Silenced by copyright claims
p2pnet view Freedom | P2P:- “Nearly a year ago, we wrote about how a YouTube presentation done by well known law professor (and strong believer in fair use and fixing copyright law), Larry Lessig, had been taken down, because his video, in explaining copyright and fair use and other such things, used a snippet of a Warner Music song to demonstrate a point”, writes Mike Masnick (right) on TechDirt.
” There could be no clearer example of fair use — but the video was still taken down”, he says, going on >>>
There was some dispute at the time as to whether or not this was an actual DMCA takedown, or merely YouTube’s audio/video fingerprinting technology (which the entertainment industry insists can understand fair use and not block it). But, in the end, does it really make a difference? A takedown over copyright is a takedown over copyright.
Amazingly enough, it appears that almost the exact same thing has happened again. A video of one of Lessig’s presentations, that he just posted — a “chat” he had done for the OpenVideoAlliance a week or so ago, about open culture and fair use, has received notice that it has been silenced. It hasn’t been taken down entirely — but the entire audio track from the 42 minute video is completely gone. All of it. In the comments, some say there’s a notification somewhere that the audio has been disabled because of “an audio track that has not been authorized by WMG” (Warner Music Group) — which would be the same company whose copyright caused the issue a year ago — but I haven’t seen or heard that particular message anywhere.
However, Lessig is now required to fill out a counternotice challenging the takedown — while silencing his video in the meantime:
While you can still see the video on YouTube, without the audio, it’s pretty much worthless. Thankfully, the actual video is available elsewhere, where you can both hear and see it. But, really, the fact that Lessig has had two separate videos — both of which clearly are fair use — neutered due to bogus copyright infringement risks suggests a serious problem.
I’m guessing that, once again, this video was likely caught by the fingerprinting, rather than a direct claim by Warner Music. In fact, the issue may be the identical one, as I believe the problem last year was the muppets theme, which very, very briefly appears in this video (again) as an example of fair use in action. But it was Warner Music and others like it that demanded Google put such a fingerprinting tool in place (and such companies are still talking about requiring such tools under the law). And yet, this seems to show just how problematic such rules are.
Even worse, this highlights just how amazingly problematic things get when you put secondary liability on companies like Google. Under such a regime, Google would of course disable such a video, to avoid its own liability.
The idea that Google can easily tell what is infringing and what is not is proven ridiculous when something like this is pulled off-line (or just silenced). When a video about fair use itself is pulled down for a bogus copyright infringement, it proves the point. The unintended consequences of asking tool providers to judge what is and what is not copyright infringement lead to tremendous problems with companies shooting first and asking questions later.
They are silencing speech, on the threat that it might infringe on copyright.
This is backwards.
We live in a country that is supposed to cherish free speech, not stifle it in case it harms the business model of a company. We live in a country that is supposed to encourage the free expression of ideas — not lock it up and take it down because one company doesn’t know how to adapt its business model. We should never be silencing videos because they might infringe on copyright.
Situations like this demonstrate the dangerous unintended consequences of secondary liability. At least with Lessig, you have someone who knows what happened, and knows how to file a counternotice — though, who knows how long it will take for this situation to be corrected. But for many, many, many other people, they are simply silenced. Silenced because of industry efforts to turn copyright law into something it was never intended to be: a tool to silence the wider audience in favor of a few large companies.
“The system is broken”, says Mike, adding:
“When even the calls to fix the system are silenced by copyright claims, isn’t it time that we fixed the system?”
..… and identi.ca
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win ~ Mahatma Gandhi
TechDirt – Bogus Copyright Claim Silences Yet Another Larry Lessig YouTube Presentation, March 2, 2010
Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. Subscribe to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/feed
Net access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for details.
March 3rd, 2010 at 1:28 pm
I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit. It’s the only way to be sure. – Abolish copyright!
March 3rd, 2010 at 2:19 pm
Abolish copyright!
March 3rd, 2010 at 2:21 pm
Or at least put a human to investigate whether something is actually infringing or not, instead of someone simply dissenting (unless he has music in the background).
March 3rd, 2010 at 3:20 pm
“Or at least put a human to investigate…”
I sure wouldn’t want to be that person!
