Hacker Timesnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | more superasn's commentslogin

This is the new source of income and a lot of media orgs are getting paid - take ANI in India.

Theyve been hitting YouTubers like Mohak Mangal, Nitish Rajput, Dhruv Rathee with copyright strikes for using just a few seconds of news clips which you would think is fair use.

Then they privately message creators demanding $60000 to remove the strikes or else the channel gets deleted after the third strike.

It s not about protecting content anymore it's copyright extortion. Fair use doesn't matter. System like Youtube makes it easy to abuse and nearly impossible to fight.

It s turning into a business model: pay otherwise your channels with millions of subs get deleted

[1] https://the420.in/dhruv-rathee-mohak-mangal-nitish-rajput-an...


'Which you would think is fair use' - I must admit I wouldn't think that. When I consider Indian content creators making use of clips from Indian media organisations I can't really imagine why Indian copyright law fair dealing provisions, which are far narrower than the US provisions, wouldn't apply. Sure, you get to argue the strike on Youtube using their DMCA based system, but that has no legal bearing on your liability under Indian law.

I really like this aspect of US copyright law. I think the recent Anthropic judgement is a great example of how flexible US law is. I wish more jurisdictions would adopt it.


> Indian copyright law fair dealing provisions, which are far narrower than the US provisions

Are they really? I've been believing the opposite. What fair use does US allow that India doesn't?


Very different in character. The US fair use four factor test (https://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/four-factors/) is really flexible. You don't need to fall into an enumerated exception to infringement to argue that your use is transformative, won't substitute in the marketplace, etc.

Look at the famous Authors Guild, Inc. v. Google, Inc. case. Google scanned every work they could put their hands on and showed excerpts to searching users. Copying and distribution on an incredible scale! Yet, they get to argue that it won't substitute in the marketplace (the snippets are too small to prevent people buying a book), it's a transformative use (this is about searching books not reading books), and the actual disclosed text is small (even if the copying in the backend is large scale).

On the other hand, fair dealing is purpose specific. Those enumerated purposes vary across jurisdictions and India's seems broadish (I live in a different fair dealing jurisdiction). Reading s52 your purposes are:

- private or personal use, including research

- criticism or review, whether of that work or of any other work

- reporting of current events and current affairs, including the reporting of a lecture delivered in public.

Within those confines, you then get to argue purpose (e.g. how transformative), amount used, market effect, nature of the copyrighted work, etc. But if your use doesn't fall into the allowed purposes, you're out of luck to begin with.

I'm not familiar enough with Indian common law to know if the media clips those youtubers you mentioned should fall within the reporting purpose. I'm sure the answer would be complex. But all of this is to say, we often treat the world like it has one copyright law (one of the better ones) when that's not the case! Something appreciated by TFA.


If what you say were true, Indian media conglomerates like the Times Group would be clamoring to sue the hell out of Google for every excerpt shown, yet I haven't heard of a single such case. What ANI did with Indian Youtubers was exploiting the Youtube platform's broken copyright reporting mechanism, not actual litigation.


https://bytescare.com/blog/fair-use-copyright-india-vs-us

The big one being transformative use is fair-use in the US but not India.


> It s not about protecting content anymore it's copyright extortion.

It's always been about copyright extortion.


Is there a video feed of the cockpit inside the black box?

If not there should be one as even my simple home wifi camera can record hours of hd video on the small sd card. And If there is, wouldn't that help to instantly identify such things?


No neither black box stores video. One stores audio on flash memory and the other stores flight details, sensors etc.

I don’t think video is a bad idea. I assume there is a reason why it wasn’t done. Data wise black boxes actually store very little data (maybe a 100mbs), I don’t know if that is due to how old they are, or the requirements of withstanding extremes.


This isn’t true. This was a 787. It does not use a separate recorder for voice and data (CVR, FDR).

(Most media outlets also got this wrong and were slow to make corrections. )

Rather, it uses a EAFR (Enhanced airborne flight recorder) which basically combines the functions. They’re also more advanced than older systems and can record for longer. The 787 has two of them - the forward one has its own power supply too.

There should be video as well, but I’m not sure what was recovered. Not necessarily part of the flight data recording, but there are other video systems.

https://www.geaerospace.com/sites/default/files/enhanced-air...


That's really interesting. From reading air crash reports there's a lot of times I've seen."Nothing is known about the last 30 seconds because the damage broke the connection to the flight recorders in the tail"


In the US, the NTSB has been recommending it for over 20 years. The pilot unions have been blocking it, due to privacy and other things.

I'm not in aviation. But my between-the-lines straightforward reading is that unions see it as something with downsides (legal liability) but not much upside. It could be that there are a million tiny regulations that are known by everyone to be nonsensical, perhaps contradictory or just not in line with reality and it's basically impossible to be impeccably perfect if HD high fps video observation is done on them 24/7. Think about your own job and your boss's job or your home renovation work etc.

Theoretically they could say, ok, but the footage can only be used in case the plane crashes or something serious happens. Can't use it to detect minor deviations in the tiniest details. But we know that once the camera is there, there will be a push to scrutinize it all the time for everything. Next time there will be AI monitoring systems that check for alertness. Next time it will be checking for "psychological issues". Next time they will record and store it all and then when something happens, they will in hindsight point out some moment and sue the airline for not detecting that psychological cue and ban the pilot. It's a mess. If there's no footage, there's no such mess.

