You don't need to guess. TFP doesn't need to "claim they have copyright" over the art, they do. Images, art, etc. are also IP and covered by copyright laws. Using that IP without proper authorization is copyright infringement. So, the only question is, was there any authorization for anyone outside of TFP/BI to use it.
Please reconsider how to handle the JaWoodle thing.
- Thread starter TravisFleuryLopez
- Start date
Kalen
Survivor
Not the only question.... another question would be could jawoodle's use of that content be considered fair use? The fact that he spoke with a lawyer and continues to fight this, tells me that they, at least, believe there is enough doubt to warrant the fight.
theFlu
Hunter
This is simplified to the point of wrong. Yes TFP owns the C on the assets, displaying them on video with commentary/review is already a different product.
wyr3d
Refugee
I posted a comment on Jawoodle's YouTube video regarding this matter, and figure I should reiterate it here:
To be honest, sounds like they both ■■■■ed up. From what I understand of this situation:
The Fun Pimps sent Jawoodle the wrong build. That was their mistake and that's on them. Jawoodle published videos about the build they received. They were unaware that they received the wrong build, so no intended harm on Jawoodle's part, so that's on The Fun Pimps too. When they found out, they asked Jawoodle to take those videos down, stating Jawoodle had accidentally received the wrong build, and those videos unveiled information that was not supposed to be disclosed to the public.
In the letter Jawoodle showed on YouTube, The Fun Pimps acknowledged it was their mistake, and asked Jawoodle to edit out the material in question from the longer video, and remove shorts that focus on the offending material. The Fun Pimp's representative comes off as reasonable, and compromising. The claim that Jawoodle should have recognized that the material was not intended to be shown is a stretch - this statement assumes they had the same understanding of the build that the developers have, which is simply not the case.
But, Jawoodle was made aware of the error, and had they complied, it probably would have ended there without further issue. This is where Jawoodle has a problem, because they refused to do so. So that's on them. Jawoodle made that choice, and now things have escalated. Not gonna lie, I think Jawoodle is boned, and here's why:
- 7 Days to Die is The Fun Pimp's intellectual property. They have exclusive legal rights to it, and that dictates what content creators can do with their footage. Jawoodle should have pulled the videos.
- Digital copyright law dictates that a creator has no legal right to host copyrighted material without the owner's permission. When they asked Jawoodle to take down and edit those videos, The Fun Pimps were denying them permission to publish that material.
- Fun fact: all streams, videos, shorts and the like of game content is technically copyright infringement. Developers allow people to make videos because it's free marketing, gets the word out about their stuff. But they still retain the legal right to revoke that permission at any time, for any video - regardless of the content.
To be honest, sounds like they both ■■■■ed up. From what I understand of this situation:
The Fun Pimps sent Jawoodle the wrong build. That was their mistake and that's on them. Jawoodle published videos about the build they received. They were unaware that they received the wrong build, so no intended harm on Jawoodle's part, so that's on The Fun Pimps too. When they found out, they asked Jawoodle to take those videos down, stating Jawoodle had accidentally received the wrong build, and those videos unveiled information that was not supposed to be disclosed to the public.
In the letter Jawoodle showed on YouTube, The Fun Pimps acknowledged it was their mistake, and asked Jawoodle to edit out the material in question from the longer video, and remove shorts that focus on the offending material. The Fun Pimp's representative comes off as reasonable, and compromising. The claim that Jawoodle should have recognized that the material was not intended to be shown is a stretch - this statement assumes they had the same understanding of the build that the developers have, which is simply not the case.
But, Jawoodle was made aware of the error, and had they complied, it probably would have ended there without further issue. This is where Jawoodle has a problem, because they refused to do so. So that's on them. Jawoodle made that choice, and now things have escalated. Not gonna lie, I think Jawoodle is boned, and here's why:
- 7 Days to Die is The Fun Pimp's intellectual property. They have exclusive legal rights to it, and that dictates what content creators can do with their footage. Jawoodle should have pulled the videos.
- Digital copyright law dictates that a creator has no legal right to host copyrighted material without the owner's permission. When they asked Jawoodle to take down and edit those videos, The Fun Pimps were denying them permission to publish that material.
- Fun fact: all streams, videos, shorts and the like of game content is technically copyright infringement. Developers allow people to make videos because it's free marketing, gets the word out about their stuff. But they still retain the legal right to revoke that permission at any time, for any video - regardless of the content.
StiggyMcCool
Refugee
There is a legitimate disagreement here, but parts of this thread have gone well beyond disagreement and into inventing facts.
The defensible criticism of JaWoodle is simple:
Once he was told that the officially supplied build contained material TFP did not intend to show, he could have removed or substantially edited the affected videos. Doing so would probably have been the safest commercial decision and may have preserved the creator relationship.
That is a reasonable opinion.
What is not reasonable is repeatedly declaring that he knowingly leaked material, committed a crime, deceived his viewers, blackmailed TFP, pocketed legal donations or engineered the dispute for money. None of those claims has been established.
The initial publication and the later refusal are separate events.
JaWoodle received a build through the official creator programme, presented as 3.0 access for the purpose of creating 3.0 coverage. He published at the stated embargo time. Behaviour’s correspondence, as presented, acknowledged ambiguity around build access and versioning, said he had received a build labelled as 3.0, said it was not accusing him of intentionally seeking out the incorrect build, and accepted responsibility for supplying that build.
The fact that he recognised bandits as unfinished does not prove that he knew the build itself was unauthorised or that material accessible inside it fell outside his permission to create coverage. Those are different kinds of knowledge.
Using the spawn menu does not resolve that question either. At most, the unusual nature of the material may have given him reason to pause and ask. That supports an argument about judgement. It does not establish deliberate wrongdoing.
Once informed, he did not refuse every form of cooperation. He corrected the record, pinned a clarification, repeated it on streams, stopped further publication, cancelled planned Instagram content and proposed an alternative while responsibility and costs were discussed. He refused the complete remedy demanded of him. You can regard that as inadequate without falsely saying he did nothing.
Likewise, TFP owning the game and its assets does not automatically settle the copyright dispute. The relevant questions include the scope of the permission attached to official creator access, any earlier NDA, the later 3.0 authorisation, the event terms, the character of the videos and the legal basis for removing entire uploads. None of us has the complete documents required to decide those questions.
Removing him from the creator programme is also not the same issue as copyright-striking his independent videos. The former is a commercial relationship decision. The latter is a legal claim capable of threatening his entire channel.
People are free to say:
“He should have taken the videos down once notified.”
People are not entitled to transform that opinion into:
“He knowingly stole confidential material, committed a crime and defrauded his audience.”
The public evidence does not establish any of that.
The pro-JaWoodle side should exercise the same discipline. There is no public proof that TFP deliberately set him up, that no NDA existed, or that he is guaranteed to win any legal dispute.
The facts are already serious enough. There is no need for either side to manufacture motives, crimes or conspiracies.
The defensible criticism of JaWoodle is simple:
Once he was told that the officially supplied build contained material TFP did not intend to show, he could have removed or substantially edited the affected videos. Doing so would probably have been the safest commercial decision and may have preserved the creator relationship.
That is a reasonable opinion.
What is not reasonable is repeatedly declaring that he knowingly leaked material, committed a crime, deceived his viewers, blackmailed TFP, pocketed legal donations or engineered the dispute for money. None of those claims has been established.
The initial publication and the later refusal are separate events.
JaWoodle received a build through the official creator programme, presented as 3.0 access for the purpose of creating 3.0 coverage. He published at the stated embargo time. Behaviour’s correspondence, as presented, acknowledged ambiguity around build access and versioning, said he had received a build labelled as 3.0, said it was not accusing him of intentionally seeking out the incorrect build, and accepted responsibility for supplying that build.
The fact that he recognised bandits as unfinished does not prove that he knew the build itself was unauthorised or that material accessible inside it fell outside his permission to create coverage. Those are different kinds of knowledge.
Using the spawn menu does not resolve that question either. At most, the unusual nature of the material may have given him reason to pause and ask. That supports an argument about judgement. It does not establish deliberate wrongdoing.
Once informed, he did not refuse every form of cooperation. He corrected the record, pinned a clarification, repeated it on streams, stopped further publication, cancelled planned Instagram content and proposed an alternative while responsibility and costs were discussed. He refused the complete remedy demanded of him. You can regard that as inadequate without falsely saying he did nothing.
Likewise, TFP owning the game and its assets does not automatically settle the copyright dispute. The relevant questions include the scope of the permission attached to official creator access, any earlier NDA, the later 3.0 authorisation, the event terms, the character of the videos and the legal basis for removing entire uploads. None of us has the complete documents required to decide those questions.
Removing him from the creator programme is also not the same issue as copyright-striking his independent videos. The former is a commercial relationship decision. The latter is a legal claim capable of threatening his entire channel.
People are free to say:
“He should have taken the videos down once notified.”
People are not entitled to transform that opinion into:
“He knowingly stole confidential material, committed a crime and defrauded his audience.”
The public evidence does not establish any of that.
The pro-JaWoodle side should exercise the same discipline. There is no public proof that TFP deliberately set him up, that no NDA existed, or that he is guaranteed to win any legal dispute.
The facts are already serious enough. There is no need for either side to manufacture motives, crimes or conspiracies.
flam1ngd0tard
Refugee
Regardless, the game is getting review bombed hard on Steam and that's going to hurt BeHavior Interactive too.
I won't buy any DLC and my PS5 is always DC from internet so I can determine if or when to allow a game to update especially for 7DTD.
Personally I just want a way to toggle off tge Rancher and Chuck zombies because their spawn max and timer is ridiculous
I won't buy any DLC and my PS5 is always DC from internet so I can determine if or when to allow a game to update especially for 7DTD.
Personally I just want a way to toggle off tge Rancher and Chuck zombies because their spawn max and timer is ridiculous
Ringkeeper
Refugee
writing in this forum is pointless....TFP showed already in many occasions that they p.iss on the opinion of the normal users, if they don't align with the company "vision" .
and yeah, this account is not new but 13 years old.
Getting that but-hurt about unfinished stuff that should be in the game and was promised a decade ago is just another little piece of incompetence.
That s.hit could have been turned into sooooo good PR with a little "upsi, yeah, wrong build but hey, see, we have already something to show for the bandits and cool chickens, stay tuned, soon in better" but noooooo, we turn it into the next Ego trip again.
and yeah, this account is not new but 13 years old.
Getting that but-hurt about unfinished stuff that should be in the game and was promised a decade ago is just another little piece of incompetence.
That s.hit could have been turned into sooooo good PR with a little "upsi, yeah, wrong build but hey, see, we have already something to show for the bandits and cool chickens, stay tuned, soon in better" but noooooo, we turn it into the next Ego trip again.
bobrpggamer
Survivor
I am completely with you on that. The clickbait is outrageous at times. My favorite is a picture of Mike Tyson and Butterbean in the boxing ring with a caption like "Mike Tyson finally gets knocked out". Right, everyone knows they never fought, but whatever. Also the videos that have a cut to some popular media picture every minute and its even worse because they all use they same media picture or clip over and over between multiple Youtubers. Like the "a few minutes later..." with the guy with Indian voice. Its been used so many times its just irritating. Problem is I always thought if I just hover the mouse pointer over the video clip without clicking on it that it would not count as a view, but I came to find out that it gives them a view so I do not even do that anymore.
Sorry for the YouTube rant, I know this is about Woodle and the FPs. I watched the recent video he made defending himself and he does not really seem like a bad guy. Other than that, I really don't have much of an opinion to state. Although I believe the real winners of the dispute will be all the lawyers.
Last edited:
Rooster Gold
Scavenger
I don't know about you guys, but where I come from this is called extortion.
He got off far too easy, all they did was take down a couple videos and revoke his special privileges.
People are acting like they shot his dog.
Dooderina
Refugee
It will be interesting to see how this plays out in court. How can they PROVE he KNEW anything was wrong when he was recording/editing/uploading? Just because it came out after the fact, doesn't mean A) he knew and B) doesn't mean they have the right to ask him to do free labor and not compensate him for his/his editor's time. Who is paying the editor? Unless it's in writing, of course. If it was all in good faith (which can be abused) then TFP needed to eat this one.
And the fact you say he "caused issues" by talking a little critically of a game he clearly LOVES is very telling. Are you saying anyone with legitimate complaints is "causing issues"? You do know that makes it look like this could have been an "accidentally on purpose gave the wrong build to him" so they could go after his wallet and/or kick him out of the streamers weekend events? If that comes to light, I would be VERY cautious if I were a streamer. They can't speak their minds. All they can do is lick a boot "or else".
Anyway, we'll see how court plays out.
bdubyah
Hunter
They don't have to? At the end of the day, TFP owns the game. They could take down every single piece of content on the game if they wanted to because they own it, and others profiting off of it is infringement. They allow it as it's free advertising.
Don't be delusional. They couldn't go after his wallet if he just took the content down like they asked. And he wouldn't have been kicked out then either. Stop acting like the guy didn't have a choice here.
Dooderina
Refugee
Okay, so at what point would it be reasonable, if at all, for TFP to compensate creators when they make these costly "mistakes" going forward? Never? Is that the reasonable stance? What's to stop them from doing this any time a creator gets the wrong build? What's to stop them from giving a wrong build on purpose?
