TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

Dragon Ball Z Abridged

Go To

Zeromaeus Since: May, 2010
#37201: Feb 9th 2020 at 11:10:00 PM

Project Mouthwash's Digimon Abridged was top-notch, but Toei and YouTube seem to have crushed their spirits in that regard. They still release episodes of Unlimited Bladeworks Abridged every once in a while, though.

Edited by Zeromaeus on Feb 9th 2020 at 2:12:39 PM

terumokou Pitiable and Illegally Dumped Object from In a bamboo forest full of bunnies, California Since: Sep, 2013 Relationship Status: Mu
Pitiable and Illegally Dumped Object
#37202: Feb 9th 2020 at 11:23:54 PM

Oh man, reminding me that Abridgimon is still down.

Burning love!
Mullon Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: And here's to you, Mrs. Robinson
#37203: Feb 10th 2020 at 4:54:17 AM

There was something annoying about watching their goodbye video while the Oscars played on our tv. There's no justice in the world.

Never trust anyone who uses "degenerate" as an insult.
theLibrarian Since: Jul, 2009
#37204: Feb 10th 2020 at 9:20:40 AM

Yeah, along with all the effort that goes into producing a show like that, there's also the legal things because despite parody being covered under fair use You Tube doesn't seem to acknowledge that.

HighCrate Since: Mar, 2015
#37205: Feb 10th 2020 at 9:41:45 AM

It's not a You Tube issue, it's a DMCA issue. The DMCA does have some protections for fair use built into it, but like most bureaucratic legal systems, it's easily abusable by those with the resources to do so.

If You Tube were to actively declare a video "fair use," they'd make themselves legally liable if the matter went to court and the video was found to be infringing.

The way the process works, a company (e.g. Toei) submits a claim saying to You Tube, "this video infringes on our copyrights." The ostensible copyright-holder has the option of taking the video down altogether, allowing it to stay up but blocking monetization, or allowing it to stay up but taking ad revenue for itself.

If the video creator (e.g. TFS) doesn't dispute, the matter ends there. If they do dispute on fair-use grounds, You Tube takes the video down until the dispute is resolved. Again, if You Tube does not take the video down, they make themselves liable. As long as they comply with the takedown request, they remain a neutral party.

At that point, the ostensible copyright-holder has the option of releasing the claim, essentially saying, "never mind, you're right, this is fair use." If they maintain their claim that the video is infringing, the video creator has another chance to retract their dispute and let the ostensible copyright-holder have their way.

If both parties stick to their respective positions— the copyright-holder maintains that the video is infringing, but the video creator maintains that it's fair use— there reaches a point where, unless the copyright-holder provides You Tube with proof that they have initiated formal legal proceedings such as a lawsuit, You Tube can restore the video without being legally liable even if it goes to court later.

Essentially, the DMCA has a "put up or shut up" clause by which, if the copyright-holder isn't willing to actually go to court over the matter, the material is assumed to be non-infringing, at least for the purposes of You Tube's liability.

And that, as far as I can see, is where the matter has always ended in the case of Team Four Star (and most other channels that involve fair use disputes). Toei is willing to rattle their saber by sending takedown notices, but they're not willing to back it up with actual court action, and the video or channel always gets restored in the end.

The one exception I've seen to this pattern is the case of h3h3 vs. Matt Hoss, which actually went to court, and in that case fair use was upheld. That precedent doesn't necessarily apply to TFS: the case was a bit of a slam-dunk in favor of the video creator (h3h3). The copyright-holder (Matt Hoss) was rather blatantly a copyright troll attempting to use the legal system to stifle criticism. Whether the same would hold true in the unlikely event of an actual lawsuit between Toei and TFS is anyone's guess.

However, if You Tube had failed to comply with the initial takedown notice and Matt Hoss had won, You Tube would have been liable for damages alongside h3h3.

Edited by HighCrate on Feb 10th 2020 at 11:24:55 AM

Primis Since: Nov, 2010
#37206: Feb 10th 2020 at 2:52:40 PM

It doesn't help that Abridged Series don't actually fall under Fair Use.

