💀 Horrorcow Nicholas Robert Rekieta / Rekieta "Law" / Actually Criminal / @NickRekieta / "u/Early-Leopard-8351" - Polysubstance abuser, child doser, dog killer. "Lawtube pope" turned zesty Dabbleverse Redditor streamer. Swinger "whitebread ass nigga" who snuffs animals and visits 🇯🇲 BBC resorts. Legally a cuckold. Still not over his ex Aaron. Wife's bod worth $50.

[Vibralldo]

Given he reads this thread, he's probably gonna go with that now if either one of them sues him or Melton.

You should bill him for the legal advice.

Wouldn't that make it worse?
I'm saying that Nick thinks that Kurt and Sean aren't public figures, so that opens Nick up to more liability if sued because he's fucking with random civilians, right?

 

[Sneed Force One]

There's also the ToS for supertips....but what do I know. I do shoddy analysis......

View attachment 7295029

"You have the written consent, release, and/or permission of each and every identifiable individual person in your Contributions to use the name or likeness of each and every such identifiable individual person to enable inclusion and use of your Contributions in any manner contemplated by the Services and these Legal Terms."

People like Kurt, Aaron and yourself never consented to the use of likeness.
Send Melton a formal takedown notice. Nick is in clear violation of the Right of Publicity and is engaging in Misappropriation of Likeness for commercial gain.
Mods remove my post if I'm being a cowtipping faggot but fuck Pedotips.

 

[Bean Sidhe]

You can tell because Kayla is noticeably fatter and has at least two new tattoos

Can't pay his mortgage, can buy both him and her new tattoos.

Hide the pain, Kayla.

Man, talk about a smile not reaching the eyes. Nick as well.

 

[Strix454]

I'm not sure on the copyright infringement, its a weak case by all accounts.

A comicsgate cow named Liam Grey successfully used it a long while back on YT to get strikes on channels. People were using an avatar that looked like him and pretending (without AI) to talk like him. A legal copyright infringement case might be difficult. But getting TOS violations on YT might be possible.

 

[Captain Manning]

There's also the ToS for supertips....but what do I know. I do shoddy analysis......

View attachment 7295029

My question with that is: Can you compel enforcement of a ToS, when the entity responsible for drafting and enforcing a ToS doesn't give a shit?

The issue here is that it's Melton's company. He also regularly ignores that clause on his own.

Wouldn't you have to lean more on a law than a ToS to get him to comply?

Wouldn't that make it worse?
I'm saying that Nick thinks that Kurt and Sean aren't public figures, so that opens Nick up to more liability if sued because he's fucking with random civilians, right?

Absolutely correct. But Nick is an idiot, so you should still bill him for giving him advice that sabotages him.

ETA: Nick doesn't understand the "public figure doctrine" at all. I figured that out back during Weebwars.

 

[Owlbear]

My question with that is: Can you compel enforcement of a ToS, when the entity responsible for drafting and enforcing a ToS doesn't give a shit?

This has as much to do with Melton's ToS as it does with copyright. This is about SEEEAAAAN's NIL rights. NIL rights are new and subtle and still have a bit of a legal patchwork but are becoming much more enforceable largely thanks to NCAA athletes. Rekieta wouldn't know this because he's not a practicing lawyer and the jurisprudence is mostly very young on NIL rights (hence his sophomoric copyright "analysis"). Melton's lawyer probably put that in his ToS so that he would have cover from retards like Nick using people's voices without permission.

 

[Laquisha Guntermensch]

Lord Chaos Balldo
What a fag.

Calling Balldo a fag reminded me that he sang a George Michael song to make fun of Ralph on the Killstream Karaoke many years ago:

 

[Gobermental Supervisor]

My question with that is: Can you compel enforcement of a ToS, when the entity responsible for drafting and enforcing a ToS doesn't give a shit?

The issue here is that it's Melton's company. He also regularly ignores that clause on his own.

Wouldn't you have to lean more on a law than a ToS to get him to comply?

You enforce it on Youtube, not Melton.
Just send them a C&D about violation of "Right to Publicity" by the company supertips.gg used on the following channels "<list>" and they will shut the channels faster than you can blink.

 

[AncientPhosphur]

By God he’s going to do it isn’t he. Rekieta is going for a hat trick. 3 time lolcow of the year, back to back to back.

 

[Stiffy]

We actually discussed "likeness" a.i. voice model abuse in my music business law class last week. My professor who is a longtime attorney said it's still a gray area the courts are going to have to figure out. She did say that the more famous you are the more likely you would have a case. For instance the fat greasy nonce could not use Frank Sinatra, Michael Jackson, or any major familiar celebrity a.i. voice without them bringing the hammer down. Small potatoes e-celebs would probably have to prove that Fatrick's Supertips voices are causing harm. They are being misused in lewd and disturbing ways. Several Onion degenerates have made comments about pedophilia using the Supertips voices.

