And no one is arguing against the law being enforced. People are arguing against the retroactive termination of accounts for uploading copyrighted assets before DMCAs were filed and Roblox started taking action against copyrighted assets. They are under no legal obligation to terminate users, let alone users for old content, which is why people aren’t happy with what’s happening. My apologies if I worded my thoughts weirdly in previous posts.
That’s not how DMCAs work. When a DMCA is filed it applies to ALL of that IP uploaded, regardless of the date.
DMCA’s are inherently retroactive. It’s quite literally how it’s intended to be used.
I’m not arguing against that. The claimed content should 100% be deleted. However, as I’ve said, Roblox is under no obligation to terminate users, and the EFF actually discourages a 3 strike system like Roblox is using. By no means do they have to terminate anyone, let alone terminate for old content.
CaptainJadeFlames worded it much better than I could earlier in the thread:
3 Likes
To be completely fair, it’s not one and done termination necessarily. Every single case is reviewed separately and action is decided based on severity of infringement.
The policy is intentionally vague to specifically allow case by case review.
DMCA does explicitly state that companies must implement some sort of termination system for repeat infringers. The fact that Roblox will allow us time to counter file is actually really great and allows false claims to be dealt with accordingly.
This policy isn’t as simple as “3 strikes and you’re out” even tho it’s somewhat worded like that. Case by case review negates the “3 & out” mindset as it allows for ‘exceptions’ based on a number of factors. But as per DMCA, Roblox needs to have some sort of repeat infringer policy, which they do. How else would you suggest they implement a repeat infringer policy other than a strike system?
DMCA doesn’t explicitly call for termination for repeat offenders, it calls for punishment, which is exactly why the EFF calls for avoidance of a 3 strike and you’re out policy. Even if that might not be 100% what it is, that’s what it is at base value and as far as we know at the moment, it’s a 3 strikes and you’re out policy.
I suggest they give users warnings for assets created before the 3 Strike Policy was put in place, possibly a one-three day ban depending on how many assets the user has, but giving a strike that can lead to termination for assets created before this 3 strike system was put in place is ridiculous and benefits no one.
4 Likes
Screenshots taken from the EFF website;
There was also no ‘before’ the 3 strike system. From my knowledge based on the policy threads, the 3 strike system has always been the way they handle repeat infringers.
And if you actually read EFF’s recommendations this is exactly what Roblox follows.
Each case is initiated with a notification and an opportunity to counter notice before a strike is given.
1 Like
This isn’t new information, me and other people have said this multiple times. No one is denying that the website says that. This whole conversation is going nowhere, so I’d rather just end it here so we don’t clog the thread.
I don’t understand. You claim that Roblox should go by what EFF suggests when they already do?
A simple re-read of the policy threads posted on the Devforum show that Roblox starts with a notification of DMCA and allows the user to counter notify before moving forward with a strike. There is no ‘instant termination’ unless the specific case requires it. And good behavior accounts/‘famous’ users are assumed to have those ‘extra protections’ as listed by EFF
Roblox goes by the EFF guidelines.
OP basically lays out EFF recommendations:
- for reference, here is what EFF lays out:
Now pray tell, is this not EXACTLY what Roblox has laid out in OP?
1 Like
I literally never argued anything other than my position against retroactive termination and the 3 strike system. Not once did I say anything about their trust or information policies.
Now, as I said, I’d like to end this conversation because all we’re doing at this point is clogging the thread.
You did however mention that Roblox should follow EFF guidelines… which they do.
No hate to @CaptainJadeFlames but someone clearly did not read the posts fully.
And jade, I realize you are replying: I was specifically referring to the part in your post where you reference EFF as it continues to be used as an argument against this for some reason. Nothing else.
1 Like
I’d ask that you read my own post before claiming others did not. Directly after the point about the EFF guidelines, I had asked for some things to be clarified which could help clear up how strict the system is. There’s a major difference between “All cases are considered strikes, regardless of intent.” and “These users are different from other users, since they’re using that content in a way which is solely for profit.”
The point of me bringing up the post was not “Don’t use a strike system at all!” but more “Is the strike system going to be fleshed out enough to the point where good users won’t have to worry about it, since they’d be abiding by the rules? Is the system fluent enough to not fit the warnings the EFF describes?”