The truth is, you can't bring down the danger from human factors to absolute zero. It's exceedingly rare to have sabotage. In every human interaction, this can happen. The answer cannot be 24/7 full-blown totalitarian surveillance state on everyone. You'd have to prove that the danger from pilot is bigger than from any other occupation group. Should we also put bodycam on all medical doctors and record all surgeries and all interactions? It would help with malpractice cases. How about all teachers in school? To prevent child abuse. Etc. Etc.

Regulation is always in balance and in context of evidence possibilities and jurisprudence "reasonableness". If the interpretation is always to the letter and there is perfect surveillance, you need to adjust the rules to be actually realistic. If observation is hard and courts use common sense, rules can be more strict and stupid because "it looks good on paper".

You also have to think about potential abuses of footage. It would be an avenue for aircraft manufacturers, airlines, FAA, etc to push more blame on the pilots, because their side becomes more provable but the manufacturing side is not as much. You could then mandate camera video evidence for every maintenance task like with door plugs.

I wonder how the introduction of police body cam footage changed regulations of how police has to act. Along the lines of "hm, stuff on this footage is technically illegal but is clearly necessary, let's update the rules".


Airlines would certainly try to surveil regularly, but if the video data is only sent to the sealed FDR, they'd need to tamper with the system.

Additionally, footage could be encrypted with the NTSB having the keys.

Or simply make it a crime to use the footage in non-accident situations (this should be applied to other forms of surveillance, too ...).


If you work in a job where the lives of hundreds could be ended in seconds due to an error or intentional action then there is no excuse to not have critical control surfaces recorded at all times. Non-commercial/private flights/flight instructors and trainees have cameras, trains have camera, stores have cameras, casinos have cameras, buses have cameras, workers who work for ride hailing services have cameras as do millions of other people who just drive.

Hopefully other countries will start deploying recording systems or start forcing manufacturers of planes to have these integrated into cockpits.


> The answer cannot be 24/7 full-blown totalitarian surveillance state on everyone.

Surveillance is actually pretty common in many high-risk environments. And piloting is very much not just any other job but an exceedingly rare situation where the lives of hundreds of people are in the hands of only two people without anyone else being able to do anything to influence the outcome.

That pilot unions don't want surveillance is to be expected (the union is there to act in the pilots interest) but ultimately it isn't just up to them.

> Should we also put bodycam on all medical doctors and record all surgeries and all interactions?

Yes. We are finally starting to do so for police. These are all situations where an individual or very small team has direct control over the life of others who can't defend themselves.


Not sure why something so important isn't included.

Heck they can make a back up directly to the cloud in addition to black box considering I'm able to watch YouTube in some flights nowadays.


ALPA (pilot union) has consistently objected to cockpit video recording. I believe other pilot unions have a generally similar stance.


So? Those unions act in the interests of pilots so that is to be expected. That doesn't mean that a regulator should be swayed by their objections.


My thoughts exactly.

In fact, you could add some AI to it, even, as an embedded system with a decent GPU can be bought for under $2000. It could help prevent issues from happening in the first place. Of course airgapped from the actual control system. But an AI can be very helpful in detecting and diagnosing problems.


It just takes me to the pricing page after signup and I can't access anything.

Pretty sure this is against the Show Hn guidelines.


I appreciate you bringing up this issue about the Cloudflare challenges making it hard to browse. I had a similar experience where I couldn't access jsfiddle even without using a VPN. As a result, I switched to a different platform for my coding experiments.

JsFiddle used to be my favorite for quickly testing out code snippets. It's a shame that due to Cloudflare hurdles, I've stopped using it and don't plan on going back.

It may not be much but as more websites and businesses lose genuine web traffic like this, Cloudflare might eventually listen and fix this mess.


One concrete thing we can do is to stop seeing Cloudflare as an easy, unproblematic solution. Bring up issues like this when people suggest using it.


While I can't totally relate to this scenario I feel something like this playing video games. I'm happiest when I'm working towards the goal and once you defeat the big boss / get the best gems, etc you're just standing there wondering what now.

I think the most exhilarating part is before you are about to beat the big boss (which in this case would be the offer for acquisition i suppose).


Yes it's the only way to watch documentaries at 2x speed but the quality becomes crap


Have you tried RescueTime? It's a similar app that prompts you to log your activities every time you unlock your phone.

It's surprising to see how much time can slip by unnoticed each day. Using it can really make you more mindful of how you're spending it.


> Have you tried RescueTime? It's a similar app that prompts you to log your activities every time you unlock your phone.

I didn't know they had such a feature. I'm going to check this out.

> It's surprising to see how much time can slip by unnoticed each day. Using it can really make you more mindful of how you're spending it.

Exactly. I have so many unnecessary phone pickups during the day. Without such apps that would slip unnoticed. Also, it's worth mentioning that when you notice those moments at least in my case it makes you feel guilty a bit that you picking it up unconsciously, but maybe that's my individual behaviour.


Does it do this on iOS? I just cancelled RT because it crashed on my work computer all the time but if the phone app weren’t useless that might be different.


Here is some feedback. Your landing page needs samples. After spending 30s I do have some idea about what you're trying to do but some real life samples of input and output will show me exactly what to expect and how good the quality is and eventually if it's worth my time to sign up for it.


Very good input, thanks! We'll add some examples on the page.


Keep Your Identity Small (1)

This essay has saved me from wasting away so much time in general.

(1) https://paulgraham.com/identity.html


I remember there was something called readability for chrome which is just what browsers have incorporated as reader view. And mozilla even had a stand-alone version of it (1). Might be of interest to you.

[1] https://github.com/mozilla/readability


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: