
Twitch Sues Troll Streamers over Violent Videos, Pornography - jason_zig
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-06-15/twitch-sues-troll-streamers-over-violent-videos-pornography
======
dx87
Guessing it's related to people streaming on the Artifact section on Twitch.
Basically, there was a popular streamer who would joke about how nobody was
streaming the game, so people start streaming porn, Avengers: Endgame, etc, so
they'd be at the top of the list of Artifact streams when the popular streamer
looked at the streams. It lasted for a few days, with Twitch doing nothing
about it. The lawsuit seems like they're trying to save face because they
failed to do anything about it for way too long.

[https://apptrigger.com/2019/05/28/artifact-twitch-
channels-p...](https://apptrigger.com/2019/05/28/artifact-twitch-channels-
porn-anime/)

~~~
meruru
>showing downright despicable content such as Adolph Hitler propaganda, videos
of beheadings, varying interests of pornography and even streams of anime
programming

That sentence makes it sound like anime is worse than beheadings and Nazi
propaganda.

~~~
SolarNet
That's because it (the anime programming and pornography) is worse. At least
from a corporate perspective.

For the same reasons tumblr banned pornography, yet still hasn't done anything
to fight child pornography, child abuse, or grooming on their platform.

For the same reasons youtube demonetizes videos about legal education or
discussing alphabet/google/youtube policies, yet still allows child grooming
and radicalization to be monetized and recommended to children.

As always: money.

~~~
neotek
>For the same reasons youtube demonetizes videos about legal education or
discussing alphabet/google/youtube policies, yet still allows child grooming
and radicalization to be monetized and recommended to children.

What nonsense.

~~~
SolarNet
This is well documented [0] and has been going on for years. Rather than take
a straightforward approach of hiring more community managers (which is
expensive) to solve the problem they instead rely on algorithms that punish
probable child abuse with _demonetization_ (harking back to my earlier point
that it's all about money) rather than say _banning and reporting to
authorities_.

[0]
[https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20190223/00430041656/youtu...](https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20190223/00430041656/youtube-
demonetization-hammer-nail-content-moderation.shtml)

------
danShumway
Honest question, doesn't the Twitch TOS have an arbitration agreement?

In my (nonlawyer) reading of their terms, it's not clear to me why this
wouldn't fall under that policy. It doesn't seem to fit into any of the
exceptions they list. How can Twitch file this suite before a normal judge?

 _Edit: Hah, another commenter found the filing, and it alleges a trademark
violation. I wonder if that 's in there purely so they can get this before a
normal judge?_

~~~
ezoe
I wonder how could a trademark be violated in this case.

------
tomatotomato37
I'd like to know the law company Twitch is contracting out of because holy
shit is Twitch getting ripped off here. Sueing people you don't even know the
identities of has to be the easiest way of racking up legal fees I have ever
seen

~~~
whymauri
Could it be a pre-emptive political move to avoid scrutiny from governments
where the content that was streamed (Christchurch shooting, some illegal
pornography) is illegal? Also, I'm pretty sure they know some of the
perpetrators but are probably still building a case. A few years ago they
pinpointed the heads of a viewbotting operation and successfully took legal
action. I could see them finding a few people to make an example out of,
honestly.

~~~
tomatotomato37
I could see Twitch's thinking be to only catch a few people to make an example
of, but in similar style cases with media companies and pirating the paperwork
already has the targets name on it; the use of just placeholders imply to me
that the lawyers are going to intentionally drag the case out while telling
Twitch they are trying to find the "perfect target" to make an example of.

~~~
morpheuskafka
It may be less of finding an example defendant as just providing an example
that they are doing something if they're accused of not doing enough later. I
expect the case will quickly settle.

------
adam1210
A certain twitch category I frequent has had streams advertising phishing
websites (phishing game credentials) on it 24/7 for a few years and twitch has
never done anything about it. I guess if it doesn't cause public outrage then
it's fine.

~~~
numlock86
Sounds like so called "trading" portals for skins in CS:GO ...

------
arkitaip
""The company said that if it learns the identities of the anonymous streamers
who have abused its terms of service -- named in the lawsuit as “John and Jane
Does 1-100” -- it will ask the court to prohibit them from using the platform
and order them to pay restitution and damages.""

Restitution and damages for what?

~~~
olliej
if nothing else: legal fees. If a streamer violates the ToS, and hides their
identity then serving them a restraining order can cost quite a lot.

I’m sure there are other things - eg punitive damages exist for the purpose of
ensuring that the cost of violation is more than just the direct harn

~~~
eridius
Also the videos were presumably damaging to the Twitch brand for anyone who
saw them, which translates into lost revenue for Twitch.

~~~
olliej
I just figured that that was a pointless argument (people on HN seem to
dismiss the concept of brand image and how that might have value), but you are
of course correct - legal costs however are very directly enumerable

------
joatmon-snoo
Can't access the filing, but I did find a preview of it.

The complaint lists four causes: (1) federal trademark infringement, (2)
breach of contract, (3) trespass to chattels, and (4) fraud.

[https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/28635117/Twitch_Int...](https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/28635117/Twitch_Interactive,_Inc_v_John_and_Jane_Does_1_through_100)

------
BubRoss
Seems like it's admitting that they both don't know how to stop people
technically and don't know who any of the 100 people are.

~~~
WillPostForFood
How would they know who they were? Filing a lawsuit is a tool to find out.

~~~
dx87
What could they do though? I thought courts in the USA ruled that an IP
address can't be used to identify a person. It seems like the most they could
do is ban the account, which they can do for any reason they want.

~~~
WillPostForFood
They just said an IP can't solely be used to identify someone. You can use the
IP address to get the name and then acquire additional information to
prosecute the case. But you need to start with the IP address to get the ball
rolling.

~~~
apples_oranges
Interesting. So for instance if the offence is sharing a Hollywood movie on
Bittorrent, the ip address would not be enough to get fined? What then? Use ip
to get search warrant?

(I'm from Europe, asking out of curiosity.)

~~~
dhruvrrp
IANAL but it would go something like this: Twitch has IP addresses of the
trolls, but no way to tell their real identity. So they file the lawsuit and
then use it to subpoena the ISPs assigned those IP addresses to get their
client information.

~~~
fnky
But there's no way they can prove that it was actually the owner that did
this. An argument could be that someone got access to the WiFi, either
maliciously or otherwise.

It's not enough to be used as evidence in court.

Most likely did the majority of the bots use proxies and VPNs, which may or
may not provide additional information about their customers, but even then it
has to be proven that is was the same user that did the acts which is very
difficult.

~~~
WillPostForFood
It is enough to be used as evidence, it isn't enough, by itself, to
definitively prove identity. It might be enough to get a subpoena to image the
computers at the IP address. From there you might find the offending material
that was broadcast, VPN accounts, chat logs talking about planning it, etc...

------
showdead
I basically gave up on twitch after it stopped working on the Xbox 360. The
app just shows thumbnails but never streams. It doesn't work right in the
browser for me either, probably due to running an old version of Chrome, but
it used to work, and the browser hasn't changed, so I blame site "upgrades"
(read: changes that break what was previously working.)

~~~
cheeze
X360 is literally a 15 year old console... Of course twitch doesn't work on it
anymore.

Have you considered running something more modern?

------
DigitalTerminal
Can they really sue someone for streaming porn / legal content? Is violating
the twitch TOS really such a crime that they can prosecute you?

------
olliej
Finally - make being an asshole cost money.

~~~
baalimago
Agreed. Maybe also introduce some sort of system which rewards good behavior?
A sort of, hmm, social score?

~~~
olliej
Dude there’s a difference between saying “we won’t host violent videos so some
trolls can get off” and “we’re going to police every action”.

People like you who will inevitably bring up the “slippery slope” argument
seem to ignore a) twitch etc are private companies and you can’t force speech
on them, and b) there’s is no difference between threatening or broadcasting
violence against people and having an unpopular opinion.

Unpopular opinion: America should be communist.

Opinion that might get you banned: “go out & beat up or murder people who
disagree with me”

~~~
axylw
Sure but Twitch is here suing people in a real court. It's not about whether
Twitch is forced to host your speech or whatever. Here the government is
getting involved.

~~~
neotek
>It's not about whether Twitch is forced to host your speech or whatever.

That's exactly what it's about.

>Here the government is getting involved.

Which is not the same thing as the government abrogating anyone's freedom of
speech, fairly obviously.

------
yellow_lead
Paywall: [https://outline.com/KRAU7W](https://outline.com/KRAU7W)

~~~
superkuh
I was going to upvote this but it turns out outline.com hides it's content
behind a computational paywall. You have to execute their code in order for
text to display.

Here's a version that is just accessible text:
[http://superkuh.com/twitchsues.txt](http://superkuh.com/twitchsues.txt)

~~~
292355744930110
I can't use that site because I am under 90 years of age.

------
whamlastxmas
I suspect this is in part retaliation of someone or people getting banned for
stupid reasons

------
rolltiide
I think it is interesting how people use porn streaming sites for general non-
porn related streaming now since these other platforms keep shooting
themselves in the foot, playing a war of attrition to keep their own investors
and advertisers placated.

But now the porn platforms also have their own pornographic advertisers, and
lower overhead costs on moderation.

~~~
olalonde
I'm not sure what you're trying to say... Who is using porn streaming sites
for non-porn related streaming?

~~~
rolltiide
I was talking about the growth of porn sites for general user submitted
content that isnt of the pornographic variety

Users use them for that, you want usernames per site? How am I supposed to
answer that. I assumed A lot of people are already familiar with this use case
and also find it discussion worthy

~~~
olalonde
Yes this is genuinely news to me and sounds intriguing. I was hoping for some
examples or an article about that phenomenon.

------
throwaway66666
I am curious as whether this will be relatively forgotten or it will become a
manifestation of the streisand effect (
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect)
). With hordes of troll users streaming crap, just for fun and to fight
against what they perceive to be a corporate overlord (twitch being owned by
amazon).

~~~
olliej
The Streisand effect is not wanting people to know something, and in trying to
prevent that drawing attention to it.

That’s not what is happening here: everyone knows there’s a bunch of basement
trolls who stream violence (which is of course against tos), and from twitch’s
POV publicity is a win:

* they get public appearance that they’re trying to do something about.

* the specter of being sued may discourage some people from abusing their platform

~~~
SmellyGeekBoy
> That’s not what is happening here: everyone knows...

I didn't know. The Streisand Effect absolutely applies, at least in my case.

~~~
MadcapJake
The Streisand Effect implies that the subject did not want the publicity but
got it by trying to hide or cover up something. Here Twitch wants people to
see that they are taking action. Now if the publicity leads to additional
trolling of their platform thus exacerbating the problem, then you could make
an argument that this scenario fits the Streisand Effect.

