Full Kek : Kicking Mustang. Poor Guys Antics Have Apparently Caught up With Him ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Groot

Groot

Members
Joined
Jun 29, 2020
Messages
576
Reaction score
348
Saw this on one of the Facebook airsoft groups and thought it might be fun to share. 




He has apparently been going around copyright striking everyone who posts it, only to find 2 more pop up!

View attachment 68255

Hail Hydra

If anyone knows how to post gifs, PLEASE let me know :)

https://tenor.com/9P9t.gif
 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
not really seeing anything that's much of a revelation, but then if you genuinely believed airsoft video hit markers are accurate then you're probably a fan of many youtube channels.

km is by no means the only one to do this and unless you actually see the bb land or the target call hit and walk off the field wether it's in video or in real life then you can't claim otherwise.

hell even if you do see the target call hit and walk off the field doesn't mean you hit them, it just means something hit them at approximately the right place and time for them to call hit.

as for doing it for the views/admonies? well that's no surprise, even novvy boy straight up admitted to playing the youtube game.

i have no problem with the notion of spinning fantasies to create drama, but if you're trying to hide the fact so you can boost your reputation at others expense? well that's just not cricket.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Copyright striking, wtf that ?

Watched the first couple minutes, can't see feck all, are we meant to see him hit the guy, or is he missing every shot & covering it with a "hit" marker ?

 
Ahh the kicking mustang expose site. I consider this forum a distraction and though I enjoy it I am fully aware that I probably have better things I could be doing with my time.

They however take it to another level, if they don’t hand out handbags when you join I’d be most surprised.

 
1 hour ago, Groot said:

Saw this on one of the Facebook airsoft groups and thought it might be fun to share. 

Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
There’s one solution to avoid copyright strikes - don’t put someone else’s video/audio material in your video 

They generally occur for - few reasons, an actual person has claimed a copyright breach, an agency has scanned for content or a bot has done it

 
Having skimmed through it my take is the guy who put this together REALLY has an unhealthy fixation on the prick that is kicking mustang BUT equally he has shown KM is a false god , he’s proven categorically with the video clip that three of the shots clearly missed , the 3rd shot out of the four looks to me as if it may have ‘grazed’ the plate carrier but unlikely to have been heard or felt , but with the use of smoke and mirrors (the white ‘impact’ marker and the sound of a hit)he very successfully tricks the viewer in to thinking all four BBs hit the player there in making the player out to be a huge vile cheat and prick boy the Demi-god he promotes himself as . 
didn’t watch the rest for the sake of my sanity !?

 
Tackle said:
Copyright striking, wtf that ?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...


essentially making a claim that because the video features him that it's his copyright and anyone who posts it is infringing on that copyright.

it's meant to be for music or tv shows that just get straight up ripped into youtube but in this context it's being used to silence criticism as the video tends to get immediately pulled while youtube/facebook decides if it's a ripoff or not.

thing is, if a copyright claim is made fraudulently (people are allowed to use others work for "fair use" and criticism/commentary afaik is part of that, or if the used sections are short) then it can backfire massively on the one making the claim (we're talking youtube pulling your channel kind of backfire)

 
A bit of a contradiction in the comment intended to prevent copyright strikes ——- Kicking Mustang doesn’t have people’s permission to film and publish them, so in that case I can use his video.

That’s also on a false premise - the law differs in each part of the world, but permission is not required to film people.  The sites are not public land so you don’t have the automatic right to film, but the above video even has a  segment of Kicking Mustang saying that he won’t be filming on a specific day as he has not been given permission to do so by then site 

Sites will often cover consent in their disclaimers or published terms about video/photos on site.  That isn’t explicitly required but can depend on what use is made.

Consent is required for ‘commercial use’ but there are limitations to what commercial use that applies to.

