 2, 2016 by Guest (see edit history)

[Meelis13]

@Meelis: Problem is, EVERYONE reacts to things. If it's stupid to trademark eating, then it's stupid to trademark reacting. Everyone does it, and people should have the rights to record it and put it up on YouTube. But with Let's Plays, not everyone plays games. So I guess that's probably why?

So is it trademark or copyright issue? because there is HUGE difference between the two, as trademark does NOT extend backwards in time, from what i can tell.

[Meelis13]

i think this video is quite on-date:

GuMJLhWd248

[UndeadNecro]

@Meelis: Problem is, EVERYONE reacts to things. If it's stupid to trademark eating, then it's stupid to trademark reacting. Everyone does it, and people should have the rights to record it and put it up on YouTube. But with Let's Plays, not everyone plays games. So I guess that's probably why?

So is it trademark or copyright issue? because there is HUGE difference between the two, as trademark does NOT extend backwards in time, from what i can tell.

 

It's copyright but they tried to imply in their original video that their trademark has been infringed upon before(e.g. their "format", which I think it's a reference to the Ellen show). I find that hard to believe because, well, it's a react show. At the core, there's nothing specifically different than other react videos other than specific logos(their REACT logos) and production value which is irrelevant. That being said, they don't have much to trademark in the first place. If they had brand-specific merchandise then... sure? Otherwise, they really only have their logos. That's it.

[Meelis13]

 

It's copyright but they tried to imply in their original video that their trademark has been infringed upon before(e.g. their "format", which I think it's a reference to the Ellen show). I find that hard to believe because, well, it's a react show. At the core, there's nothing specifically different than other react videos other than specific logos(their REACT logos) and production value which is irrelevant. That being said, they don't have much to trademark in the first place. If they had brand-specific merchandise then... sure? Otherwise, they really only have their logos. That's it.

So, again, which one is it? because copyright and trademark are two totally different things, yet i cant read out wheter you mean copyright or trademark?

[UndeadNecro]

 

It's copyright but they tried to imply in their original video that their trademark has been infringed upon before(e.g. their "format", which I think it's a reference to the Ellen show). I find that hard to believe because, well, it's a react show. At the core, there's nothing specifically different than other react videos other than specific logos(their REACT logos) and production value which is irrelevant. That being said, they don't have much to trademark in the first place. If they had brand-specific merchandise then... sure? Otherwise, they really only have their logos. That's it.

So, again, which one is it? because copyright and trademark are two totally different things, yet i cant read out wheter you mean copyright or trademark?

 

 

It's a copyright issue . I was just saying that they don't have anything to trademark in the first place, for the most part.

Edit: My point being that they weren't trying to trademark the REACT brand but the word itself(which, as I checked, in this context is a copyright, not a trademark).

[Scorpia]

So, fine bros apologizing...

https://medium.com/@FineBrothersEnt/a-message-from-the-fine-brothers-a18ef9b31777#.1hgcvigpe

[Alyxx Thorne]

This is pretty hilarious... XD

[Binky The Rabbit]

One wonders if they'll be able to salvage their reputation.