Even if Roblox wished to stay vague, they could still answer certain questions as simple as “We review content in a case by case manner. We will determine if such content is worthy on a strike depending on the severity.”
This is a system I’d like to be confident to stand on, knowing it won’t crumble me and others around me over Roblox showing they can’t handle such a system, and in order to do that it’d be good if we could better understand it. Better understanding means seeing Roblox clear up what certain cases may mean, even if it’s as simple as things like “We acknowledge that you can’t view your past unions in a list due to how our union system works, and will try to keep that in mind when determining whether something deserves a strike.”
It doesn’t mean someone else coming in and saying “This is how their vague, oddly worded post could be read as” because as nice as those posts are, they don’t stand on anything people are understanding. Even you admit the posts are vague, and are worded in ways which could be interpreted in ways which don’t match up with how the system actually works.
3 Likes
As I referenced, the policy is intentionally vague as to what they consider strikeable. This applies with nearly any ToS in any company. The vagueness not only allows for protection of the company itself but each case to be reviewed individually.
That being said, the only reason I tagged you there was for the sole fact that the specific mention of EFF you made in an earlier comment is continuing to be used and ‘some’ people are seemingly not actually reading OP. The EFF ‘recommended’ steps of action are almost word for word what Roblox has listed in OP. Everyone who is mentioning that they should follow EFF and are surprised that they aren’t are simply wrong. A quick re-read of both the EFF recommended guidelines and Roblox’s OP show that, as I referenced above with images of both OP and the EFF guidelines.
I do agree that this is not a light issue and that some clarification on what exactly would constitute a strike would be nice to see, but seeing it from the way most companies word their ToS it makes complete and total sense as to why they are so vague.
I continue to see this as a very fair implementation of a long withstanding policy. I am glad that Roblox has finally publicized this policy to the extent they have. I’ve been using this platform for nearly 9 years now with no understanding of how they handle DMCA filings. Transparency is nice. I’ll take what I can get.
I fully agree with the EFF and am glad to see that Roblox is taking note of what they recommend and following along with it.
1 Like
Again, they can still be vague while clearing up certain issues. Is it really that much to know “Oh, the fact that I can’t clear up unions on my own is known, and won’t be held against me in the future.” ?
As for the reference images, that’s why my post had those last two paragraphs. There’s being vague enough to allow flexibility, and then there’s being so vague and oddly worded that nobody understands what you’re saying. It doesn’t matter whether someone else shows how it could be interpreted as, because I can’t be sure that’s exactly the case.
It’d be like music lyrics before the internet made it easy to look them up. Two people hear the same lyric to their favorite tune, singing along, but then there’s a bit of a desync between the two later on in the song. One hears one thing, and another hears another. Even if they were to both explain their sides, and how it could fit within the rest of the lyrics, neither of them are really sure which one is right, and the only way either of them are going to know for sure is if they got word from someone involved in making the song.
There are situations where someone on the side “explaining the legal nonsense” in an easier to understand way works, but this isn’t quite one of those cases, and it’s only made more strict when this is about a policy which could determine if your account will still be around later on.
4 Likes
While Roblox has made some decisions that the community dislikes, I think it’s important to recognize that they as a company are very receptive to user and developer input and feedback, especially after they have already made a decision.
Do strikes expire? If someone gets a strike for something they posted 5 years ago (which shouldn’t happen IMHO) why should it last their entire life on Roblox?
1 Like
Read the follow-up, it’s linked at the bottom of the thread and also several times in the replies:
3 Likes
How does this 3 strike system affect those with models from like 5 years ago?
1 Like
Has anyone received a response or had their assets deleted yet through this method? I emailed nine days ago and I haven’t heard back or had the assets removed. I’m really paranoid I’ll get a strike before the assets are dealt with.
8 Likes
While I do fully agree and find it odd that they haven’t sent emails back yet -
Giving a strike is not a quick process. It starts with a warning, an opportunity to counter notice, and then it is taken to the next step from there depending on the previous.
I am sure that if you get to the warning phase and let them know you sent an email in with the assets in question requesting deletion a while before they will not take action. I don’t really think you have to worry about getting a strike before they delete your assets.
4 Likes
Ah, thank you for the information. Glad to hear that I won’t automatically get a strike for the content pending for deletion! 