Let alone even thinking that YouTube are going to read your statement sat among the comments

View attachment 68260

 
Jesus wept according to these YouTubers everyone is a cheater. Just watched another YouTubers view on this video defending KM. I think there will always be 2 views on him and his type of video however to hear he has been doxxed is frankly shameful. Simple solution if you don’t like his videos don’t watch I know I don’t If I can avoid it 

 
Tommikka said:
Consent is required for ‘commercial use’ but there are limitations to what commercial use that applies to.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...


is there an argument to be made that a profitable film production is a business?

because 7k from one video (according to the op's presented evidence) sure sounds like enough money to count.

 
Still, I don't see why it should be so easy to copyright claim. It seems like a textbook example of fair use? It's definitely limited and for a transformative purpose as it's definitely a criticism.

"In its most general sense, a fair use is any copying of copyrighted material done for a limited and “transformative” purpose, such as to comment upon, criticize, or parody a copyrighted work."

However, he definitely should NOT have been doxxed. That's never acceptable!

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Adolf Hamster said:
is there an argument to be made that a profitable film production is a business?

because 7k from one video (according to the op's presented evidence) sure sounds like enough money to count.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Could be a business but not necessarily ‘commercial use’ of the image with regard to permission etc 

I can publish and sell my event photos, including those including identifiable people.

I cannot use them in commercial advertising to sell a product without clearing consent.  
That may or may not be a legal matter until someone raises a claim but nobody would touch the photo without a model release consent form.

(Having said that, a company did use one of my photos in a Facebook advert after somebody memed a copy of it.  Nice bit of compensation ended up in my wallet)

Even on a TV show the need for consent/release depends on specifics.

For one of our guys an appearance as subject expert, named, multiple appearances in the programme, talking part etc - full release disclaimer required.

For others, faces on screen, key characters in a segment, non speaking parts - no release required.

 
Impulse said:
Still, I don't see why it should be so easy to copyright claim. It seems like a textbook example of fair use? It's definitely limited and for a transformative purpose as it's definitely a criticism.

"In its most general sense, a fair use is any copying of copyrighted material done for a limited and “transformative” purpose, such as to comment upon, criticize, or parody a copyrighted work."

However, he definitely should NOT have been doxxed. That's never acceptable!
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The claim can be made with ease, YouTube are a facilitator so cannot permit videos to remain online with a potential breach.   If you claim fair use then you repsond as such and can successfully get it back up.

(Note that the fair use response is only available to the original uploader. When people get their knickers in a twist and keep republishing a video on different accounts they have just lost that fair use claim on the subsequent uploads)

https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2814000?hl=en-GB

Fair use is a lazy defensive argument that is overly used on YouTube 

This is a rough guide to fair use on YouTube.  The above video doesn’t ‘transform’, it’s not a true critical review , it does criticise Kicking Mustang but isn’t a critical review, and it uses plenty of his material.

It definately does use his copyrighted material, he has a right to claim a strike on them, a creator has instant copyright over their material.  The ultimate answer to a dispute is to be found in court



 
Tommikka said:
Could be a business but not necessarily ‘commercial use’ of the image with regard to permission etc 

I can publish and sell my event photos, including those including identifiable people.

I cannot use them in commercial advertising to sell a product without clearing consent.  
That may or may not be a legal matter until someone raises a claim but nobody would touch the photo without a model release consent form.

(Having said that, a company did use one of my photos in a Facebook advert after somebody memed a copy of it.  Nice bit of compensation ended up in my wallet)

Even on a TV show the need for consent/release depends on specifics.

For one of our guys an appearance as subject expert, named, multiple appearances in the programme, talking part etc - full release disclaimer required.

For others, faces on screen, key characters in a segment, non speaking parts - no release required.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...


Is there an argument to be made via merchandising then? He does use his videos as an advertising tool for his own products and the people featured in the video as "cheaters" are being used to bolster the persona of km as a player who's skills, strategies, and therefore equipment are worth using/learning from?

This kind of copyright law isnt exactly my strong point so i'm not sure how well that kind of scenario would be covered.

Doesnt really matter either way, it'll be a case of videos getting pulled and by the time yt makes a decision either way people will have stopped caring.

