national

Tokyo court orders 2 to pay ¥500 mil over 'fast movie' uploads

32 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© KYODO

©2022 GPlusMedia Inc.

32 Comments
Login to comment

The Tokyo District Court on Thursday ordered a man and woman to pay 500 million yen in damages to 13 major film production companies for uploading minutes-long, edited versions of their films known as "fast movies" on YouTube without permission.

Absurd and another example of the corporate controlled Japanese courts.

Corporate negligence causing death and injury, bribery and graft do not even get such fines.

Of course the defendants are YouTube geeks and not proud members of Japan Inc.

There are a billion story recap videos on Youtube.

4 ( +34 / -30 )

These companies are desperately trying to scratch together whatever pennies they can. With the exception of a couple of blockbuster kids movies, Japan hasnt put out a decent movie in decades.

3 ( +27 / -24 )

cronyism at its best!

-2 ( +22 / -24 )

That companies should've sued Youtube. Youtube also got advertising revenues and allowed that videos.

Beside i see a lot of story ormovie recaps and it's allowed .

Japan legal system is a joke

5 ( +28 / -23 )

In other words the prosecutors pulled the figure out of their a..

In this country, edit and upload a movie short (10 mins with original narration on the plot)and you're in deep water, but somebody with connections who rapes a young journlist pays a pittance; a politician who carries out brazen corruption gets to bow and offer and apology with a glint of a crocodile tear in their eye....

9 ( +29 / -20 )

Disgusting. Shame on these movie companies. Shame on the court for allow such large payouts when real crime is largely unrewarded. Someone in the justice or political circles must have just got a nice increase in their savings.

0 ( +21 / -21 )

If your movie can be replaced by the "fast movie" videos and because of them you lose a ticket, then that speaks much more about the lack of quality of the movie than anything else.

16 ( +21 / -5 )

Totally support this. It's theft, however you try to spin it.

I've never downloaded music or film for free. Artists deserve to be paid, and paid properly. This is what has led to the dearth of good quality film.

Don't care where you get your content from. Physical, Download or Stream. But pay for it.

You wouldn't do your job for free, would you?

-22 ( +13 / -35 )

Love it. Lots of downvoted - But no one can say much, because, you wouldn't do your job for free. Would you?

-20 ( +8 / -28 )

That companies should've sued Youtube. Youtube also got advertising revenues and allowed that videos.

They sued the individual YouTubers, because in this society you aim not for the one with the deepest pockets, but for whomever is weakest and who you know you will win easily against. Think YouTube would have accepted a 500-million-yen judgment, or the bogus methodology used to calculate it? (Really, 200 yen per view? If I saw a condensed movie on YouTube and there were a 200-yen charge to see it, I wouldn't watch it at all.)

11 ( +20 / -9 )

I am all for sever punishment for those who infringe on the hard work of others.

"significant deterrent against future cases of copyright infringement," and added it was "meaningful" that the film companies had come together to obtain a payout of its scale.

But as we all know this is NOT new to Japan, in fact many Japanese companies were sued and many law suites are still in the justice system UNSOLVED.

-9 ( +1 / -10 )

I’m sure the judge would binge watch inka videos if he had a tv that didn’t require manually changing the channel?, who I am I kidding he would just tell his wife to do it. His version of a remote control.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

Why don't those production companies start making "official" fast movies or short films of around 10 min, and upload them to Youtube? There must be some growing demand while the companies may cut expenses.

8 ( +10 / -2 )

So ¥500 million should be paid by YouTube for allowing the videos to be published. Why did YouTube not pick up the copyrighted material?

I publish many YouTube videos of my own original work and several times other companies claiming copyright putting a block on my video and requiring action from me to clear them. But if you lose three times, YouTube cancels your account.

The film companies cannot claim they forfeited money. The viewers of the videos are more likely to go and watch the full version if they like them.

The fine should have been ¥7 million made from the adverts. No chance of getting ¥500 million.

13 ( +13 / -0 )

500 million yen is life ruining, basically a death sentence. 13 film companies came together to crush the lives of two people in their 20s and they call that 'meaningful'. Actual crimes like rape and bullying to the point of suicide are totally ignored here, makes me sick.

3 ( +12 / -9 )

another way how to make money if your crap cant make it and its not worth of price asked?

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

It was a similar story years back when the music industry giants went after people uploading MP3’s and sued them for millions of dollars. In the end, it was the music industry that had to give up on it - the people could never pay back the ridiculous fines, they never stopped the mp3s and eventually had to adapt to the streaming services distribution model.

