TED Entertainment Inc. v. Alexandra Marwa Saber, Morgan Kamal Majed, and Kasey Caviness, California 2:25-cv-5564, 2:25-cv-5565,Missouri 4:25-cv-459 - Ethan Klein Suing three women and 10 redditors for Copyright Infringement.

[Stupid Sexy Flanders]

yeah, I posted about these in the Ethan Klein thread.
Nothing of note happened there yet, so I have not posted any updates.

Ethan appears to be aiming at creating new precedent about AI companies stealing copyright protected content and specifically aiming at them circumventing protection against scraping.

Odd that none of the other leftie sperg creators seem to bother considering their strong stance on AI. Leave it to the Jew to sort it out I guess.

 

[HackerX]

Has Denims said anything about this ruling or new filing?

For the former, no. Maybe she listened to her lawyer and chose to remain silent? The latter just came out, so I wouldn't have expected anything from her regardless until someone explained it to her.

I particularly like this part:

How does shit like saying they play into a fair use argument anyways? Even if she did creatively transform/critique it, does that even matter when you outright state your product exists solely to deprive the original product of views? I'm sure I'm overly dumbing this down in my head, but it seems like if the judge interprets Denim's infringement as a 'spirit of the law' rather than the 'letter of the law', she's absolutely fucked.

 

[Irene and 22 others]

She's absolutely fucked and if her lawyer isn't advising her to settle immediately he's as stupid as his client. Even if she were willing to subject herself to some humiliation ritual to get let off the hook, now that the Reddit mods are roped into this Ethan isn't going to settle until he gets his pound of flesh from them as well. At least one of them is going to want out badly enough to flip on everyone else.

 

[Unknown God]

How does shit like saying they play into a fair use argument anyways? Even if she did creatively transform/critique it, does that even matter when you outright state your product exists solely to deprive the original product of views?

Glad you asked! Because Mr. Bar-Nissin has an answer.

 

[AnOminous]

I'm sure I'm overly dumbing this down in my head, but it seems like if the judge interprets Denim's infringement as a 'spirit of the law' rather than the 'letter of the law', she's absolutely fucked.

Even if she didn't absolutely screw herself on the critical fourth factor, she loses all the others too. You can't just play the vast majority of what you're copying while occasionally grunting incomprehensibly and commenting on stuff that has nothing to do with the original.

If you make a 20 minute criticism using 2 minutes of another video, you probably will be okay if there aren't other factors. She barely introduced any relevant content at all. Reaction videos are in a very gray legal area and she went well beyond anything that has ever been upheld as fair use.

 

[HackerX]

Glad you asked! Because Mr. Bar-Nissin has an answer.

View attachment 8945423

Ahh geez. Unless Denims can pull some shit to prove that quote was taken extremely out of context, it seems like she's what we in the business call "fucked". Either that, or praying the court wildly construes and/or interprets a bunch of shit in her favor.

I'll admit I can't help but appreciate these retards (Denims and Reddit mods) screwing themselves this hard for updoots and dopamine. Most people only temporarily get laughed at when they do dumb shit like that, but they went above and beyond. Getting themselves wrapped up in a seemingly unwinnable copyright lawsuit, against a rich, well-connected Jew (with a literal IDF wife) of all people, is definitely at the top of my list of nightmare scenarios.

 

[mindlessobserver]

How does shit like saying they play into a fair use argument anyways? Even if she did creatively transform/critique it, does that even matter when you outright state your product exists solely to deprive the original product of views? I'm sure I'm overly dumbing this down in my head, but it seems like if the judge interprets Denim's infringement as a 'spirit of the law' rather than the 'letter of the law', she's absolutely fucked.

It matters a great deal. Many legal arguments of guilt and liability turn on what "the mind" is thinking at the time of the action. Obvious example being the difference between Manslaughter and Murder. To be Manslaughter, you can't be intending to kill. To be Murder, you have to be intending to kill. The question of intent rests solely on what is going on between your two ears. Which is opaque, and often has to be proven laboriously. Unless of course you are retard and tell everyone you intended to kill the son of a bitch before doing just that. Then its very easy to decide whether or not its Murder or Manslaughter.

Here, its much the same as in the Akila Case. When you say the intention of your actions is to cause someone else financial harm, well, you are admitting to a tort. Causing someone financial harm deliberately is often the nexus on which most civil torts reside. Usually, its burdensome for a plaintiff to prove the malicious intentions of the defendant, but if the defendant has just gone out and admitted publicly their intentions then its not difficult at all. Akila ended up having to pay fee's because she outright said she was just using the copyright act to cause Sargon financial damage and not to expressly vindicate any rights she had. She even phrased it in such a deliberate way as to make it very easy for the court to punish her.