 
Adolf Hamster said:
Is there an argument to be made via merchandising then? He does use his videos as an advertising tool for his own products and the people featured in the video as "cheaters" are being used to bolster the persona of km as a player who's skills, strategies, and therefore equipment are worth using/learning from?

This kind of copyright law isnt exactly my strong point so i'm not sure how well that kind of scenario would be covered.

Doesnt really matter either way, it'll be a case of videos getting pulled and by the time yt makes a decision either way people will have stopped caring.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It would be a stretch on the merchandising/advertising to make a gameplay element commercial use.  
Showing gameplay and also selling a product would have to depend on interpreting that segment of a video to be a direct advertisement, whereas they come off as ‘look at me, I’m so awesome and a perfect player’ and ‘by the way, I used an X in this video’ or ‘I wore a Y super ninja ghillie’

He is after monetisation of click bait and sells items but that’s not necessarily commercial use of the segment with another player

An ad agency / cable TV channel wouldn’t touch the videos among its adverts without protecting themselves on releases but might use them within a programme.

A claim on use of footage of you is commercial use would be up to you as an individual to bring up against him, and from what I’ve seen wouldn’t stand up to the test.

On defamation as mentioned as part of the justification in the YouTube comment screenshoot, that claiming somebody cheated and they are identifiable then it’s ‘defamatory to their character’ would need it to be untrue, for Mustangs opinion to be beyond mistake and for some form of harm to reputation.  If a video complete with hit markers isn’t good enough to protect Mustangs opinion then there should be lawyers on sites for the more serious defamation in person when it’s called out to your face among players - a harm to your character is more likely among all those present, as opposed to later on video where an individual would need to be recognizable in the footage and known to observers:

You played on, no I didn’t, his straight line hit shot and sound FX don’t match real life physics of airsoft through those bushes etc —— and by the way I’m a highly respected honest public figure with my reputation harmed by this foul statement, I demand satisfaction and a withdrawal  

Whereas it’s just hyped up click bait with people getting a bee in their bonnet and being counter productive in generating more publicity to him and his videos 

 
After watching the first part of that vid (can't be arsed to go any further), I'm pretty sure he knows what he's doing with clickbait, trolling and fake hit markers. He's appealing to young and or/new players and those who have never played. The best thing experienced airsofters can do, is not waste any brain space on him and his antics.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Tackle said:
Copyright striking, wtf that ?

Watched the first couple minutes, can't see feck all, are we meant to see him hit the guy, or is he missing every shot & covering it with a "hit" marker ?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Seems like that is exactly what he is doing.

 
@Tackle

Main take away is that he is lying on this videos about the hits he is claiming to make. 

Using on screen hit markers to make the players who he is missing, appear to be cheaters. Then actively naming a site who banned him from filming, implying that site was trying to hide its apparent high cheat rate and he was the victim.

When the reality is he cannot hit the side of a barn and is just good at editing in markers.
Then the cream on the cake is him sending his simps to the airsoft sites social media pages to kick off about his unfair treatment and how they are masking the cheating issues. Then remarking how airsoft only works with honesty. 

Whether this guy is making money from his videos or not. What a cunt ?

Before I even joined this forum, I had already told Youtube not to show me his videos. 

Common theme in most of my post/rants is how i hate cheaters. So KM if you are reading this

il_1588xN.2300660018_ol7l.jpg


 
Last edited by a moderator:
Tommikka said:
You played on, no I didn’t, his straight line hit shot and sound FX don’t match real life physics of airsoft through those bushes etc —— and by the way I’m a highly respected honest public figure with my reputation harmed by this foul statement, I demand satisfaction and a withdrawal  
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...


suppose that boils down to making cheating/cheat calling a full on legal battle, which is Billy Mitchell levels of sad.....

even if you won it wouldn't change people's perceptions of km, people will choose to either believe he's a sniping god in a world of cheaters or he's a liar who spins tales to get that sweet sweet ad revenue.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top