"Sorry, bro. I know this is the 1000th time we've given you the wrong build, but you gotta take your 1000th video down, bro. I know you haven't made a dime on any of these videos because of us, bro! But it's our content, bro! You should eat the cost every single time."
What an awful precedent to set.
We don't know how much it really costs. The act of taking down the video is negligible. He would have to estimate the additional earnings from the reveal and compare that with the earnings the taken down video could have given him further on. It is entirely possible that taking down the video would still have made him come out in the positive but this is something only he would know
Cutting the video could be done in much less than an hour but might need new material to connect the pieces together. Time seems to me to depends very much on the quality you want to deliver.
Going forward: People learn from their mistakes. Usually people do lots of mistakes in their lives but mostly totally different ones.
And TFP have organized maybe 10 of those weekends already without this happening. Why should this be the common thing now when statistics would put the chance currently at only 1 to 10?
Giving the wrong build on purpose would be an ineffectual way to burn the content creators money because he would stop doing videos of this game after the third such "accident". Because it would be evident that they are trolling him then.
And it also would be silly to do this to throw him out of the creators program because they could simply do this without giving any reason if they wanted to.
Last edited:
bdubyah
Hunter
He didn't have to take it down. Just edit out part of it. Which by the time he would have done, the video would've already gotten the majority of views it was gonna get anyway.
And again, you say costly. How costly?
zztong
Hunter
That's an interesting question.
If a creator had a contract with TFP to produce videos, and in order to make the videos the creator had to lay out significant funds in advance to retain people and materials to produce the videos, then I could see TFP being required to compensate. It would be like renting a hall. They set aside the date, arrange for a cleaner, cooks, servers. If you cancel, they may not be able to rent the hall to somebody else but the hall still went to considerable expense, so you're going to pay.
"Never" might well be the reasonable stance unless there is some other factor involved to be considered. Jawoodle's video talked about his expenses, but didn't list them, and I'm at a loss for being able to fill them in. I just don't know that business at all and don't want to guess. I'd be curious to know his costs, but he's a private business and doesn't have to share that with me. My assumption is that Jawoodle was going to make a video regardless of if the content in question was there or not, so I'm not sure those production expenses are relevant.
The cost of rework seems to be the issue? I don't see TFP being responsible for that, but again I cannot see what the costs were, so maybe there's something compelling in there.
Now if TFP engaged in bad faith with the intent of "trapping" a creator, then that's a different circumstance.. I think that results in the creator successfully defending themselves and possibly having grounds for a counter-suit that perhaps could award damages.
Kalen
Survivor
For me, this is simple.... I don't know the economics of it, but I'm sure creating, editing and posting a video costs something. I don't know what it costs, but I seriously doubt its $0. If Jawoodle is being asked to remove a video due to a mistake made by the TFP, it is completely reasonable, to me, for him to ask to recoup those costs. If thats what he's asking for, I think thats fair. If he asking for something more then I think he's being unreasonable.
bdubyah
Hunter
Again, as plenty of people seem to think his only option was to take the video down...it wasn't. He could have just edited it. And either way, from what I've seen other creators state, he likely got paid off of that video before it got taken down. So...he made a video and got paid from it. Even if they took it down, or if he had edited it, what costs are there to be paid? And since he didn't edit it and they took it down, but he still got paid, why would TFP owe him anything? It isn't like he put tons of time into the videos just to get nothing out of them. I guess there were a few shorts he said never got published, but those would've just been cut from the same original video, with maybe a tiny bit of editing for the format. People are acting like TFP cost him some significant amount of money or something. Anything he could get, which I doubt happens, will not be worth the headaches he brought on himself.
Dooderina
Refugee
Yes, the big cost is time and lost opportunity among smaller costs like electricity, equipment wear, software, etc. If he has an editor, he needs to pay that editor. I don't know how long his video(s) were, I didn't see them. But slicing and editing videos/audio isn't nothing. I used to do it. It could take a few hours to film (if he needed to refilm), a few more to edit, and more to render. His machine is taken up by all of these processes, when he could be working on something else entirely.
I guess I might be biased due to my work history. It's not an uncommon complaint from editors/artists when they run into what we call "pixel ■■■■ers". The ones who don't mind wasting your time on edits and will never offer to pay you for them. I cringed hard when I heard they weren't compensating him for his time.
Kalen
Survivor
The cost to edit the video? Whether he pays someone to edit his videos or edits them himself, there is a cost associated with it. How is it unreasonable to ask to be compensated for those costs? You can argue whether fighting TFP for that cost was worth it and thats a valid argument. I personally would've eaten the cost to maintain goodwill with TFP.... but I wouldn't have been happy about it.