Tweet about the mom-calling: https://nitter.poast.org/itchio/status/1866239798924763227 or https://x.com/itchio/status/1866239798924763227 Deets from the owner on a post on Hacker News: And the...
I'm the one running itch.io, so here's some more context for you:
From what I can tell, some person made a fan page for an existing Funko Pop video game (Funko Fusion), with links to the official site and screenshots of the game. The BrandShield software is probably instructed to eradicate all "unauthorized" use of their trademark, so they sent reports independently to our host and registrar claiming there was "fraud and phishing" going on, likely to cause escalation instead of doing the expected DMCA/cease-and-desist. Because of this, I honestly think they're the malicious actor in all of this. Their website, if you care: https://www.brandshield.com/
About 5 or 6 days ago, I received these reports on our host (Linode) and from our registrar (iwantmyname). I expressed my disappointment in my responses to both of them but told them I had removed the page and disabled the account. Linode confirmed and closed the case. iwantmyname never responded. This evening, I got a downtime alert, and while debugging, I noticed that the domain status had been set to "serverHold" on iwantmyname's domain panel. We have no other abuse reports from iwantmyname other than this one. I'm assuming no one on their end "closed" the ticket, so it went into an automatic system to disable the domain after some number of days.
I've been trying to get in touch with them via their abuse and support emails, but no response likely due to the time of day, so I decided to "escalate" the issue myself on social media.
This sounds like a new form of swatting. Site-swatting. I haven't seen an explanation of who called the mom. Doubtful it was actually Funko, can that be pinned on BrandShield as well? I wonder if...
This sounds like a new form of swatting. Site-swatting.
I haven't seen an explanation of who called the mom. Doubtful it was actually Funko, can that be pinned on BrandShield as well? I wonder if there's grounds for legal action against them, for harassment or something.
My robots have actually detected some (likely) malicious pages cropping up on itch.io lately, usually posing as official pages for android apps and distributing APKs. Hopefully whatever this is...
My robots have actually detected some (likely) malicious pages cropping up on itch.io lately, usually posing as official pages for android apps and distributing APKs.
Hopefully whatever this is doesn't divert attention from fighting malware. I really like the service and the significant library of DRM free titles and Linux builds.
There is a lot I could say but I will simplify everything to be as concise as possible. The DMCA should be repealed. Every part of it. It’s a net negative for society.
There is a lot I could say but I will simplify everything to be as concise as possible. The DMCA should be repealed. Every part of it. It’s a net negative for society.
While this likely does not affect your opinion, it's worth noting that the method they used here was not the DMCA. They completely avoided using the legal methods provided by the DMCA and used...
While this likely does not affect your opinion, it's worth noting that the method they used here was not the DMCA. They completely avoided using the legal methods provided by the DMCA and used reporting methods intended for fraud and phishing sites, not copyright infringement.
If they had issued a DMCA takedown request, it wouldn't have been to the domain registrar anyway. They would have sent it to itch.io directly and itch.io would've taken down the game. The domain registrar would have never been part of it -- which makes it very clear BrandShield weren't innocently making some sort of simple mistake by not following the normal DMCA request.
The second Hacker News (🤮) post that I posted in my comment has its own comment that links to a statement from Funko (🤮), where they say:...
The second Hacker News (🤮) post that I posted in my comment has its own comment that links to a statement from Funko (🤮), where they say:
Recently, one of our brand protection partners identified a page on itch.io imitating the Funko Fusion development website. A takedown request was issued to address this specific page. Funko did not request a takedown of the @itchio platform
They don't specifically say "DMCA" anywhere, just "takedown request", but they might have utilized DMCA? Or meant to?
Then again, what Funko says means fuck all. That Twitter (🤮) post is just corpspeak for "we didn't do anything wrong" and I don't see any reason to take them at their word.
A "takedown" usually refers to a DMCA takedown. According to itch's comment on HN, their hosts received reports of fraud and phishing, not copyright infringement. To add to it, a copyright...
A "takedown" usually refers to a DMCA takedown. According to itch's comment on HN, their hosts received reports of fraud and phishing, not copyright infringement. To add to it, a copyright infringement report wouldn't even ever touch the host or the registrar. That should have gone only to itch itself. If Sony (through one of their social features) ends up hosting material that infringes my copyright, I don't reach out to AWS.
