Video summary

Ubisoft uses DMCA to kill open source game; time for DMCA to GO!

Main summary

Key takeaways

News and Commentary

Overview

The video argues that Ubisoft is using DMCA Section 1201 (anti-circumvention) to suppress open-source tools that allow users to play legally owned game content. It specifically targets the open-source, browser-based “Rocksmith in the browser” project (described as “Slop Smith”).

The host frames Ubisoft’s actions as part of a broader “stop killing games”/anti-DRM effort—aiming to prevent companies from revoking access to games that users have already paid for.

Main Points and Claims

Rejection of “You don’t own your games” messaging

The host criticizes Ubisoft subscription director Philippe Tremblay, who argues that the idea of “owning games” is outdated and claims subscribers won’t lose progress when sessions change.

In response, the host argues that:

  • Subscription/DRM models can revocation access entirely.
  • Users are not truly comfortable with losing the ability to use purchased content.

Slop Smith is described as lawful (in the host’s view)

The host presents Slop Smith as an open-source web app that:

  • Reads song data, including files from Rocksmith on the user’s computer
  • Supports custom content
  • Offers learning features
  • Works across multiple platforms

The host distinguishes between:

  • Lawful use: playing songs the user already owns/purchased
  • Unlawful use: downloading or distributing copyrighted songs/recordings the user doesn’t own

Core legal objection: DMCA 1201 targets the “tool,” not only infringement

The host argues that while copyright law has historically allowed tools that have “substantial non-infringing uses” (citing Sony v. Betamax), DMCA Section 1201 is broader because it restricts bypassing technological protections—potentially restricting tools even when they have non-infringing purposes.

The host’s thesis: DMCA 1201 can criminalize or suppress legitimate use by focusing on bypassing/defeating protections rather than solely on infringement.

Alleged escalation by changing Rocksmith availability

The host claims Ubisoft:

  • Removed Rocksmith 2014 from stores in 2023
  • Moved toward a subscription model
  • Altered platform availability

This is used to support the claim that Ubisoft prefers locked-down access over ownership.

Criticism of Ubisoft’s takedown notice (“overreach”)

The host claims Ubisoft’s takedown notice:

  • Asserted that the entire repository/network of 131 repositories was infringing
  • Included alleged false statements, including that the software was not open source
  • Incorrectly claimed copyrighted music existed in the repo (the host claims mirrors show none is present)

GitHub’s handling is portrayed as inadequate

The host argues that GitHub:

  • Processed the takedown for the entire repository network
  • Did not meaningfully investigate what was actually in the code
  • Effectively deferred to Ubisoft without sufficient verification

Selective enforcement: similar software allegedly remains on sale

The host claims other products that can read similar file formats—such as “ToneLib JAM”—remain available, with no comparable takedown action.

This is presented as evidence of selective enforcement.

Broader political/legal critique: DMCA may block preservation and maintenance

The host connects the case to broader debates about DMCA exemptions, especially for video game preservation.

The argument presented is that DMCA (particularly 1201) can prevent legitimate access and ongoing maintenance of older tools/content, and that DMCA proponents may prefer subscription markets over preservation.

Contributing/Author Commentary Quoted in the Video

  • Bruce Lehman (described as a key DMCA-associated figure) is quoted/characterized by the host as:
    • admitting attempts to control copyright
    • noting he “tricked Congress” to pass parts of the law (as presented by the host)

The host uses these remarks to argue that the law should be reformed.

Calls to Action

  • The host announces plans to organize in-person events to campaign for DMCA reform, including:
    • a meet-up in Austin, Texas
    • an appearance in California
  • The host urges creators and policy stakeholders to attend and be prepared.
  • The host also states he received the emailed “original code” that was taken down and plans to mirror it on his own GitLab—aiming to ensure future legal pressure is contested in court with more direct notice.

Presenter / Contributor

  • Louis Rossmann (host)

Original video