- Joined
- Jul 31, 2018
This. We've seen the spastic monkey dance a million times. Time to electrify the cage floor and get some real emotion...
[20-Aug-2022] Another React stream [TIHYDP MGS2] + DarkSydeHoarder - He was only pretended to be retarded, everyone.
- Thread starter Traian007
- Start date
-
🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
- Status
LegendaryUncommon
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2021
Real Emotion and Phil don't go together unless he's nutting on stream or crying because PandaLee is getting railed somewhere by someone with an actual sense for money.
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2019
When it comes to AJ's decision, this is my perspective on his rationale; I'm not going to speak for him, but it's how I see it.
For a disclaimer: I'm not even his fan or regular watcher, so I'm not purposefully trying to be biased.
It comes down to your stance on "does the end justify the means"? I can see some Kiwifarmers' response to that being yes, while AJ's to that being no, evidenced by his actions.
Starting from 2 premises: DSP's reaction to the TIHYDP would be covered under Fair Use by most / all common sense standards, despite not having permission from the creator (AJ), much like unrecorded DSP segments are also uploaded by detractors without his consent, while being protected under Fair Use; AJ does acknowledge that the reaction is transformative enough for DSP to do, and he should be able to have the freedom to publish.
The end does justify the means:
AJ files a copyright claim for DSP's reaction.
This goes against the notion that DSP should have the freedom to publish such transformative content, it betrays his ideals.
However, the reason for doing so: DSP is a scammer, if he can be taken down or screwed with by such means, even if they're unrelated to his scam, it is justified.
He arguably does not think this way, which brings the other course of action, and what he did: not filing the claim, which does align with AJ's ideals/2nd premise of freedom when publishing transformative content.
Why private the video then? It means that he does not have his blessings for reacting to his video, much like AJ does not have DSP's blessings for making TIHYDP, while acknowledging that legally, they can if under Fair Use.
"I may not like your rection to my content, but I won't oppose your freedom to do so if you manage to get the material. The fact is that as long as it's transformative enough, it's a new work of creation that you made and should not be censored after its conception."
And so this has the consequence that DSP's own standards justify restreams/videos/edits of his content as long as it's transformative enough, even if without his permission, because this is what happened here with the TIHYDP and that was his reasoning.
Someone mentioned that AJ's video wasn't transformative enough to begin with in order to follow this logic, but it was shown how it arguably is, as evidenced by a real life example of similar nature.
That's how I see the half-full glass by AJ's reasoning, it further devoids DSP's arguments and stance on detractor rebroadcasts since he checkmated himself, all the while AJ trying to be true to his ideals.
For a disclaimer: I'm not even his fan or regular watcher, so I'm not purposefully trying to be biased.
It comes down to your stance on "does the end justify the means"? I can see some Kiwifarmers' response to that being yes, while AJ's to that being no, evidenced by his actions.
Starting from 2 premises: DSP's reaction to the TIHYDP would be covered under Fair Use by most / all common sense standards, despite not having permission from the creator (AJ), much like unrecorded DSP segments are also uploaded by detractors without his consent, while being protected under Fair Use; AJ does acknowledge that the reaction is transformative enough for DSP to do, and he should be able to have the freedom to publish.
The end does justify the means:
AJ files a copyright claim for DSP's reaction.
This goes against the notion that DSP should have the freedom to publish such transformative content, it betrays his ideals.
However, the reason for doing so: DSP is a scammer, if he can be taken down or screwed with by such means, even if they're unrelated to his scam, it is justified.
He arguably does not think this way, which brings the other course of action, and what he did: not filing the claim, which does align with AJ's ideals/2nd premise of freedom when publishing transformative content.
Why private the video then? It means that he does not have his blessings for reacting to his video, much like AJ does not have DSP's blessings for making TIHYDP, while acknowledging that legally, they can if under Fair Use.
"I may not like your rection to my content, but I won't oppose your freedom to do so if you manage to get the material. The fact is that as long as it's transformative enough, it's a new work of creation that you made and should not be censored after its conception."
And so this has the consequence that DSP's own standards justify restreams/videos/edits of his content as long as it's transformative enough, even if without his permission, because this is what happened here with the TIHYDP and that was his reasoning.
Someone mentioned that AJ's video wasn't transformative enough to begin with in order to follow this logic, but it was shown how it arguably is, as evidenced by a real life example of similar nature.
That's how I see the half-full glass by AJ's reasoning, it further devoids DSP's arguments and stance on detractor rebroadcasts since he checkmated himself, all the while AJ trying to be true to his ideals.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2018
Not bored enough to private a video and talk some shit though? Just bored enough to not hold DSP accountable for stealing his video. C'mon now...
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2020
To be fair to the guy, he'd sometimes go months on end without ever tweeting that much or ever talking about Phil, he's only really resurfaced again in recent weeks, yeah he's been "stream sniping" Phil in street fighter here and there, but again that's been inconsistent at best, I wouldn't say he was someone like Gojitenks who would follow him almost every street fighter session, just someone who popped in every now and then when the time it suited him, it was never his moral obligation to hold Phil to account, quite frankly not even we are.Not bored enough to private a video and talk some shit though? Just bored enough to not hold DSP accountable for stealing his video. C'mon now...
Point being the guy is not your typical DSP troll, Phil seems to occupy very little of his head space, but if you believed everything Phil says you'd think the guy has have an unhealthy obsessin about him and wants to "murder him" because he's unhinged or something.
I can see why people might be disappointed about the path he chose, but I can understand why Aj made the choice he did, ultimately he just wanted to piss Phil off a little bit because that's what he wanted to set out to do in the first place, not attempt to meddle with his personal life and toe the line of fair use and copyright law.
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2018
This completely misses my point though.
His consistency as a detractor is irrelevant here. People dip in and out, I get that.
It's the fact that he recinded his permission to use his video, privated his video specifically to mess with DSP, Retweeted DSP calling him an "irrideemable piece of shit" and that he should "go fuck yourself" etc etc etc.
These are not the actions of someone too bored by DSP to retaliate.
- Status