That does not answer the core question I have. The project itself seems to be a mod and not violate any copyright, as far as I know. So assuming that, how is it legal to take it down? Companies the hoster of the mod, not the modder itself (also applicable to videos on YouTube in example) will take anything down without hesitation and questions asked, if it is a DMCA request. That does not mean its legally correct at that time and must be investigated.
So my question is, how a end user agreement can be a reason to DMCA, if the modder itself does not agreed to the EULA in example. How is it, that a company can decide if and how a product from a hobbyist is monetized, if it is not their product?
In example, do you think YouTube should be able to shutdown all third party YouTube players, because they sell the software? That would be a similar situation with this DMCA takedown.
I see, but that is not what I was asking. I know that DMCA makes it easier to takedown, because the companies (like the website that hosts the files) has to take it down immediately no questions asked. I know that, my question is how this is legally right to do in this case. I am not arguing if it should be, I am asking how this is even a takedown that is requested? Because the EULA of a company is irrelevant, as it is not part of the mod itself.
I assume this part, at least it’s the first one that gives them an excuse:
Don’t create, use, make available… software that interact with or affect our Games and/or Services in any way (including any unauthorised third party programs that collect information about our Games and/or Services by reading areas of memory used by our Games and/or Services to store information).
The DMCA allows the hosting service to be exempt from any legal damages if they follow up on DMCA takedowns. It would take winning or losing a lawsuit to determine how valid or invalid the argument is, not winning or losing an Internet argument, so I can only point out why it’s possible.
There are a lot of people abusing DMCA takedowns on YouTube, have you not heard about it before? Look up copyright trolls DMCA on YouTube if you want more info on it.
There are a lot of people abusing DMCA takedowns on YouTube, have you not heard about it before? Look up copyright trolls DMCA on YouTube if you want more info on it.
This is what I am actually asking. Does CD Projekt Red abuse the DMCA system here?
That does not answer the core question I have. The project itself seems to be a mod and not violate any copyright, as far as I know. So assuming that, how is it legal to take it down? Companies the hoster of the mod, not the modder itself (also applicable to videos on YouTube in example) will take anything down without hesitation and questions asked, if it is a DMCA request. That does not mean its legally correct at that time and must be investigated.
So my question is, how a end user agreement can be a reason to DMCA, if the modder itself does not agreed to the EULA in example. How is it, that a company can decide if and how a product from a hobbyist is monetized, if it is not their product?
In example, do you think YouTube should be able to shutdown all third party YouTube players, because they sell the software? That would be a similar situation with this DMCA takedown.
I’m telling you what the law has historically been, not arguing with you about what it should be.
I see, but that is not what I was asking. I know that DMCA makes it easier to takedown, because the companies (like the website that hosts the files) has to take it down immediately no questions asked. I know that, my question is how this is legally right to do in this case. I am not arguing if it should be, I am asking how this is even a takedown that is requested? Because the EULA of a company is irrelevant, as it is not part of the mod itself.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_rights_management
The ones you agree to when you install the game, like CD Projekt RED’s EULA.
https://store.steampowered.com/eula/1091500_eula_0
I assume this part, at least it’s the first one that gives them an excuse:
The DMCA allows the hosting service to be exempt from any legal damages if they follow up on DMCA takedowns. It would take winning or losing a lawsuit to determine how valid or invalid the argument is, not winning or losing an Internet argument, so I can only point out why it’s possible.
There are a lot of people abusing DMCA takedowns on YouTube, have you not heard about it before? Look up copyright trolls DMCA on YouTube if you want more info on it.
This is what I am actually asking. Does CD Projekt Red abuse the DMCA system here?
Depends on your take on the law I cited.