These Reddit Retards have essentially done the same thing. You can't claim the fair use defense when you are publicly saying the entire point of what you are doing is to not use the material fairly.

 

[Potentially Criminal]

After the judge up in San Francisco making such determinations with a cursory glance at the facts, Denims needs to settle NOW.

Daddy Hasan ain't coming to save you.

 

[Gobermental Supervisor]

After the judge up in San Francisco making such determinations with a cursory glance at the facts, Denims needs to settle NOW.

Daddy Hasan ain't coming to save you.

Stop giving good advice.

We need this to go to trial so Denims can be humiliated on the stand with critical questions about the content of her streams.

"Miss Saber, how often did your purchase restreaming rights for the content shown on your streams?"

<Denims Fish Stare>

"Miss Saber, could you summarize the 'Content Nuke Hasan Piker' for us in your own words?

"Were you aware that your most successful moment as a streamer happened when you were showing content you stole from Mr. Klein? How does that make you feel?"

 

[Irene and 22 others]

Stop giving good advice.

We need this to go to trial so Denims can be humiliated on the stand with critical questions about the content of her streams.

"Miss Saber, how often did your purchase restreaming rights for the content shown on your streams?"

<Denims Fish Stare>

"Miss Saber, could you summarize the 'Content Nuke Hasan Piker' for us in your own words?

"Were you aware that your most successful moment as a streamer happened when you were showing content you stole from Mr. Klein? How does that make you feel?"

"Miss Saber, how would you feel if you did not have breakfast this morning?"

 

[Maraschino]

Has Denims said anything about this ruling or new filing?

It's in her best interest to shut the fuck up until the lawsuit is finished.

Odd that none of the other leftie sperg creators seem to bother considering their strong stance on AI. Leave it to the Jew to sort it out I guess.

They don't seem to bother because A) they aren't willing to spend the money, and B) they want to steal people's shit, but they don't want to look like they're stealing people's shit. Which is what ReactGate was mostly about. The Twitch cunts who were defending that garbage behavior then are still doing it today:

I didn't infringe on your content.
And if I did, it wasn't that bad, because it's just a video.
And if it was bad, it's not a big deal, because everyone does it.
And if it is a big deal, it's not my fault, because Twitch does nothing to stop it.
And if it was my fault, I didn't mean to, because maybe I would've reacted more if your content was "good enough".
And if I did mean to, didn't you know there's a genocide going on in Gaza?

You do not hate these faggots enough.

Even if she did creatively transform/critique it, does that even matter when you outright state your product exists solely to deprive the original product of views?

It doesn't help that she says it AND her audience seems to believe that is the purpose for the stream: stealing from Ethan. It's like that bit from Key and Peele where Peele's character wrote a song admitting to the crime (which is also ironically applicable to the D4vd case that's ongoing).

She's absolutely fucked and if her lawyer isn't advising her to settle immediately he's as stupid as his client. Even if she were willing to subject herself to some humiliation ritual to get let off the hook, now that the Reddit mods are roped into this Ethan isn't going to settle until he gets his pound of flesh from them as well.

You forget she's incredibly fucking stupid and incredibly fucking smug, despite having zero redeeming qualities as a person or as a streamer. Being "above average" in looks means nothing if you have an insufferable fucking personality who seems to believe she can do whatever she wants to whoever she wants, because she believes she's a lot smarter and more insightful than she actually is (which is zero).

I believe she legitimately believes she still has a chance. The longer she waits the less likely Ethan wants to settle. Especially if she truly doesn't have information on the snarkers. Getting to slap the shit out of malicious copyright infringers is nice, but he wants the people who tried to mess with his family. He can take the souls of Denims and Frogan (and if she is dumb enough to get dragged back in, Kaceytron), but his ultimate win condition is destroying the snark mods. I personally hope he gets all of them, because I've been wanting those fucksticks punished for this shit for years.

against a rich, well-connected Jew (with a literal IDF wife) of all people

IDF wife?

View attachment 2169162

 

[AnOminous]

IDF wife?

Hila Klein is an Israeli who was in the IDF.

 

[Maraschino]

Hila Klein is an Israeli who was in the IDF.

I'm aware, I was bringing up the recurring bit that Null likes to play the Sven animation of Hila shooting Palestinians whenever Hila gets mentioned.

 

[Terrifik]

Juice from the net

https://x.com/Leigha_Sapienti/status/2051477468763033654

Rolling for Optics
4:05