TorrentFreak

The place where breaking news, BitTorrent and copyright collide

First Ever ‘Withheld’ Tweet Was Faked By F-Secure Researcher

According to reports this morning, Twitter has withheld the first Tweet from one of its users on copyright grounds. Normally, disputed Tweets will simply disappear if there is a complaint, but one belonging to F-Secure’s Chief Research Officer Mikko Hypponen has now been replaced with a copyright notice. While Twitter has indeed introduced a welcome policy change that will lead to more transparency, the first ever “withheld” Twitter comment was faked by a rather mischievous F-Secure employee.

As first noticed by GigaOm last evening, Twitter has announced a new policy for dealing with allegedly infringing Tweets.

On receipt of a complaint from a copyright holder, in the past Twitter has simply deleted Tweets leaving the site’s users completely in the dark as to what had happened. But now a change in policy will see Twitter increase transparency by providing more information about disappeared Tweets.

The way it will work in future is outlined as follows. Copyright holders will submit a ticket to Twitter containing a DMCA complaint. After an initial inspection Twitter will notify the author of the Tweet in question that their post has been removed. They will also send along a copy of the original complaint and give the user an opportunity to file a counter-notice. The big change comes with how the offending Tweet is displayed while that process is underway.

“In an effort to be as transparent as possible regarding the removal or restriction of access to user-posted content, we clearly mark withheld Tweets and media to indicate to viewers when content has been withheld,” the Twitter team explains.

“We also send a copy of each DMCA notification and counter-notice that we process to Chilling Effects, where they are posted to a public-facing website (with your personal information removed).”

Twitter then give an example of how a removed Tweet will appear, containing the following text.

“This Tweet from @Username has been withheld in response to a report from the copyright holder. Learn more”

So how quick were Twitter to take down a Tweet and replace it with this notice for the very first time? Well, at least on the surface, very quick indeed.

TwitterMikko

The Tweet shown above comes from Mikko Hypponen, Chief Research Officer at F-Secure.

However, while it might appear to be a world first, we sensed that something didn’t look quite right. And, after all, it’s quite easy to post a similar Tweet and provoke a reaction on Twitter.

TorrentFreak contacted Mikko and he’s yet to respond but in any event we’re pretty sure that Mikko isn’t likely to be posting infringing content on Twitter any more than we are.

Also, his Tweet was “withheld” just a few hours after Twitter made the announcement, far too quickly for a complaint to be made and Twitter to respond – especially at midnight on a Friday evening.

But as this article is being written, Mikko has posted a new Tweet in response to people doubting whether the takedown was genuine or not.

MikkoFake

Well Mikko, we can tell. It’s quite subtle but let’s just say that the real Twitter “withheld” version contains a feature that normal users simply cannot pull off.

Have you spotted it yet? Have a guess in the comments section below.

Update: We just received a comment from Mikko

“I read the Twitter support article about their new DMCA policy over the weekend and immediately tried finding an example of such a censored tweet. Since I couldn’t find any, I decided to create one,” Mikko explained.

“So yes, it was a joke.”

Related Posts

Previous Post | Next Post

  • Guest

    Expect more censorship to come from people to censor any criticism that portrays them they see wrongly.

    • The_Strawbear

      Private businesses can do what they like in this regard as long as they’re not targeting a certain group of people (eg stopping all gay people tweeting because of a weird homophobic policy). They aren’t there to have some huge moral crusade against IP holders and their lawyers. It would be great if they were, but they’re not into that.

      No one makes you use twitter. No one makes you read twitter.

      If you don’t like how they do stuff, then go elsewhere to get your ego boosts or to read about what other people had for lunch.

      • Harold

        And that’s precisely the problem. Every damn part of the internet is some private business, so they get away with censorship, because it “isn’t censorship”. But just because a private business is doing it instead of a government, doesn’t mean it doesn’t have the same bad results.

        • http://twitter.com/SandraR82590366 Sandra Rose

          @JordanKratz, …vbd.qlnk.net

        • Krozareq

          Then don’t use those parts of the Internet. That’s why I have been suggesting our own net of hobbyists and real computer users just like it used to be before every jackass on their iDevice came along.

          But telling a site owner what content they can or cannot delete is in itself tyranny and censorship is it not?

