• Junkernaught@vlemmy.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    114
    ·
    2 years ago

    “As the original creator and designer of the logo and banner, I also filed a DMCA against the further use of the r/TIHI logo on reddit.”

    Thanks, I Love It.

      • Nord@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        2 years ago

        Under GDPR you have the right to your content, including data download and revocation. If you are banned from or restricted access to a website it doesn’t strip you of that right. However the complain should have probably been through GDPR and not DMCA.

      • LoafyLemon@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 years ago

        This doesn’t hold any grounds in the EU as copyrights can’t be waived, and unless you got paid for it, you can withdraw consent at any time.

        • SpaceCadet2000@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 years ago

          You don’t waive your copyright. You grant a license to reddit to use your content.

          Read the link, it’s all there:

          You retain any ownership rights you have in Your Content, but you grant Reddit the following license to use that Content:

          • LoafyLemon@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            2 years ago

            This doesn’t apply unless you got compensated for your work. Reddit can add anything they like in their agreements, but that won’t hold in court.

            The artist can withdraw consent at any time.

            • SpaceCadet2000@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              2 years ago

              You are confused. What you are describing applies to transferring copyright, not for granting a license while retaining the copyright.

              If things worked the way you described, free software, for example licensed through the GPL, couldn’t exist because then the authors could always take away the users’ rights by retroactively revoking their license. Fortunately, it doesn’t work that way.

              • LoafyLemon@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                2 years ago

                There are cases where artists withdrew consent and their work had to be taken down, and to my knowledge all contracts can be amended or cancelled, especially if they’re exploitative like reddits. You have a right to compensation if they profit off of your creative work, be it artwork, music, or writing.

      • Nordwolf@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 years ago

        Under GDPR you have the right to your content, including data download and revocation. If you are banned from or restricted access to a website it doesn’t strip you of that right. However the complain should have probably been through GDPR and not DMCA.

      • fayoh@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        The DMCA is used “successfully” with even less grounds on YouTube every day. But I suppose the difference lies in not being a mega corporation.