Yes, and normally I think it would be fine to assume DMCA when someone (even a slimy corpo Twitter account) uses the word "takedown" but... The incident that occurred was an entirely different...
A "takedown" usually refers to a DMCA takedown
Yes, and normally I think it would be fine to assume DMCA when someone (even a slimy corpo Twitter account) uses the word "takedown" but...
The incident that occurred was an entirely different kind of takedown, targeting Itch itself via their host and registrar, rather than specific content on Itch, so I didn't want to make any assumptions.
Their statement is peak corpspeak though. I mean, let's break down exactly what it says:
One of Funko's "brand protection partners" (BrandShield) identified a page on Itch
A takedown request was issued to address that specific page
Funko did not request a takedown of Itch itself
What's funny about those three statements, and why I call it corpspeak, is because all three of those statements could be true, but in no way preclude Leaf's (Itch's owner's) statements about independent "fraud and phishing" reports sent to their host and registrar.
Assuming itch.io isn't lying, they explicitly state that Funko did not use DMCA requests (I think in the original Twitter thread iirc) and used the fraud and phishing report to the registrar...
Assuming itch.io isn't lying, they explicitly state that Funko did not use DMCA requests (I think in the original Twitter thread iirc) and used the fraud and phishing report to the registrar instead. As for whether they meant to... I simply don't think it's very likely that you'd mix the two up, especially when you're in BrandShield's line of business.
At the very least they need to undo this "guilty until proven innocent" crap. I understand the reasoning behind things like this - in order to retain copyright, you MUST ensure there is not...
At the very least they need to undo this "guilty until proven innocent" crap.
I understand the reasoning behind things like this - in order to retain copyright, you MUST ensure there is not rampant infringement. But the execution is unfair. If someone has birds chirping in their video and they sound too similar to a sample of birds in a copyrighted song, it's absurd to takedown (or mute) the video. (This is a real thing that has happened.)
This is a pre-AI system that shoots first and asks questions later. Any additional functionality to this that incorporates AI is only going to make things worse.
The DMCA also makes it illegal to break DRM which is why we have such a hard time with, for example, repairing the devices we own. The reason why third parties are having a hard time fixing things...
The DMCA also makes it illegal to break DRM which is why we have such a hard time with, for example, repairing the devices we own. The reason why third parties are having a hard time fixing things like tractors, ice cream machines, and cars. Every part of it robs the masses for the benefit of large corporations.
Sorry, just to clarify: may I ask if you are referring to trademark or copyright law? The former can be interpreted to require enforcement of a trademark to maintain it, but that’s not true in all...
I understand the reasoning behind things like this - in order to retain copyright, you MUST ensure there is not rampant infringement.
Sorry, just to clarify: may I ask if you are referring to trademark or copyright law? The former can be interpreted to require enforcement of a trademark to maintain it, but that’s not true in all jurisdictions (even within the US). I’m not familiar with a similar process for copyright …?
Although you could also be saying that, socially, if everyone starts distributing media for free, we’ll all collectively begin to question the murky relationship between production costs and consumer prices in the modern era. In which case I’d agree 😅
Looks like you are correct and I was not. They don't have to enforce copyright to keep it. But as you suggested, they definitely do want to enforce it when possible. The current system is fine for...
Looks like you are correct and I was not. They don't have to enforce copyright to keep it.
But as you suggested, they definitely do want to enforce it when possible. The current system is fine for copyright holders, but bad for everyone else
In the US there is definitely some degree of enforcement necessary for trademarks, but you're correct that this is not the case for copyright. It can be easy to get the two things confused as a...
In the US there is definitely some degree of enforcement necessary for trademarks, but you're correct that this is not the case for copyright. It can be easy to get the two things confused as a layperson.
This has nothing to do with DMCA or copyright at all. As it clearly states in the post, it was a false phishing report issued to itch.io's domain registrar. It's a report-based fraud prevention...
This has nothing to do with DMCA or copyright at all. As it clearly states in the post, it was a false phishing report issued to itch.io's domain registrar. It's a report-based fraud prevention system.
Tweet about the mom-calling:
https://nitter.poast.org/itchio/status/1866239798924763227 or https://x.com/itchio/status/1866239798924763227
Deets from the owner on a post on Hacker News:
And the other one: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42371481
This sounds like a new form of swatting. Site-swatting.
I haven't seen an explanation of who called the mom. Doubtful it was actually Funko, can that be pinned on BrandShield as well? I wonder if there's grounds for legal action against them, for harassment or something.
