By Antonio D. French
Filed Friday, September 21, 2007 at 9:34 AM
On Wednesday we filed a formal counter-notification with YouTube in response to our account being suspended and our more than 500 videos being taken off-line. The suspension came just hours after KSDK Channel 5 filed two complaints with YouTube alleging that we violated their copyrights by using clips of their broadcast in our piece criticizing their coverage. Labels: Beefs, Media_Watch
We believe our usage of KSDK's video falls under the "Fair Use" provision in copyright law. From the Stanford University Libraries:Fair use is a copyright principle based on the belief that the public is entitled to freely use portions of copyrighted materials for purposes of commentary and criticism. For example, if you wish to criticize a novelist, you should have the freedom to quote a portion of the novelist's work without asking permission. Absent this freedom, copyright owners could stifle any negative comments about their work.
Here is a PDF of the counter-notification. We received word from YouTube last night that they had received it and forwarded it to KSDK.
Here again is the video at the center of KSDK's complaint:
No word yet on when — or if — we'll get access to our 500 unrelated videos.
Thanks to the following websites for mentioning our plight:
NewTeeVee.com
Missouri Political News Service
Arenas of Ideas
Arch City Chronicle
BlogKC
It's My Mind
Highway 61
The Riverfront Times
Dee Harvey
Bill Streeter from LoFiSTL.com
6 Comments:
KSDK is following the strategy once used by Dick Gephardt, to use copyright laws to suppress the flow of information. Gephardt sued one of his opponents (either Gary Gill or Bill Federer, I forget which) for use of videos of Gephardt's speeches documenting Gephardt's public statements that he had been denying. Gephardt claimed copyright protection over everything he said. He lost. And so should KSDK, for the reasons Antonio stated. Pubdef wasn't stealing their news coverage of an event; KSDK's coverage itself was the news event.
KSDK probably knows it will lose utlimately. But it wins right now by intimidating YouTube into removing the videos now, during the very period when public interest in the videos is highest. Later, when the videos are returned to public view, interest will have lagged, and fewer people will see them.
This may amount to a tort called "abuse of process" which is the abusive use of the legal system to accomplish something different than what the litigation claims. Here, the real aim is to suppress distribution during the key time period when interest is highest. Pubdef may wish to discuss with its legal counsel about whether it has a worthy claim in this regard.
9/21/2007 1:21 PM
"intimidating YouTube"
lol
9/21/2007 4:16 PM
Oh, that's right, this is about an alderman on the take originally. If KSDK is concealing this info, isn't that as good as accessory to the crime?
9/21/2007 5:22 PM
Hey PubDef, I'm sorry that KSDK's doin' this business to ya. It's really lame.
9/22/2007 1:44 PM
This sounds like an unfair attack to me. Although, Youtube is notorious for being difficult. Hope you come out of this victorious.
9/24/2007 12:00 AM
Dog, in the future, use somebody else. YouTube is just another fickle who' full of drama you don't need. Use Google.
9/26/2007 2:25 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home