Doug Sundseth Posted January 1, 2020 Share Posted January 1, 2020 Caveat: I am not a lawyer, so don't rely on any of this for legal advice. That's why you pay lawyers. That said: At least one YouTuber doing a product review of Vallejo's line of color shifting paints was hit with a copyright strike by Green Stuff World, because the mention of the name of the paint line and video showing the bottles of paint was (according to them) a violation of their copyright in the name of their paint line: https://www.reddit.com/r/minipainting/comments/ehxjn7/green_stuff_world_issuing_copyright_takedowns_and/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qz79dwh_CQw I can think of no way in which GSW could possibly have a copyright claim against the YouTuber in the instant case (see the video and Reddit thread). Names of products are not, in themselves, copyrightable, and showing a picture of the generally available product you bought cannot possibly be a copyright violation anyway. Further, I think even any trademark claim (which would be against Vallejo, not the YouTuber, of course) is somewhere between very weak and non-existent, given that the name is descriptive, which is at best the weakest class of trademark and at worst purely nominative. (You can't trademark "Cherry Pie" for your line of cherry pies, since it's just a description of the product. Similarly, you could argue with some effect that "Color Shift" is purely a description of what the paint does, and use other companies' paint lines to show that, since it's not just GSW and Vallejo who are using that terminology.) Take that for what you will. I'll say that I was irritated enough to send a nasty note to GSW customer service as a result of this. 7 4 3 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TripleH Posted January 1, 2020 Share Posted January 1, 2020 (edited) The following statement was shared on Facebook: Edited January 1, 2020 by TripleH 15 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator Darsc Zacal Posted January 1, 2020 Moderator Share Posted January 1, 2020 (edited) 14 minutes ago, TripleH said: The following statement was shared on Facebook: I was just about to post that myself. I don’t really think there’s much to see here. Greenstuff World had a line of paints named Colorshift. Vallejo recently introduced their own line of paints called Colorshift. Lawyers were hired. Letters were sent. And Vallejo changed the name of their new paint line from Colorshift to Shifters. A YouTube reviewer got a hold of some of the older uncorrected Vallejo packaging and unfortunately YouTube’s policy in such matters caused an over reaction, which Greenstuff World had YouTube correct and Greenstuff World publicly apologized for. Stuff happens. Edited January 1, 2020 by Darsc Zacal 12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Sundseth Posted January 1, 2020 Author Share Posted January 1, 2020 Good to see them acknowledge an error. Unfortunately, they did not acknowledge either in the letter to the YouTuber or in the letter above that they had absolutely no copyright claim of any sort against the channel. I consider the claim entirely unjustified, in a way that any competent lawyer (and they claimed that they had consulted a lawyer) could not possibly have suggested. It wasn't just a bad idea, it was bullying, in violation of the DMCA, and probably legally actionable. I was, am, and probably will continue to be offended by their action. 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator Darsc Zacal Posted January 1, 2020 Moderator Share Posted January 1, 2020 (edited) 10 minutes ago, Doug Sundseth said: Good to see them acknowledge an error. Unfortunately, they did not acknowledge either in the letter to the YouTuber or in the letter above that they had absolutely no copyright claim of any sort against the channel. I consider the claim entirely unjustified, in a way that any competent lawyer (and they claimed that they had consulted a lawyer) could not possibly have suggested. It wasn't just a bad idea, it was bullying, in violation of the DMCA, and probably legally actionable. I was, am, and probably will continue to be offended by their action. I believe the issue is YouTube’s policy in such matters rather than anything Greenstuff World did in protecting their brand name. From Wikipedia: Edited January 1, 2020 by Darsc Zacal 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Sundseth Posted January 1, 2020 Author Share Posted January 1, 2020 I don't have a problem with GSW protecting their brand names to the extent that the law allows. But a DMCA copyright complaint requires that the complainant sign an assertion under penalty of perjury that they have a good faith belief that there is an actual copyright violation as a part of the takedown request. GSW said that they contacted a lawyer who advised them to file a takedown notice. There is no non-frivolous theory under which they could possibly have a good-faith belief that the video was a violation of any GSW copyright. There is a specific provision in the DMCA under which an unwarranted notice can cause the complainant to be liable for damages, but this is extremely difficult even for complainants in the US, and essentially impossible for non-US complainants. The only thing left is a more grassroots response to companies who are weaponizing the takedown process. YouTube's process is definitely worthy of scorn, but the problem here arose from the risible takedown notice filed by GSW. And frankly, GSW's response looks to my eyes like "We're sorry we got caught and we promise not to get caught again." Opinions can obviously vary about how sincere their repentance actually is. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator Darsc Zacal Posted January 1, 2020 Moderator Share Posted January 1, 2020 It looks to me like GSW simply didn’t realize that YouTube’s SOP was to nuke everything from orbit and ask questions later. 4 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteWulfe Posted January 1, 2020 Share Posted January 1, 2020 3 minutes ago, Darsc Zacal said: It looks to me like GSW simply didn’t realize that YouTube’s SOP was to nuke everything from orbit and ask questions later. I'd be curious as to how a company, that uses said platform... Wouldn't know about just how knee-jerk YouTube is with a long of things? Most people who are on YouTube, watching stuff will have had at least one channel they follow rub into something at some point, and yeah, YouTube goes directly for nuking from orbit. One channel I used to follow wound up being permanently demonetized for a year because, wait for it... YouTube screwed up. No strikes, no claims, no issues, direct from everything is good to "no money for you". Wow, that's a lot of salt being thrown both ways in that Reddit thread. I'm hoping an actual, proper apology will be put out by GreenStuffWorld. The way they handled this was not very smooth, nor good for their own image. I'm not one to jump on the "nope, not supporting them" train, but it sure makes it easier to decide about paints (I've been working on trying to reduce the amount of paints I'm wanting to pick up). 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SisterMaryNapalm Posted January 1, 2020 Share Posted January 1, 2020 Excuse my intrusion, but what exactly is the purpose of this thread? 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corsair Posted January 1, 2020 Share Posted January 1, 2020 16 minutes ago, SisterMaryNapalm said: Excuse my intrusion, but what exactly is the purpose of this thread? LOL 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kristof65 Posted January 1, 2020 Share Posted January 1, 2020 Interesting. I was walking through Michael's today, and there were at least two different lines of color shifting paints with the words Color Shift in the name. One of those lines is owned by Plaid, who's one of the biggest crafting companies in the country. I happen to own a couple bottles of it, too. 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Sundseth Posted January 2, 2020 Author Share Posted January 2, 2020 50 minutes ago, SisterMaryNapalm said: Excuse my intrusion, but what exactly is the purpose of this thread? What is the purpose of this question? 15 minutes ago, kristof65 said: Interesting. I was walking through Michael's today, and there were at least two different lines of color shifting paints with the words Color Shift in the name. One of those lines is owned by Plaid, who's one of the biggest crafting companies in the country. I happen to own a couple bottles of it, too. Yup. And the pigments use the term, too. (A search on "color shift" or "colorshift" finds lots of products.) My unbacked suspicion is that Vallejo just wasn't interested in the hassle so they changed their product's name. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SisterMaryNapalm Posted January 2, 2020 Share Posted January 2, 2020 (edited) 36 minutes ago, Doug Sundseth said: What is the purpose of this question? To find out if this - despite the spurring headline - is a thread worth following and maybe taking part in or just another shoot of the on-going witch hunt. But, you know - I already got the answer I was looking for. Have fun. Edited January 2, 2020 by SisterMaryNapalm 4 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ratsmitglied Posted January 2, 2020 Share Posted January 2, 2020 based on my reading of everything it appears that Green Stuff World has trademarked the term 'colourshift' for paints in Spain, so the issue is a trademark dispute, however they filed a copyright claim on YouTube against the reviewer rather than following the proper channels. the fact that they managed to get the trademark in the first place is a completely different issue (and probably only occurred because they're in Spain, in an English speaking country the application would probably have been thrown out - see GW and their attempts to trademark 'space marine') 2 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Sundseth Posted January 2, 2020 Author Share Posted January 2, 2020 16 minutes ago, SisterMaryNapalm said: To find out if this - despite the spurring headline - is a thread worth following and maybe taking part in or just another shoot of the on-going witch hunt. But, you know - I already got the answer I was looking for. Have fun. If you think that this thread is inappropriate, feel free to make your case, either here or to a mod. A passive-aggressive attempt to imply illegitimacy without an argument isn't really very interesting, though. As you say, have fun. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.