Current Events > Copyright troll exploit YouTube and extorts channel to pay £4,600 ($6,000)

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwMPSdTOfQA

https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-51090857

https://reclaimthenet.org/jukin-media-fair-use-mcr/

Jukin Media, who deal in licensing viral videos, recently presented YouTuber MxR Plays with a demand to pay $6,000 in fees for allegedly violating copyright by using content the company says it owns.
Jukin also threatened that unless MxR Plays pays up, it would issue a copyright strike against the channel and take it down. MxR Plays, however, believes that the way footage from Jukin clips was used falls under fair use in other words, is permitted under copyright law.
This has in the meantime grown into a controversy, with accusations that Jukin were effectively extorting the channel for money. Hundreds of thousands of eyes are now on the case, including vast amounts of fans supporting the YouTuber, but also legal professionals looking at how the situation may play out, and if it might set any precedents.
One of them, Leonard French, took to Twitter to ask Jukin about their understanding of fair use. The reply he got revealed that Jukin may not have much of a leg to stand in when it comes to their action against MxR. This came out when Jukin referred to a prior fair use case and lawsuit apparently citing it as a precedent that backs up the company's position in the MxR Play controversy. But in reality, that judgment by mostly went against Jukin.
We consider fair use in these matters, and we disagree strongly that this constitutes fair use. As you mention we've fought in court over similar usage in the past, Jukin said on Twitter, getting heavily ratioed.

However, French goes through the judgment, explaining that the case never received a verdict from a jury because it was settled before it went to court. It centered around a video-making company, Equals Three, who sued Jukin for claiming copyright infringement, and asked the judge to declare that none took place.

The Court must now weigh the four factors in light of copyrights purpose. See id. In so doing, the Court notes that transformative works generally further copyrights goal of promoting the arts and sciences. Campbell, 510 U.S. at 579. Here, Equals Threes episodes (except Sheep to Balls) are highly transformative and use of Jukins videos only what is reasonably necessary to achieve their transformative purpose. The first and third factors thus strongly favor fair use. There is no proof of cognizable harm to any actual or potential market, and thus the fourth factor favors neither party. Moreover, though the second factor weighs against fair use, it is of little weight in light of Equals Threes episodes transformativeness. Moreover, Jukins videos were published before Equals Three used them. Thus, on balance, the factors weigh in favor of fair use for all episodes except Sheep to Balls.

I think that undoes a lot of what Jukin just said on Twitter, Leonard French concluded. They actually gave us a case to look up and that case went against them.

YouTube copyright being shitty as usual.


---

SO these people don't make the clips that just pay random clips. Then say oh look we own this pay up. While smart , pretty shitty.

---

Always go chaotic good. Tell them to kiss ass

---

WesternMedia posted...

MxR Plays, however, believes that the way footage from Jukin clips was used falls under fair use

Well I guess that settles it. He believes it's fair use so it must be

---

They made Jeannie cry. You don't make Jeannie cry.

---

She's cute.

---

Dunno who any of these people are but I bet this will be the best thing to ever happen to their channel once the dust settles.
---

Jukin Media is cancer. They make nothing of their own, they just go around paying viral video creators for copyrights to their content.

I like tracking down video source links and half the time the original is nowhere to be found because Jukin copyrighted it for their own channel/website. >_>

Tyranthraxus posted...

Well I guess that settles it. He believes it's fair use so it must be

It's entirely possible the vids weren't even owned by Jukin at the time he clipped them, considering how the company operates.
---

I just started watching MXR Plays because their videos randomly popped up on my suggestions one day, and I find them quite entertaining. I hope they can get out of this, because threatening to remove a YouTube channel unless someone pays thousands is kinda a dick move.

Also standard "They made Jeannie cry" meme

Also from what I hear the CEO of Jukin Media closed his Twitter account lol. No matter who's right, Jukin has to realize that a crapton of people online are supporting Henry and Jeannie, and that this is terribad publicity. Henry made a galaxy brain decision to show Jeannie crying, since that makes Jukin look like heartless assholes lol

---

Tyranthraxus posted...

Well I guess that settles it. He believes it's fair use so it must be

Finish reading the passage

---

I actually watched that lawyer's coverage of this whole thing a few days ago. He has a video where he basically reads the entire court case and adds his own insight to it. In all truth Jukin Media has no case whatsoever here and is just trying to bully MxR into paying.

Not to mention that the day the CEO closed his social media accounts is the same day that French's video on the Equals Three case went up.

---

Well they settled it. MXR couldnt say the conditions but he said that they reached a compromise and that he should be able to keep making videos. Jeannies tears broke them.

---

Sabram posted...

I actually watched that lawyer's coverage of this whole thing a few days ago. He has a video where he basically reads the entire court case and adds his own insight to it. In all truth Jukin Media has no case whatsoever here and is just trying to bully MxR into paying.

Not to mention that the day the CEO closed his social media accounts is the same day that French's video on the Equals Three case went up.

Another lawyer says Jukin does have a case, and copyright law is very very very muddled and can go either way. Looking through MxR's videos, some of them do not fall under fair use, as they either show the entire video instead of only what is needed, or the most important parts, or have very few if any comments during showing the footage. Though said lawyer also says Jukin lost in court of similar stuff before, but it all depends on the judge and jury and will be very very expensive to pursue.

Jukin still an asshole company, but has some legal leg to stand on.

---

Not really sure what this has to do with YouTube's shitty copyright policy tbqh, this appears to be 2 third party companies battling it out amongst themselves

---

eston posted...

Not really sure what this has to do with YouTube's shitty copyright policy tbqh, this appears to be 2 third party companies battling it out amongst themselves

The 3rd strike rule YT has that allows a company to delete anyone's channel however they wish, since they can just strike any channel without any retribution.

---

Good ending it seems
https://reclaimthenet.org/mxr-jukin-media-settle/

---

Jukin Media sounds like something that doesn't need to exist tbh.