Quinton Reviews explains it better than I could in this video:

Relevant part starts at 11:56.

Edited by Primis on Feb 10th 2020 at 3:55:53 AM

alekos23 Since: Mar, 2013
#37207: Feb 10th 2020 at 2:53:58 PM

So the Short Z are actually safer in a way then?

terumokou Pitiable and Illegally Dumped Object from In a bamboo forest full of bunnies, California Since: Sep, 2013 Relationship Status: Mu
Pitiable and Illegally Dumped Object
#37208: Feb 10th 2020 at 2:57:01 PM

Apparently so? I'm not exactly familiar with how it works other than they're not using actual footage from the show.

Burning love!
Primis Since: Nov, 2010
#37209: Feb 10th 2020 at 2:57:19 PM

[up][up] As long as they avoid directly adapting the same storyline, yes probably.

So if they stuck to their original plan of using the ShortZ to adapt the Buu Saga, then nothing would've changed in that regard.

Edited by Primis on Feb 10th 2020 at 3:58:55 AM

Thebrawlbro Since: Aug, 2013
#37210: Feb 10th 2020 at 3:03:52 PM

Yeah, using models is okay. It’s using the animation that was the problem.

HighCrate Since: Mar, 2015
#37211: Feb 10th 2020 at 3:04:18 PM

The truth is, nobody really knows whether they fall under fair use or not, and a You Tube reviewer with no background in copyright law doesn't know any better than anyone else.

It's the sort of thing that there's not a lot of clear, obviously-applicable case law on, because it's far more common for these things to be settled out of court than in it. There are guidelines set down in statutory law, but those are broad and open to interpretation.

Legally, though, the burden is on Toei to prove that it's not fair use, and so far, they haven't displayed a willingness to initiate formal legal proceedings to do that.

Edited by HighCrate on Feb 10th 2020 at 3:07:16 AM

Ghilz Perpetually Confused from Yeeted at Relativistic Velocities Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Barbecuing
Perpetually Confused
#37212: Feb 10th 2020 at 3:36:39 PM

Legally, though, the burden is on Toei to prove that it's not fair use, and so far, they haven't displayed a willingness to initiate formal legal proceedings to do that.

It's actually more complex than that.

Remember than Youtube isn't just beholden to American law. It's beholden to the law of every country it broadcasts in. We're more used to DMCA regulation, but Toei is a Japanese Company. Youtube does play in Japan. And Japan doesn't have fair use laws.

HighCrate Since: Mar, 2015
#37213: Feb 10th 2020 at 4:03:10 PM

I mean, to my knowledge Toei hasn't initiated legal proceedings in Japan either, and I think we would have heard about it if they had.

TobiasDrake (•̀⤙•́) (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Arm chopping is not a love language!
(•̀⤙•́)
#37214: Feb 11th 2020 at 7:59:44 AM

I actually think DBZA is more vulnerable to copyright law than other Abridged series. Most Abridged works can be defended under the grounds of parody, but DBZA transitioned to being a love letter to the series at some point. And by love letter, I mean an alternative localization to the licensed Funimation and Ocean products.

That transition from making fun of the work to trying to express it more faithfully could put the company in legal hot water. A key element of Fair Use doctrine is that a work must be transformative; it must be using the content in question to create something different, such as the use of a video clip from a film to critique said film.

Using Toei's animation intended to tell the story of Dragon Ball to tell the story of Dragon Ball isn't particularly transformative, even if they did edit it and voice their own dialogue over it. And since they stopped doing it for the purpose of mocking the original content, the parody defense doesn't apply either. Dragon Ball Z Abridged is copyright infringement.

If Toei did take them to court, their best defense would be to hone in on the fourth factor of copyright law.

4 - the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

A legit argument can be made that Team Four Star's work directly contributed to Dragon Ball's resurgence of popularity. That Toei has directly profited from their creation, and not just by putting ads on their videos.

However, that's only one factor. They'd have a harder time with these three.

1 - the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;

2 - the nature of the copyrighted work;

3 - the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole;

Or, in layman's terms,

  1. Did they make money off of using Toei's copyrighted material?
  2. Did they use Toei's copyrighted material in a transformative way that expresses something different from what Toei originally created?
  3. Did they use only the bare minimum material required for that transformative expression, and nothing more?

The answer is yes, no, and no. They used Toei's animation to produce their own version of Dragon Ball Z, using as much footage as they wanted for the sake of that version, and were able to build a business off its back. They never directly monetized DBZA, but it would be hard to argue that Team Four Star, as a company, would have existed without it.

Especially when TFS's main defense in terms of monetization has always been that they only monetize the gaming channel. But the gaming channel features further unlicensed trademark violations such as Two Saiyans Play or Goku's Gonna Show You. Dragon Shortz, incidentally, sidesteps the copyright issue but is also a trademark violation.

In short: if Toei wanted to take TFS to court, they'd have a pretty strong case. Which is why TFS has always bent over backwards to try and appease them.

tl;dr: "LOL Goku's a bad dad" is more legally defensible than Episode 60.

Edited by TobiasDrake on Feb 11th 2020 at 9:01:32 AM

My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.
HighCrate Since: Mar, 2015
#37215: Feb 11th 2020 at 11:16:46 AM

All of which only matters if Toei were actually willing to go to court over it, which they have shown time and time again they're unwilling to do.

And honestly, if they did? It could be the best thing that ever happened to Team Four Star, win or lose. Everyone loves a David and Goliath story. Think how much goodwill they'd gain from their fans for standing up to the big corporate giant who wants to take everyone's toys away. Think how much free publicity they'd get when they started showing up in headlines in news outlets that would never cover them before.

Worst-case scenario Toei sues them, they lose, the company declares bankruptcy... but the people behind the company have a loyal community giving them massive support for whatever they do next, because they know that these are people who stand by their decisions.

But that only works if they have the stones to actually stand up for themselves. Instead, they buckled, and pissed away the goodwill they had with their audience by being wishy-washy about buckling. They didn't even have the courage to capitulate smartly.

They've been on a leaky ship for years, and instead of either fixing the leak or steering towards shore, they've searched around for a bucket while the water rose around them.

Edited by HighCrate on Feb 11th 2020 at 11:19:26 AM

Ghilz Perpetually Confused from Yeeted at Relativistic Velocities Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Barbecuing
Perpetually Confused
#37216: Feb 11th 2020 at 11:20:25 AM

Worst-case scenario Toei sues them, they lose, the company declares bankruptcy... but the people behind the company have a loyal community giving them massive support for whatever they do next, because they know that these are people who stand by their decisions.

I like how you treat the company going bankrupt like if it's a minor inconvenience and they dont have families to support.

(Also without pointing out that going to court costs money. Even if you're in the right)

Edited by Ghilz on Feb 11th 2020 at 2:23:36 PM

PushoverMediaCritic I'm sorry Tien, but I must go all out. from the Italy of America Since: Jul, 2015 Relationship Status: watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ
I'm sorry Tien, but I must go all out.
#37217: Feb 11th 2020 at 11:22:01 AM

[up][up]You say that like this is the sole reason they're ending DBZA, when they've explicitly stated that there are many factors to the decision.

Edited by PushoverMediaCritic on Feb 11th 2020 at 12:22:18 PM

HighCrate Since: Mar, 2015
#37218: Feb 11th 2020 at 11:32:02 AM

[up][up] So now instead they get to try to support their families on a gaming channel with a fraction of the views it had a couple years ago, and a Patreon that relies on the goodwill of a fanbase that they've consistently failed to keep their commitments toward.

That doesn't sound like a better game plan to me.

[up] They've stated a lot of things. But you're right, at this point I'm more playing a "what if" game about what the optimal move would be if some other group of people, a group that had the courage of their convictions, was in their shoes.

