McCain and Palin latest DMCA take-down victims
US PRESIDENTIAL hopeful John McCain and his running mate Sarah Palin are getting treated to a lesson about how the DMCA is being used to make criminals out of ordinary people.
Yesterday their campaign HQ penned an angry letter to Youtube complaining about rights holders, especially news organisations, that filed illegitimate DMCA takedown notices and managed to have important campaign clips pulled at crucial times
The letter said that the online campaign was being hamstrung by " overreaching copyright claims".
Some news organisations which wanted the clips taken off are probably in the wrong because they contained "fewer than ten seconds of footage from news broadcasts in campaign ads or videos, as a basis for commentary on the issues presented in the news reports."
The McCain/Palin campaign said that these clips were fair use but they were pulled anyway as per Youtube's policy.
While the campaign can file a counternotice this all takes time and having crucial attack videos down for days at a time is apparently hurting the campaign.
McCain has called for Youtube to get proactive in these cases and do a manual review.
But it is somewhat amusing that US politicians bend over and do what rabid backers of DMCA takedown notices, such as the music and film industry, tell them to do. For years US politicians have watched as mothers filming their toddlers have been subjected to DMCA notices and they have done sod all. However once they are on the receiving end of their own subservience and their campaigns are threatened they don't like it and start screaming about fair use. µ
L'Inq
Arstechnica
Share this:
ShareBusiness Intelligence Software
Customer Relationship Management (CRM)
Enterprise Accounting Software
Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP)
Enterprise Systems Management
I especially this bit at the end of Arstechnica's article:

"...the McCain campaign suggests that human screening apply only to political campaigns".

I cannot help but be reminded of Sam Vimes' excuse that it's different because "it's me doing it".
The McCain-Palin campaign has been using music without permission prominently in their events. And no surprise really, because (by and large) only country & western artists are willing to let them use their music. You steal what you desperately need, in this case intellect(ual property).

I know the people at the Inq are just about all libertarian, but is the McCain-Palin campaign really your beam of hope? Really?
If it hurts enough, he just might enact some legislation to do something about the DCMA.
Despite Nick Farrell's constant bashing of the DCMA, copyright laws and all who support them and his pandering to the pirates, EFF, etc. his dribble will not change copyright laws.

Copyright laws exist to protect art which includes music, video, software, etc. If you want these items then purchase them like everyone else does. There ain't no free lunch in this world and none of the fools who believe there is, were born with some God given entitlement to steal whatever they feel like.

It's time for Nick and the pirates to buy a clue with their next music, video or software purchase. Talking smack about copyright laws just shows how ignorant Nick is. It's surprising The Inquirer allows him to post such irresponsible tripe everyday.
The internet made the supply of copies of information virtually unlimited (it's the originals that have a limited supply) which makes the classical economic rules obsolete. Applying these rules to such a system which is exactly what selling copies of information does inevitably leads to paradoxes.

Piracy is such a paradox. And it cannot stay unresolved forever. Two main things that impede it are the old ways of thinking and the copyright laws. The former will eventually change once more and more people realize the nature of the piracy paradox. The latter going to be updated when the former are transformed.

To sum it up, pretty soon the rules of information trading are going to change. Either that or we are going to see the internet shut down within the next decade. After all, bringing the old system back is also an option.
How does it feel?
Paul, you are wrong in everything you say.

First, let's get the English usage error out of the way: it's "drivel", not "dribble".

You seem to believe the writer is trying to get copyright laws changed, but he plainly isn't. He's reporting on people and corporations who want to change copyright laws. With DCMA, guilt is presumed before innocence. No injunction has to be served to prevent material from circulating: all it takes is a complaint from someone claiming copyright, whether or not that claim is true. This isn't what we signed up to when copyright was established.

Your next rant about stealing and purchasing is completely off base. Please re-read the article, this time with an effort to understand it. Note the mention of the McCain-Palin campaign stealing music and the context in which it lies.

Having convinced yourself the writer -- and not the McCain-Palin campaign -- is promoting piracy, you continue in the same vein. Please, do try harder. As it is, you come across as an irresponsible, tripe-writing, RIAA cheerleader.
I'd rather hear drashek comments than paul comments, they at least are genuine (and come off more intelligent), and don't seek to insult people's intellect and aren't balancing on the troll line.

It's nice that they let anyone comment though, that's getting rare these days, but admittedly it IS damn hard to moderate in a calm fashion and not ban left and right, if you take the internet-idiocy one observes into account. If I owed youtube for instance I'd be struggling to not ban 99.99% of the commenters.