My robots have actually detected some (likely) malicious pages cropping up on itch.io lately, usually posing as official pages for android apps and distributing APKs.
Hopefully whatever this is doesn't divert attention from fighting malware. I really like the service and the significant library of DRM free titles and Linux builds.
There is a lot I could say but I will simplify everything to be as concise as possible. The DMCA should be repealed. Every part of it. It’s a net negative for society.
While this likely does not affect your opinion, it's worth noting that the method they used here was not the DMCA. They completely avoided using the legal methods provided by the DMCA and used reporting methods intended for fraud and phishing sites, not copyright infringement.
If they had issued a DMCA takedown request, it wouldn't have been to the domain registrar anyway. They would have sent it to itch.io directly and itch.io would've taken down the game. The domain registrar would have never been part of it -- which makes it very clear BrandShield weren't innocently making some sort of simple mistake by not following the normal DMCA request.
The second Hacker News (🤮) post that I posted in my comment has its own comment that links to a statement from Funko (🤮), where they say:
https://nitter.poast.org/originalfunko/status/1866255848366039468
They don't specifically say "DMCA" anywhere, just "takedown request", but they might have utilized DMCA? Or meant to?
Then again, what Funko says means fuck all. That Twitter (🤮) post is just corpspeak for "we didn't do anything wrong" and I don't see any reason to take them at their word.
A "takedown" usually refers to a DMCA takedown. According to itch's comment on HN, their hosts received reports of fraud and phishing, not copyright infringement. To add to it, a copyright infringement report wouldn't even ever touch the host or the registrar. That should have gone only to itch itself. If Sony (through one of their social features) ends up hosting material that infringes my copyright, I don't reach out to AWS.
Yes, and normally I think it would be fine to assume DMCA when someone (even a slimy corpo Twitter account) uses the word "takedown" but...
The incident that occurred was an entirely different kind of takedown, targeting Itch itself via their host and registrar, rather than specific content on Itch, so I didn't want to make any assumptions.
Their statement is peak corpspeak though. I mean, let's break down exactly what it says:
What's funny about those three statements, and why I call it corpspeak, is because all three of those statements could be true, but in no way preclude Leaf's (Itch's owner's) statements about independent "fraud and phishing" reports sent to their host and registrar.
Assuming itch.io isn't lying, they explicitly state that Funko did not use DMCA requests (I think in the original Twitter thread iirc) and used the fraud and phishing report to the registrar instead. As for whether they meant to... I simply don't think it's very likely that you'd mix the two up, especially when you're in BrandShield's line of business.
At the very least they need to undo this "guilty until proven innocent" crap.
I understand the reasoning behind things like this - in order to retain copyright, you MUST ensure there is not rampant infringement. But the execution is unfair. If someone has birds chirping in their video and they sound too similar to a sample of birds in a copyrighted song, it's absurd to takedown (or mute) the video. (This is a real thing that has happened.)
This is a pre-AI system that shoots first and asks questions later. Any additional functionality to this that incorporates AI is only going to make things worse.
The DMCA also makes it illegal to break DRM which is why we have such a hard time with, for example, repairing the devices we own. The reason why third parties are having a hard time fixing things like tractors, ice cream machines, and cars. Every part of it robs the masses for the benefit of large corporations.
Sorry, just to clarify: may I ask if you are referring to trademark or copyright law? The former can be interpreted to require enforcement of a trademark to maintain it, but that’s not true in all jurisdictions (even within the US). I’m not familiar with a similar process for copyright …?
Although you could also be saying that, socially, if everyone starts distributing media for free, we’ll all collectively begin to question the murky relationship between production costs and consumer prices in the modern era. In which case I’d agree 😅
Looks like you are correct and I was not. They don't have to enforce copyright to keep it.
But as you suggested, they definitely do want to enforce it when possible. The current system is fine for copyright holders, but bad for everyone else
It's not even very good for many, if not most copyright holders. Most people who make things don't have the legal resources of media conglomerates.
In the US there is definitely some degree of enforcement necessary for trademarks, but you're correct that this is not the case for copyright. It can be easy to get the two things confused as a layperson.
This has nothing to do with DMCA or copyright at all. As it clearly states in the post, it was a false phishing report issued to itch.io's domain registrar. It's a report-based fraud prevention system.