But seriously, wrongful takedown is just the tip of the iceberg.
Here we have a world that’s now debating all sorts of ideas designed to “remedy” this perceived problem of IP infringement on internet content. All of these proposals involve summarily taking away natural and Constitutional rights from all users, yet demanding accountability only from the user end, while threatening the very functionality of the Internet.
None of these ideas seem to include proper attention to things like reality, applicability, respecting human dignity and privacy, other related laws, legal rights of the accused, proper grounds, or adequate recourse for those wrongly affected.
March 3rd, 2010 at 4:23 pm
OK, time for an extreme suggestion: Kill the Internet!
Shut it down! No online news, no P2P, no BitTorrent, no “illegal” downloads, no iTunes, no NetFlix, no internet radio, no ISP’s, no online shopping, and NO BUSINESS TRANSACTIONS as this will include killing the emails/networking/everything. Just kill it all.
This reality can be broadcast as the future if retards in the “Entertainment” industry get their way. People will still bitch about IP infringement from USB Key’s and DVD’s/CD’s, but whatever, they would bitch about chalkboards if that’s all we had.
March 3rd, 2010 at 8:18 pm
This is just…disgusting. The fact that the fingerprinting technology is still present on YouTube makes me sick. We thought that this issue would be solved in an adult manner, but the big, bad companies don’t want to listen to the people who keep them alive. Even freedom of speech is being suppressed by these jackasses. And a long time ago, YouTube was made so that people could ‘broadcast themselves’ and I loved YouTube. But now ever since these (excuse me) corporate assholes showed up, even that has no meaning anymore. I want my YouTube back. That’s why it’s important for me to keep supporting P2Pnet and boycotting these so called ‘big men’. Anyone who blocks freedom of speech is not big at all. They’re just whiny little children trying to get their way.
So Viacom, Avex, RIAA, Disney, and all of you other companies that would silence the voices of many people…m|m -_- m|m this is for you.
March 3rd, 2010 at 10:48 pm
Quite frankly, it’s bullshit like the above, that they did to Lessig — that has turned the entire notion of copy”right” into something between a sick joke, and the cultural equivalent of cancer. The more idiotic shit like this the corporate megaliths do, the worse their precious monopoly privileges end up looking, and the more difficult it is for their apologists to continue to make a case for such state-granted monopolies as a “good thing”.
If that destroys a few business-models that weren’t actually good in the first place (the corporate “recording industry”), so be it.
If it involves a few years/decades of people figuring out *new* business-models that don’t involve cronyism, propaganda, mis/disinformation, the reduction of culture to the status of “product”, the monopolization/hobbling of such “product” for a century after the monopolist’s death, etc. — that’s perfectly fine, too.
March 4th, 2010 at 5:07 am
The YouTube version of Lessig’s video located here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9JIp3yStpmg has audio again!!!
I also found a Rapidshare version of his video located at: http://rapidshare.com/files/358705989/Webside_Chat.mp4 (109776 KB) and am posting it here just in case the YouTube and Blip.tv versions “disappear.”
Attempting to stop people from speaking out on copyright issues with threats of copyright infringement penalties/takedowns is very stupid and WON’T work!!!!
March 6th, 2010 at 10:07 am
I wonder if maybe we could strike at the heart of this beast from another angle that may be a bit more accessible in terms of action. Though published some time ago and I can’t remember how I ended up finding it, I just recently read Robert Hinkley’s article titled “How Corporate Law Inhibits Social Responsibility” : http://www.negativland.com/news/?page_id=14
It occurs to me that perhaps rather than fighting the soulless corporate entity directly which appears impervious to reason, right, and rhyme, we might instead attack the foundation it rests upon which has no direct interest in self-preservation and may therefore yield more quickly. Could we affect change by adjusting circumstances which created the monster that cannot be controlled instead of attacking the monster itself?
also worth reading:
“Some Thoughts for Congress About Creativity and Copyright” : http://www.negativland.com/news/?page_id=87
“Ideas on Fair Use” : http://www.negativland.com/news/?page_id=23
“Changing Copyright”: http://www.negativland.com/news/?page_id=22
March 6th, 2010 at 10:09 am
“The system is broken”, says Mike
Ohh ain’t that the truth…