Edited by HighCrate on Feb 11th 2020 at 11:37:40 AM

TobiasDrake (•̀⤙•́) (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Arm chopping is not a love language!
(•̀⤙•́)
#37219: Feb 11th 2020 at 11:38:24 AM

"Worst case scenario, Toei sues them into bankruptcy and then they live happily ever after."

I think that might be the most privileged thing I've ever heard anyone say on this forum.

My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.
MetaflarePrime Urara-lala~! (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: Sinking with my ship
Urara-lala~!
#37220: Feb 11th 2020 at 11:39:25 AM

[up][up]Chill dude it's just a You Tube show

Edited by MetaflarePrime on Feb 11th 2020 at 12:39:47 PM

Ghilz Perpetually Confused from Yeeted at Relativistic Velocities Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Barbecuing
Perpetually Confused
#37221: Feb 11th 2020 at 11:44:03 AM

[up][up] It's certainly pretty high there.

fredhot16 Don't want to leave but cannot pretend from Baton Rogue, Louisiana. Since: Jan, 2015 Relationship Status: Too sexy for my shirt
Don't want to leave but cannot pretend
#37222: Feb 11th 2020 at 11:48:44 AM

This worst-case scenario is missing a step in between "Toei sues them into bankruptcy" and "they coast on through on everybody's good will".

Like, unless the fanbase is willing to foot the bill for their utilities and food, I don't think that's a thing they can easily bounce back from.

Your livelihood being burned to the ground is not a thing you just take in stride.

Edited by fredhot16 on Feb 11th 2020 at 11:52:40 AM

Trans rights are human rights. TV Tropes is not a place for bigotry, cruelty, or dickishness, no matter who or their position.
HailMuffins Since: May, 2016 Relationship Status: Shipping fictional characters
#37223: Feb 11th 2020 at 11:48:48 AM

Not to dogpile, but the bankruptcy might not even be the biggest issue: a trial is fucking expensive, and Toei has an army of lawyers and endless amounts of cash.

Even if TFS has enough legal clout to win, Toei can just drag the case out and force them to give up thanks to a lack of funds.

In other words: taking a giant corporation to court is like trying to kill Cthulhu with a kitchen knife.

[up][nja]

Edited by HailMuffins on Feb 11th 2020 at 4:49:25 PM

HighCrate Since: Mar, 2015
#37224: Feb 11th 2020 at 11:54:48 AM

The company going bankrupt =/= the people going bankrupt. That's why it's called an LLC, a Limited Liability Corporation. If Team Four Star went under the people behind it... would have to find other jobs. They wouldn't lose their houses or personal savings or property.

It's not, like, ideal, but there are worse fates. I consider the slow, sad decline they're currently undergoing one of them.

You're not wrong that in some ways it's a high-risk play, but if you want to be safe, get a day job working for someone else. That's what most of us do, and there's nothing wrong with it. Trying to make a go of it as professional YouTubers / Twitch streamers is already a high-risk career move.

To use another analogy, it's like poker. If you just sit there and fold, fold, fold, it's inevitable that you're going to slowly run out of chips and lose. When your pile gets small enough, eventually you need to push all your chips in the middle before you get blinded out. Better to make a risky move with some chance of victory than accept inevitable defeat.

And I never said they should "coast" on their audience's goodwill. That's what they're doing right now: coasting on built-up goodwill from a project they haven't been actually prioritizing in over two years. How's that working out for them?

Edited by HighCrate on Feb 11th 2020 at 12:02:17 PM

TobiasDrake (•̀⤙•́) (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Arm chopping is not a love language!
(•̀⤙•́)
#37225: Feb 11th 2020 at 12:05:14 PM

"If it's too risky, just get another job"?

Like, say, professional game streaming while moving into original animation?

You are giving off so many "I have never and will never have to work for a single thing in my entire life and know absolutely nothing about the job market" vibes right now.

Edited by TobiasDrake on Feb 11th 2020 at 1:06:01 PM

My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.

Total posts: 40,340
Top