 

[Fapcop]

However! Its pretty blatant violation of YouTube privacy guidelines.

View attachment 7295026

Oh noes! I sure hope Nick’s numerous enemies don’t start mass reporting him!

It would be terrible if he lost his streaming gig and had to work at Pizza Hut to please the PO!

 

[Maude Snew]

I can't get over how much she changed up her face. She legit looks like a different person. Whether going from Gollum to Madonna-in-the-making is an upgrade I'll leave to the likes of Fapcop. She looks uncanny as hell to me, before and after the nip and tuck.

Nick must have walked into that surgeon's office and slid him this picture, going "Yeah, I'm really into the great Cornholio but with tits, can you make that happen?"

And the surgeon made it so.

 

[AnOminous]

Sean, I suggest you wait until after he loses the Monty lawsuit and then publicly declare that you're suing him for copyright infringement.

Where's the copyright? The only thing I see there is the image thumbnails. Ordinarily that kind of thing is never going to be infringing. I think in the special circumstances of how they're being used, it's arguable they're infringing, but it's a novel and I think weak argument.

 

[Sneed Force One]

Trying to watch Nick is exhausting, he's so nervous and dead air. He loops back on a story at least four times and intercuts with a tangent just as much.
I'm witnessing Mandyposters getting shadowbanned within seconds. Same with anyone who mentions April. Not Our Wife though, amusingly.

 

[Gobermental Supervisor]

Where's the copyright? The only thing I see there is the image thumbnails. Ordinarily that kind of thing is never going to be infringing. I think in the special circumstances of how they're being used, it's arguable they're infringing, but it's a novel and I think weak argument.

It is not copyright, it is Right to Publicity, which the State of Nevada has a law for. It protects voice too.
And it covers emulations of the voice.

 

[Me262PrinceOfTurboJet]

Nick must have walked into that surgeon's office and slid him this picture, going "Yeah, I'm really into the great Cornholio but with tits, can you make that happen?"
View attachment 7295135
And the surgeon made it so.
View attachment 7295134

"Return the slaaaaab or suffer my cuuuurse."

 

[Captain Manning]

You enforce it on Youtube, not Melton.
Just send them a C&D about violation of "Right to Publicity" by the company supertips.gg used on the following channels "<list>" and they will shut the channels faster than you can blink.

Right, but you wouldn't enforce the Supertips ToS on YouTube. I presume that thing is meaningless if Melton wouldn't actually enforce it.

@Owlbear answered my question. You go with general NIL/publicity rights, or something in YouTube's ToS.

 

[Trans Randy]

I can't get over how much she changed up her face. She legit looks like a different person. Whether going from Gollum to Madonna-in-the-making is an upgrade I'll leave to the likes of Fapcop. She looks uncanny as hell to me, before and after the nip and tuck.

all I can say that apart from hair color, she now looks a lot like April.
Which I'm sure is just a coincidence and not a completely broken woman trying to keep up with her baby daddy's sidepiece.

 

[Soapmore]

Nick showed his prescription Adderall bottle, which prompted a chatter to say:

...To which Nick replied that he hasn't been diagnosed ADHD, but he's pretty sure he has it.

 

[AnOminous]

Small potatoes e-celebs would probably have to prove that Fatrick's Supertips voices are causing harm.

It isn't solely celebrities. The right protects individuals from having their image commercially exploited without their consent, regardless of whether they intended to exploit it themselves. Even in the most important case involving an actual celebrity, Waits v. Frito-Lay, Inc., Waits didn't allege he was deprived of income by someone making money off his image.

In fact, he argued he explicitly did not want his likeness (in this case his voice) commercially exploited at all on principle, and that part of his core reputation was that he rejected such crass behavior as doing commercials.

The right also implicates privacy and reputation. A case that isn't U.S. but presents a similar issue is the TechnoViking case. You might recall this old meme:

The Viking himself comes in at about a minute in.

Is it an infringement just to have the video? Pretty obviously not, it's been up 14 years.

However, the original filmer started commercially exploiting it, selling merch, and similar things. TechnoViking sued and bankrupted the guy.

I'd argue using people's AI voices to collect "donations" is commercial exploitation of their image and falls well within the ground covered by the cause of action.

I'll note right of publicity (and the other rights sometimes named differently in different states) may look like an intellectual property right, but it isn't. The economic end of it looks like an IP right, but it also covers privacy, reputational and other dignitary rights. It isn't really a single clear-cut right so much as a bundle of intertwined rights, and violating even one can establish a right to relief.

Using a replica of someone's own voice to defame them certainly implicates dignitary interests.

Throw in that most of the people who would object to Pedomelton's exploitation of their likenesses are in competition for the same superchat/tip money and you have a bunch of other cool business torts.

tl;dr something could pass muster under "fair use" if you were just talking copyright, yet still violate other reputational rights.