Posts Tagged ‘Freedom of Speech’
Has anyone else out there ever heard of RightHaven, LLC? Well, if its news to you as well – that is very understandable. Check out that link – they’ve only been in business since early 2010. Their primary purpose is to acquire copyrights from newspaper organizations around the country and then actively seek out bloggers to sue them over alleged copyright infringement.
I first came aware of them this past week while I was fixing my blog. On a side note – if you are running Firefox, I highly recommend getting the add-on Firebug. You can watch your page load and see exactly where all the errors are. Anyway – I was fixing my blog and getting rid of dead links as well as checking all of my links. If you look over to the far right there and down a little to see my blog badges – you’ll see a blog from our buddy Brian Hill – U.S.W.G.O. – It is when I followed that link to his blog that I first learned of RightHaven, LLC. Apparently, they sued Brian over a TSA Patdown picture – this one. I didn’t see the actual blog post. Brian had this picture up on his blog – On February 7, 2011 – that’s right – this very past Monday – Brian was served with a court summons. If he doesn’t respond within 21 days he loses by default. If you read the initial link regarding RightHaven, LLC you will see their tactic is to demand a minimum of $75,000 payment and to have the blogger turn over their domain.
If you look to the bottom right of my sidebar – you see I have a “Fair Use Policy” – It essentially states I may use copyrighted material without expressed written permission from the originator and it is in accordance with Title 17, U.S.C. Section 107 which says:
Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include—
(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.
Like I said, I don’t know what Brian’s original post looked like and what was stated in it – but – if it was commentary regarding the aforementioned picture – it would certainly pass the “Fair Use” muster. Then, I noticed that picture does not have anything anywhere stating that it is a copyrighted image. So, I scrolled all the way down the page and it does have this on the bottom right side
All content © 2011 The Denver Post
So – that got me to thinking even further about copyrighting and notification of copyright – here is what I found
a) General Provisions. — Whenever a work protected under this title is published in the United States or elsewhere by authority of the copyright owner, a notice of copyright as provided by this section may be placed on publicly distributed copies from which the work can be visually perceived, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device.
(b) Form of Notice. — If a notice appears on the copies, it shall consist of the following three elements:
(1) the symbol © (the letter C in a circle), or the word “Copyright”, or the abbreviation “Copr.”; and
(2) the year of first publication of the work; in the case of compilations or derivative works incorporating previously published material, the year date of first publication of the compilation or derivative work is sufficient. The year date may be omitted where a pictorial, graphic, or sculptural work, with accompanying text matter, if any, is reproduced in or on greeting cards, postcards, stationery, jewelry, dolls, toys, or any useful articles; and
(3) the name of the owner of copyright in the work, or an abbreviation by which the name can be recognized, or a generally known alternative designation of the owner.
(c) Position of Notice. — The notice shall be affixed to the copies in such manner and location as to give reasonable notice of the claim of copyright. The Register of Copyrights shall prescribe by regulation, as examples, specific methods of affixation and positions of the notice on various types of works that will satisfy this requirement, but these specifications shall not be considered exhaustive.
(d) Evidentiary Weight of Notice. — If a notice of copyright in the form and position specified by this section appears on the published copy or copies to which a defendant in a copyright infringement suit had access, then no weight shall be given to such a defendant’s interposition of a defense based on innocent infringement in mitigation of actual or statutory damages, except as provided in the last sentence of section 504(c)(2).
Then – I found this – based on what I’m reading here – RightHaven, LLC has no standing:
(b) Scope and Exercise of Rights. — Only the author of a work of visual art has the rights conferred by subsection (a) in that work, whether or not the author is the copyright owner. The authors of a joint work of visual art are coowners of the rights conferred by subsection (a) in that work.
(e) Transfer and Waiver. — (1) The rights conferred by subsection (a) may not be transferred, but those rights may be waived if the author expressly agrees to such waiver in a written instrument signed by the author. Such instrument shall specifically identify the work, and uses of that work, to which the waiver applies, and the waiver shall apply only to the work and uses so identified. In the case of a joint work prepared by two or more authors, a waiver of rights under this paragraph made by one such author waives such rights for all such authors.
(2) Ownership of the rights conferred by subsection (a) with respect to a work of visual art is distinct from ownership of any copy of that work, or of a copyright or any exclusive right under a copyright in that work. Transfer of ownership of any copy of a work of visual art, or of a copyright or any exclusive right under a copyright, shall not constitute a waiver of the rights conferred by subsection (a). Except as may otherwise be agreed by the author in a written instrument signed by the author, a waiver of the rights conferred by subsection (a) with respect to a work of visual art shall not constitute a transfer of ownership of any copy of that work, or of ownership of a copyright or of any exclusive right under a copyright in that work.
Based on what I’m reading here – only the photographer of that photo that Brian put up can sue for copyright infringement. Neither The Denver Post nor RightHaven, LLC have a standing. I highlighted the section for emphasis. Even if the photographer sold his photo to The Denver Post – the photographer retains the right to state whether his photo was used in a manner that violates attribution or integrity.
This is getting pretty long – so – if you’re interested – the rest is below the fold
This is just the beginning – it was bad enough that Obama operatives in Missouri declared they would punish and fine anyone who spoke out against Obama earlier this month – now – Obama has punished a TV station for asking tough questions by cancelling an interview with Joe Biden’s wife after a reporter questioned Biden about Obama’s remarks to Joe the Plumber and Biden’s remarks about Obama being tested.
Here’s that story:
WFTV-Channel 9′s Barbara West conducted a satellite interview with Sen. Joe Biden on Thursday. A friend says it’s some of the best entertainment he’s seen recently. What do you think?
West wondered about Sen. Barack Obama’s comment, to Joe the Plumber, about spreading the wealth. She quoted Karl Marx and asked how Obama isn’t being a Marxist with the “spreading the wealth” comment.
“Are you joking?” said Biden, who is Obama’s running mate. “No,” West said.
West later asked Biden about his comments that Obama could be tested early on as president. She wondered if the Delaware senator was saying America’s days as the world’s leading power were over.
“I don’t know who’s writing your questions,” Biden shot back.
Gee – who would have guessed? If this guy gets in to the whitehouse – we can most certainly expect more if anybody criticizes his presidency!
“This cancellation is non-negotiable, and further opportunities for your station to interview with this campaign are unlikely, at best for the duration of the remaining days until the election,” wrote Laura K. McGinnis, Central Florida communications director for the Obama campaign.
McGinnis said the Biden cancellation was “a result of her husband’s experience yesterday during the satellite interview with Barbara West.”
See – and they readily admit it! They can’t handle being called out on anything. There is a strong push again to get The Fairness Doctrine put back in place. The thought police are going to be strong with this administration. Dare speak one word negative against Obama – and you will face punishment. I have a feeling this will start extending to the blogosphere as well!
Here’s a link to the interview: http://www.wftv.com/video/17790025/index.html.
Make sure you go check out that interview – FINALLY!!! A reporter asking the tough questions! And..they can’t handle it.
WFTV news director Bob Jordan said, “When you get a shot to ask these candidates, you want to make the most of it. They usually give you five minutes.”
Jordan said political campaigns in general pick and choose the stations they like. And stations often pose softball questions during the satellite interviews.
Of course they do! Most of the MSM have ONLY been tossing out softball questions!
“Mr. Biden didn’t like the questions,” Jordan said. “We choose not to ask softball questions.”
Awesome! Kudos to Channel 9 for standing up for journalistic integrity. I only wished there were more news people out there willing to do the right thing and inform the people.
Jordan added, “I’m crying foul on this one.”
I would too. But – did any of you hear about this on the MSM stations or in the MSM newspapers? Nope – this isn’t making airplay either. Again – proof that the left is for freedom of speech as long as it doesn’t disagree with their own views.
Biden so disliked West’s line of questioning that the Obama campaign canceled a WFTV interview with Jill Biden, the candidate’s wife.
I sure hope McCain and the Republicans pick up on this and get this out. People need to know what is coming. This is just the beginning people.