          Do you have a blog, a message board, IRC channel, etc? Imagine the Government telling you that you have to keep some jackasses around.

        • Hardcore_Gamer1

          @Krozareq
          You just argued against yourself and I will explain to you why. You said that no corporation should be forced into what they can and can’t takedown. Well, what if they aren’t deciding to censor on their own terms and it is actually outside legal threats and powerful lobbyist groups who are influencing social media policies. Corporations are gaining government-like power and dominating independent businesses. Wikileaks had all their funds and advertising cut off by every major bank, every major credit card company, as well as PayPal. Kim Dotcom had a botched investigation against him that resulted in even the non-infringing users losing their files. When Google defended itself in court to protect YouTube against Viacom, they lost, which resulted in stricter video filtering where a lot of content is removed by lawyers from outside of Google. It’s not too hard to get companies to give in when the MPAA and RIAA have ex-employees working in congress, huge lobby groups and only a few banks control USA’s wealth. Globalization is significantly decreasing alternative options as companies merge, struggle to compete or are buried by legal hurdles. That ‘part’ of the internet that you are referring to is expanding rapidly. Once any service begins to have a reach they are targeted. Statistics on ChillingEffects show it is not just the big names that are targeted. Even no-name political bloggers are being sued at an alarming rate. In many cases there are now even DMCA takedowns without due process where websites aren’t just sued or delisted, but completely removed from the internet. This happens before the accused can even counter the claims. There was a recent case where a group made a video revealing that Whole Foods misleads customers about not selling GMO products. Within hours the video was erased from all major video sites, delisted from many search engines and its creators threatened.. As for tweets, how many people are going to pay thousands of dollars in legal fee’s with today’s rough economy to get their tweets reinstated. Even ISP’s are targeting its own customers, as next month they will implement a “3 Strike” rule where they spy on their own users and report their activities to an ‘independent’ copyright committee. The only problem is that this ‘independent’ committee are actually former RIAA lobbyists. With future ACTA and TPP bills on the way it is clear that many big corporations are abusing the system solely for their own gain. Using their money and power to scare and sue competitors and dissenters into submission, making false claims, cutting off funds/advertising and influencing lawmakers. Why should I have to use a social network that none of my friends are on only for it to go out of business, conform or become so popular that it too is targeted by the new internet police. What search engine isn’t powered by Google, Bing or Yahoo nowadays? Website owners and users are already being told what to do. The tyranny has already arrived and we mustn’t let it’s disease continue to spread. As for our own internet for computer nerds, we have the deepnet. The only problem is that it is slow, has primitive looking websites and has far less content. That being said, it is anonymous and free of censorship.

    • http://twitter.com/RichardBig1 RichardBig

      Sarah said I’m blown away that people can profit $6212 in one month on the network. have you seen this(Click on menu Home)

    • http://twitter.com/RichardBig1 RichardBig

      …..goo.gl/bDkEX

    • Tweeter

      If 140 characters or less doesn’t count as fair use or de minimis use, wtf does?

  • Bert Ritto

    Real tweet uses HTML. Derp a derp da derpness.

  • http://travismccrea.com Travis McCrea

    :) I saw this same basic tweet on your stream and almost was fooled.

  • http://torrentfreak.com/ Rob8urcakes

    Yet more unwanted, unneeded censorship from United Corporate States of Fascist America.

    And Twitter will know exactly where they can shove this tweet :o

    • Guest321

      Time to boycott Twitter. They have gotten too big for their own good.

      • Guest

        Abuse twitter with download links they will either give up or make the process automatic.DMCA on twitter is stupid.

    • JordanKratz

      I so hate my Asshole Government and I feel bad.There some very cool Americans but we are drowned out by the Mass Consuming Majority of Sheeple.

    • Zeissmann

      I don’t think you understood the article. Let me summarise it for you: it says that Twitter is making their DMCA policy more transparent, giving users the ability to file a counter-notice. The censorship is nothing new, but now at least you will know where you went “wrong” and what you can do about it if you don’t agree. It’s not a great improvement, but still better than just removing tweets without any notice.

    • PirateSoldier

      I’ve seen plenty of your comments before Rob, as a fellow U.K citizen I think you should be the new TF ambassador. Many times seen your sensible and yet honest opinions that mpaa etc won’t listen to. You are a voice of the people my friend, keep your voice heard so that people will stand up listen and take action. I salute you

    • gnugitsu

      Rob8urcakes hey man, how are you doing? I read a while back you were dealing with some issues so I just wanted to ask.

  • demona

    I wouldn’t know about html but the “joke” has the users name at the top and the “real?” comparison has “Tweet withheld” instead of their name at the very top of the box

  • Lol

    I see four significant differences. The bold “Tweet withheld” in place of username, and “learn more” is a link not a label before the link, no follow button, no profile photo.

    Stop stealing my cakes Rob.

  • Lol

    The html thing was a joke about the real tweet being a .png. It’s possible I’m wrong and it’s more a “joke” than a joke.

  • http://twitter.com/YabbaDabbaTru YabbaDabbaTru

    twitter is a joke…..

  • Pingback: First Ever ‘Withheld’ Tweet Was Faked By F-Secure Researcher | Best Seedbox

  • GrrFace

    Grr twitter grr I am angry about twitter in the comments.

    Also I believe in the actual twitter take down Learn More is a link, not followed by one.

  • Dondilly

    How long now before dmca complainants start issuing farcical dmca notices against copies of their own dmca twitter complaints as many do on google in an attempt to fudge transparency and accountability.

  • Anonymous

    People are suddenly angry at Twitter for removing tweets, even though the change isn’t “removing more tweets”, but “be transparent about tweet removal”.

    Silly people. You think Twitter wants to take down messages? You think they want to paint themselves as an unreliable service? Don’t be angry at Twitter for obeying US law, be angry at US law. And be angry at the companies who send out DMCA notices, now publicly documented on Chilling Effects.

    • John Space

      There was a time when you could subscribe to the RSS of a Twitter account. Nowadays you cannot (although there are ways to do so), so it wouldn’t be surprising if they decided to go on with this shoot-yourself-in-the-foot policy.

  • ndmushroom

    I’m sorry, I must have missed something. How can a tweet be violating copyright? Yes, there are thousands of RTs where the fact that it’s a RT and not an original tweet has been carefully “forgotten”, but I don’t think this is what we’re talking about.
    Tweets are 140-character long text segments (sometimes containing links). Even if the entire 140 characters were copied from something else, it would still fall under “fair use”. If the issue here is how to deal with the hyperlinks, I don’t think it’s an issue for Twitter to resolve: the hyperlinks point to a webpage where copyright is (allegedly) infringed, therefore it’s the webpage (and not the tweet) that should be dealt with. If I’m letting people know there’s some stolen goods in a van behind the alley (for the purposes of this discussion, let’s assume that copyright infringement is similar to “stolen goods” and “a van behind the alley” is similar to “a webpage”, even though they aren’t), the problem is solved by recovering the goods from the van. Not by censoring my informing the world about it. If anything, the poster of the tweet can claim that it was his way of informing the authorities. ;-)
    No more censorship on copyright grounds, enough already!!!

    • Keke

      but what about if they would rather just cover it up and look the other way like so much happens irl? Just look at uk and all their govt being p3d0s. Its coming out see bbc scandal of movie stars molestering kids while at bbc, and other facilities and big govt all up in the party molestering the kids. The world is run be elitist p3dos. davidicke dot com / forum todays news has the info

      • Techanon

        I must agree here in that, many governments went on the “put CP under the rug” path and also on the “censor anything we don’t like using children, terrorism and copyright as a pretense” path.

        • Arse

          You forgot the two lesser used paths of religion and “first amendment” rights of government. The US government has actually claimed before that the first amendment protects their right, and corporate right, to censor any voice that makes it difficult to hear the voice of government.

    • Violated0

      You make a good point when it is hard to see how any Tweet could be infringing someone’s copyright.

      This seems more a step in trying to criminalize HTTP links which is something the law has never allowed but what they seem to now aim to do on a more social business level.

    • Furious Canadian

      Copyright holders pushed way too hard on that one.

      The Internet community should step up and create their own Facebook and Twitter but not US Based.

      That way we will get the good information and been possibly censored like they could do twitter as for now.

      fuck them all

      • Hogspace

        I agree completely. I’d have more respect for Twitter if the moved offshore.
        But then I already refuse to use FB and T.

    • Yuremom

      I have to repeat your question as i cannot actually fathom a copyright infringing tweet. Granted, i avoid twitter like i avoid my mother-in-law, so i really don’t know a damn thing about twitter. Still, did somebody submit 1,254,670 tweets and post a complete cliff notes or something? Seriously, someone please give me anything really could constitute a “copyright infringing post” on twitter. A web link is nothing more than a redirecting of a users location on that page/tab so it cannot apply with any logic…

  • Violated0

    At least Twitter is now correctly aiming to follow DMCA law instead of just deleting stuff that they don’t like. That means both sides now get to air their concerns and if no agreement is reached then Court then becomes an option.

    Well a nice joke but censorship is never a laughing matter. Plenty enough people will soon see Twitter’s real version and at least Chilling Effects now provides some better oversight.

    • Hogspace

      It’ll be a process that works when each takedown notice costs $10 or more

  • Hmm

    who uses twatter and social media any how crap?

  • NaziAmerica

    Lame and boring. I guess F-secure need all the publicity they can get.

  • Anyone

    it’s good that Twitter adds some transparency to the DMCA process
    still, the DMCA has to die

  • uberfu

    So there was no copyright infringement and nothing relating to Torrents – so why is this relevant ??

    Why does the article not simply focus on the Twitter policy change ?

  • Foff

    This is a complete abuse of copyright law. Claiming copyright abuse of a few words or a sentence is the equivalent of a patent on round corners on a smart phone. This is just how out of hand the DMCA. Taken to the extreme almost anything could be taken down. This is like kids on a play ground when one kid says something and another says I thought of that first. Why anyone wastes time on fb and twitter where free speech is limited is beyond me.

  • Who

    LOL Twitter sucks any way so who gives a flying FUCK.

    I use it to promote my web sales and it don’t really help.

  • Yuremom

    Actually, this makes me wonder if even just the act of faking something like this would violate the users agreed upon TOU and should thusly suspend or ban/terminate their account. Again, i am not a twitter users, but typically most web/online entities have very strict guidelines when it comes to impersonating and faking their job, positions, employees, etc. LOL, amusingly, since what he made was a fake, if it were to become the intellectual property of twitter wouldn’t he actually be guilty by simply making a “joke”?

  • SimVooo

    Bummer, Tweet is becoming way too commercialized for my liking!
    anon-you.tk

  • bow chicka wow wow

    twotter owns all tweets so it’s twotter in violation of copysloppy.

  • Lethn

    Thanks Torrentfreak for actually using journalism skills to look at this and not just do what any other journalist would do and immediately assume twitter are out censoring what people say? Yes, it will eventually happen and people have been arrested for making comments on facebook/twitter before but if we don’t use actual facts to further this cause then we’re no better than the people we fight against.

    EDIT: WOOOO EDIT BUTTON!

  • Pingback: 3 Count: Triumphant Return | Plagiarism Today

  • duodeqibaaa
  • Anonymous

    Basically what they’re doing now is removing our right to free speech

  • BTGuard - BitTorrent Anonymously

NewsBits

Even more news...

  • The Pirate Bay Isn’t Down Completely, Just Having a Few Issues

    Twitter and Facebook, not to mention the TorrentFreak inbox, are currently alive with complaints that The...

  • Pirate Bay Founder Gottfrid Svartholm on Freedom of Speech

    Freedom of speech is a highly valued commodity, but should people be allowed to say whatever...

  • Blu-ray Anti-Piracy Tech Stops Discs and Promotes Purchases

    An anti-piracy system present in all official Blu-ray players since 2012 has received a fresh update...

  • Foxtel Breeds Pirates by Locking Up Game of Thrones

    One of the main reasons why people turn to piracy is the lack of legal alternatives....

  • UK Student Admits Breaching Sony Copyrights With Leak of PS3 SDK

    Last year an Internet user known as El Nomeo leaked version 3.70 of Sony’s Playstation3 SDK...

MostDiscussed

Below are TorrentFreak's most discussed articles of the past month. Join the discussion if you like.

CopyQuote

Left Quote

“The Pirate Bay has been one of the most important movements in Sweden for freedom of speech, working against corruption and censorship.

Peter Sunde Left Quote

PopularArticles

A selection of some TorrentFreak's classics dug up from our archives.