As I mentioned above, one of mine was flagged after I updated it. Something has changed with the automated process. I’m sure staff will be investigating and making changes if possible. Now that all of us have been updating for WFF this is important.
I don’t think graphics or resemblance are actually ever a reason for the auto system to flag a face. (they can and will get flagged manually for such things eventually) but maybe 100% of the auto removals are for words in the title or description. It’s usually a seemingly harmless common word like, believe it or not, “wow”, or “halo”, or “navigator”. But there are lot of these random words that have trademarks in on them. So the solution is to appeal, and then double check your language in the description and title, make changes, then republish. (make a copy first! so you don’t have to wait for the appeal if it happens again)
2 Likes
The text in the description can be looked at also . I had a face taken down because the very nice font I used was called SWATCH . Nothing else in the description or title referred to the Maker . The watch was remarkably similar in appearance to a Watch I had had for many years . But I think the current Batch of takedowns on updating are Marvin Having hiccups from the speed he is eating these days . 
Poor Marvin
1 Like
Let’s not attack users who are trying to help. She was trying to explain that getting promoted by Facer is a good thing. And just so you know, they don’t need your permission…
(from the TOS)
By making any User Content available through Services you hereby grant to Little Labs a perpetual, non-exclusive, transferable, worldwide, irrevocable, royalty-free, fully paid up rights and license, with a right to sublicense through multiple tiers, including to other Account holders, to use, copy, reproduce, modify for formatting and correction purposes, sell and offer for sale, distribute copies of, publicly display, publicly perform and otherwise exploit your User Content, in any manner in which Little Labs sees fit, in any and all media, now existing or hereafter developed, including, but not limited to, in connection with operating and providing the Services and Content to you and to other Account holders, and for any and all purposes, including for commercial and for-profit purposes. You expressly acknowledge that under this license, Little Labs will have the right to commercialize your User Content without any compensation to be paid to you.
3 Likes
Gosh that bit of Legal Eagle stuff has two Full stops . Bless .
We should count ourselves lucky it has two 
It gives us chance to take a breath and it’ has a font size we can actually read
1 Like
Of course Facer updates their auto-flagging system, so it is possible (because it just happened to me) that when updating a face that was passed prior to the auto-flagging system update, that it could get flagged now because those criteria have changed. So it wasn’t what you changed, it was that they changed what gets auto-flagged.
4 Likes
I believe that’s what I said 
Also , it’s not that it can be scanned, it is scanned. The reason older faces sometimes disappear is that yes the list of not-allowed words continues to grow, and anything that might cause the auto-system to rescan (updating, hitting milestones…) will be scanning with the newest filter and triggering the removal if it catches the wrong word.
I few weeks ago I got an email that a 4-5 year old free face hit 1000 syncs, there was also an email that the same face was taken down by the auto system. Turned out the milestone which triggered the email also triggered the scan, and the word “wow” which was in the description is no longer ok though it was 4 or 5 years ago.
5 Likes
That’s just redonculous. What’s next, the Steven King franchise banning “it”?
3 Likes
yeah totally ridiculous, but not Facer’s fault. They have an official licensing deal with World of Warcraft makers so I guess WOW is a trademark relevant in this context. But for sure corporate ownership of common words is one of the absurd signs of the times.
3 Likes
Yes, i know. But let me deduct some aspects from your statement. First, rules changes. Did you knew when they changed and why and what was changed. It is all very cloudy if you ask me, but perhaps that is intended. Secondly, only by upgrade i got this takedown, if i did not, well alert red alert. By extension, there would be and are i am sure, many faces “illegal” because i suspect only when creating new or updating, Marvin gets in. So some bad remain, but it is okay. Another thing is, the explanation from Facer is, we SUSPECT a violation. Suspect! It is like Trump saying, you are out or in jail. Why should the proof lie with me by the way. I argument that who who has power, must explain why he or she yields that power. The accuser must present why someone is guilty of copyright violation. Not a stomach feeling, not a suspicion, proof. Or otherwise we must rewrite every law book… And fourthly, why is this Marvin thing, not positoned BEFORE publishing. I can check statistics hallelujah, but i would be more and perhaps others, interested in forechecking, not after. Perhaps some people know the meaning of pro-active. But hey, that is just me and i am not a partner.
3 Likes
…so if the ground for suspect is some AI bot, let human see it first and only when its no longer just suspect but confirmed, then first quarantine the face, not delete it straight away…
2 Likes
No Rator, she was telling me when to be proud, how to behave. That is pretty attacking to me, my integrity, but not that you care or see that, that is clear to me. And just that you know, some people are not interested at all in promotion or money. You should accept and appreciate, people are different and have other opinions.
2 Likes
And what we have here is a microcosm of what the Online Safety Act in the UK will be. Massive censorship overreach just to ensure being on the safe side of litigation and fines.
Really, it’s not often the content owner’s fault either but the lawyers and governing bodies who reap retainer and cuts of any case the target is too scared to fight.
2 Likes
and reason why Peter. Not, i find you guilty of copyright with or without human interaction, without thorough explanation.
2 Likes
It’ll simple , if you put something (anything) in your watchface or description that is, or has been copyrighted, Then it is you who is in the wrong. It doesnt matter when youmade your watchface - before or after it was copyrighted when you published , or republished- the onus is on you to check. The Facer bot ( who we jokingly call Marvin) is doing a good job in protecting Facer from the enumerable Bolex or whatever faces out there. Some scrape through,thats true, as the micky mouse orsnoopy watches in the charts prove - but, rest assured they will be taken down when republished. One cannot complain if Marvin takes a watchface down for a suspected, or actual copyright infringement, because, as i said before, the onus is on the designer to check he/she hasnt included anything that has been copyrighted. FACER gives you a chance to question Marvin’s decisions and give it back if there is no infringement…
We are publishing (in the legal sense) which has legal consequences, so despite what many people think Marvin (Facer) is saving us from ourselves
2 Likes
I’m assuming after the paranoid android of HHGTTG fame.
Or you can ask for it to be reset to draft for personal use only, even if it does.
Before “punishing” yourself, you should always ask yourself if there is “guilt”!!!
1 Like
I checked the first time and every time and i checked before every publishing as everybody must do and that is okay. But my opinion does not matter. The only thing i changed, was time machine setting. Not something to rise suspicion does it, or does it for you. Why should i think without any rules explanation given by Facer about how exactly, this was NOW a copyright violation excuse me, suspected copyright violation. For you, i assume suspicion is enough and proof must not be provided. It is the rule, full stop. Yeah, typical a power institution does that. But it is okay, everybody disagrees. I dont care, by the way and that is my right.
2 Likes