10 ( +11 / -1 )

I've never downloaded music or film for free.

Typically irrelevant corporate shill argument.

This was not even downloading a movie, it was a recap, a few minute summary like a trailer or Cliff Notes.

But corporations do need their paid and unpaid supporters to keep down the competition and stifle creativity.

https://time.com/6219423/chokepoint-capitalism-doctorow-giblin/

-1 ( +7 / -8 )

Posting a review/summary/spoiler video isn’t grounds for legal action imo. If there was a particularly egregious way of doing it like showing actual movie in fast forward then sure.

but wow it says a lot that these YouTubeers are getting a bigger fine than the negligent corporate murders from overtime, unpaid wages, sexual harassment or rape, open face scam and bribes of officials and more…

3 ( +11 / -8 )

The smart thing to do would have been to sponsor them officially and take a portion of the revenue as well as influence people to go see your movie. It’s exactly what Hollywood and Bollywood do, then again corporate Japan really really has no grasp on how to exploit YT like when they wouldn’t upload songs themselves

2 ( +6 / -4 )

One of the guy arrested was 48. Not a young geek as I would have first thought.

No licence, no right to edit that movies and monetize. Shoganai.

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

Gives a bit of a much-needed injection to the dying industry that can’t otherwise keep customers who are sick of the unnecessary middle-men.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

So, they made 7 million but are being fined 500 millon. LOL!

There's not a cat in Hell's chance the studios will ever see that money; it is purely symbolic. The court may have as well said "We'll fine you umpteen gazillion squillion Yen!".

I would have laughted in the judge's face.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Great decision. This will discourage other illegal acts like these. If you want to watch the movies, you should pay full price and enjoy the experience rather than an edited copy.

-6 ( +5 / -11 )

That's scary, I have watched some of these and ended up watching the full movies because of them. I can understand them claiming the videos etc and getting them taken down, but this is way over the top, also proves how this country is completely controlled by big companies, 500mil for this giri giri fair use case while rape victims or injuries or deaths caused by negligence by companies might end up getting 100man.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

The companies determined the damages by basing it on the price the viewers would have had to pay to watch the official versions of the films online and decided the monetary value was 200 yen per view.

Had the movies been any good, this would've been some "great promotional video" I suppose. And more people would have gained interest to watch them.

But since the movies were bad or bland enough for viewers to not give a darn after the synopsis, I guess they didn't do such a good job on the films? So they were deemed "illegal?"

How about just make some GREAT movies and not just the same old cliche stuff? Then people might watch. You can start by getting rid of any Johnny's "actors" on the bill.

3 ( +7 / -4 )

@dagon - and yours is a typically 'anti-society' comment. How does paying for music stifle creativity? Musicians are becoming burned out at a younger age now from having to tour so much as revenue from music sales is so diminished by streaming services which I am happy to pay for so at least they they get something. Are you an actual fan of music? Doesn't sound like it. I've amassed a collection of over 3000 CDs over the years which I've digitised myself plus I subscribe to 2 streaming services to discover new music. How dare you call me a 'shill' without knowing me and what i believe in.

What right do these people have to profit off another companies work without rights permissions. Of course the fines are over the top and will never be paid, but its the principle.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Musicians earn very little real money from "record sales" or streaming. The recording companies rake it in. Musicians earn their money from doing gigs.

I have personally spent more than £70,000 on music in my time. Enough to buy a small house.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Looking after the top end of town again. When a ordinary citizen dies on the road due to negligence driving get nothing compared a payout for pirating short videos make me vomit.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

How does paying for music stifle creativity

Your talent seems to lie in creating straw men.

No one is excusing wholesale pirating of movies and music and profiting from it

These were minutes long summaries of movies.

And speaking of your CD collection, try this out tiger. Search for them on YouTube and you will find most of them all available and hosted there.

Some monetized, some not. Why not try reporting and flagging them all and see the responses from YouTube.

The point is, the artists are not profiting from this decision nor the actions of YouTube and just the corporations.

Which the courts and this decision supports.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

I have no interest in listening to compressed music that the likes of a YouTube stream provide, that's why I PAY for Tidal. Thank you. Like I have no interest in watching the 'highlights' of a movie in average resolution on a small screen, Tiger.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

How can so many commentators havea point of view where their opinion is against the legitimate owners of the movies? Its obvious that the judge did the right thing and in the end they still didn't payed the real amount of damage. Can't pay for a dvd or a cinema ticket? Go work!

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites