Close Menu
Minecraft Videos

Microsoft appears to be taking down Minecraft videos on hacked clients.



Microsoft appears to be taking down Minecraft videos on hacked clients.

Microsoft appears to be experimenting with AI (Flora) to detect potential EULA breaches, specifically videos that distribute hacked Minecraft clients.

@Itsme64’s video: https://youtu.be/psxiC2hewKI
Minecraft EULA: https://www.minecraft.net/en-us/eula
Reddit discussion: https://redd.it/1fk28zm
PatarHD’s tweet: https://x.com/PatarHD/status/1836972418893590861

Merch: https://phoenixsc.store/
Cape: https://store.badlion.net/shop/PhoenixSC

——————————————————————–
This channel is powered by Shockbyte server hosting —

Receive a 25% discount on your first month on a server with code “PHOENIXSC”! https://shockbyte.com/partner/phoenixsc

——————————————————————–

If you’d like to monetarily support the channel, consider joining as a member!
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCj4zC1Hfj-uc90FUXzRamNw/join

SECOND CHANNEL: https://www.youtube.com/phoenixsucksat
TWITTER: http://twitter.com/phnixhamsta
TWITCH: http://www.twitch.tv/phoenixsclive
WEBSITE: http://phoenixsc.me
FACEBOOK: http://facebook.com/phnixhamstasc

#Minecraft is a game about breaking and placing blocks, developed by Mojang.
Minecraft: https://minecraft.net/

#PhoenixSC #Creative

View 50 Comments

50 Comments

  2. @gardenplant314 on

    It's saying that you're allowed to distribute mods, but that you can't distribute the base game even if it's altered to be slightly different than the original (through mods). And I think the AI is getting confused by the word 'client,' thinking that people are distributing the game client that has also been modded/hacked, rather than mods that are for your game client, since in both cases they're called 'clients.' But what the EULA refers to as a client is the base game client with all of their copyrighted code, not what is known to the community as a modded/hacked client.

    Though.. the part about "we'd appreciate if you didn't use mods for griefing" does slightly concern me a little.

  6. @knorke3549 on

    "suspend or ban" note that it doesn't say copyright strike? Like, denying access to their services and censoring coverage of certain content are two different things.

  9. @Chocolate_cooki3 on

    the fact its using AI to forcefully delete videos is bad but (correct me if I'm wrong) arent most of the videos deleted about hacked/cheat clients ? I fail to see how peoples would see it as unfair. Even if the video doesnt have any direct links, you are still advertising said clients which should be prohibited imo.

  10. @CDADRacer on

    PhoenixSC did you know that in Minecraft bedrock 1.21.30 on console (ps5) your XP bar is cut off on the right side, the last sub level of the xp bar is shorter than the rest

  11. @sirgouki6207 on

    I don't know where that poster got that MCP is against the EULA… especially given how long it's been a thing, and neither Mojang nor Microsoft have gone after them… in like 16? years. Modding is not only not against the EULA, they've literally got a section for what is and is not allowed (pay gating mods, mods that portray illegal activities, mods that are illegal… i.e. copyright infringement, or mods that crack the game, or distribute parts of the game without consent). MCP does none of this. It doesn't even distribute the source code for the game, it de-obfuscates it so you can make edits to make mods.

  14. @effien on

    Regardless of Microsoft's terms of service, this kind of thing doesn't fall under a copyright violation. They're blatantly abusing the system.

  19. @Delfite on

    It sucks that this is happening to innocent mod developers, but I'm of the opinion that anyone talking about Hacked Clients deserves to receive this kind of punishment. Here's my reasoning:

    1. Logical assumption based on observations: At least 80% of people think hacked clients/cheat clients are bad for the game and the servers in said game. I mean, just ask any member of a server's staff team, or someone who was on the receiving end of Killaura, it hurts player retention and it's bad for business. Less people playing on public MC servers means less people playing Minecraft and thus decreases Microsoft's profits.

    2. Logical assumption based on personal experience and observations: Nobody uses hacked clients on Singleplayer unless they're testing the features the client offers to make sure it meets the bare minimum standard in terms of functionality. People download hacked clients to get an unfair advantage against everyone else on the server, not to build things faster on a Creative server or steamroll a bunch of hostile mobs on a Survival world.

    3. Logical assumption based on observations: Hacked clients can contain Malware or Spyware that can compromise pretty much everything to do with the user. Microsoft taking action against cheat reviewers and distributors means less legal and moral liability on them if someone's kid downloads a cheat client only for it to steal their banking information and leave them penniless. After all, you can't expect a kid's parents to know everything about what they're doing on the internet, nor can they know what their kids are gathering from the stuff they're engaging with.

    By Microsoft attempting to prevent any mention of Hacked Clients they are effectively creating an information void on websites like YouTube, limiting the chance of accidental exposure to children who most likely would've watched the review and thought: "Wait, I can win any PvP minigame or get unlimited diamonds if I just install this mod? And it's FREE?! Sign me up!" and gone on to hurt Microsoft's bottom line. One kid doing it means their friends wanna do it, then their friends do it, and so on.

    Obviously I'm simplifying here as would anyone when talking about anything super complicated, but as long as Microsoft levels up their tech enough I'm fine with them taking down videos talking about hacked clients. Considering I just lived through one of the worst mass-cheating crises in gaming history: The TF2 bot crisis, which lasted 7 real life Earth years, I only want to watch cheaters, cheat developers, and the people that intentionally give them exposure BURN.

  27. @MajorTomFisher on

    Maybe if Mojang has a problem with the hacked clients they could… go after their creators instead? If you take down the people publicizing these clients, people can still search up the wikis and forums where people discuss these clients. You don't solve anything by harassing community members over this while striking a lot of innocent creators in the process. It's actually deranged how little Microsoft actually cares about the people not trying to do anything bad when they make policy decisions that affect everyone in the community.

  28. @EVILBUNNY28 on

    Definitely seems as though they are going after “cracked” clients, but in the EULA they have them listed as “hacked” clients. Microsoft either don’t know or more rather don’t seem to care for this difference as they’re taking down 2 birds with one stone with their current wording

  29. @AlexanderScott66 on

    If they really wanted to use the AI, it should instead bring it to Microsoft for human review, where they can green light a copyright strike or not, while also giving it good training data. Not "Minecraft Build Hacks… strike, you said hacks"

  37. @banjo4smash862 on

    How false claims should be handled: The one who filed the false claim must pay the uploader the $ amount their highest paid video in good faith that said video could of potentially been their next best video (or we could go by avg $ amount per video)

  42. @entityredstoneonyt on

    Man, microsoft has to stop dictating how players play mc, just let the servers put their own restrictions

    P.S. Auto copyrights should NOT be happening. Especially not STRIKES. Like mc fr is just deleting off channels without a second thought.

  44. @sourlesscream1272 on

    I understand why they are doing this, as servers are riddled with hackers and it is leaving a bad impression on there game. But I don't understand there use of the AI here, I think should much rather be an AI scanning for videos and them being flagged for human review, yes false positives will still make it through but you can at least be given a human answer to why it happened.

Leave A Reply