Posted on 12/07/2010 11:56:39 AM PST by Jim Robinson
Well, well, well. Remember back when the Associated Press threatened bloggers for quoting snippets of AP articles? Is the organization considering dipping its toes in the Righthaven waters? The Las Vegas Sun reports that Righthaven has signed up Media News as a client and has sued a blogger on behalf of the Denver Post, after the blogger apparently reposted a Denver Post column by Mike Rosen (with a link and credit). This is interesting for a few different reasons. First, it was just a few weeks ago that the Denver Post published a cryptic "reminder" about copyright that had a bunch of people scratching their heads. I had thought about mentioning it at the time, but it seemed so utterly lacking in context, that there wasn't much to say. I guess the Righthaven lawsuit provides context...
(Excerpt) Read more at techdirt.com ...
I don't like that idea as that would fundamentally change FR. Eventually, it looks like FR and others (class action?) are going to have to take a stand and defeat these guys in court. I wonder what AP's extortion/tribute/bribe/payoff price is?
Up the operating costs a bit (read: fundraise),
Or start a separate fund when the time comes to pay the extra expenses...court costs and other related expenses.
Good. Stare decisis or court precedent, to include the LA Times settlement, has been set against any new comers looking to get free money.
Does copyright also apply to reading an article out loud?
-Pj
Does copyright also apply to reading an article out loud?
-Pj
That's a very good technical question. Rush isn't the only one that reads other 'works' out loud on his show. Talk shows do the same.
David Letterman, or any other talk show host that cuts out 'funny ads' from newspapers and shows them on TV should also be an issue.
BUT....they'll never pursue that because... it's not really about protecting anyone's rights.
It's about silencing the enemy (us).
Limbaugh has said that he reads a reporters question but plays the clip of the answer because the reporter is “talent” but the politicians answer is news. It’ll be interesting to see what comes from reading articles aloud over the airwaves.
Perhaps a piece of software that lets you drop text onto it and then it does a quick re-write. It would not be perfect so you might have to read it over and make a few edits....but anyone could use it to post.
It could be set up to make some pretty unflattering conversions of various terms..LoL :-)
I believe a lot of the bullying that takes place over copyrights is just that, bullying. I’ve read some of the claims made by newspapers in their online copyright statements, and if you went by it literally, it is illegal to have more than one copy of their paper in your possession at any time.
That makes your newspaper recycling bin a major crime scene!
AP has had the goal of finding a way to charge for their news content for a while now, and aggressively pursuing purported copyright violations is how they muscle bloggers who are widely perceived and described by the industry as “unfair competition”.
Then again, consider the number of persistent Blog Pimps here at FR. RandysRight comes immediately to mind as he just had yet another of his obnoxious blog pimping threads shut down by the AdminMod just a little while ago. He has no connection to FreeRepublic LLC, but he can sure as hell get this site into a copyright violation by posting someone else’s copyrighted material here and pretending it is his own. Some are worse than others but they are all a big copyright problem for anyone who runs a site like this one.
Jim, I’m glad to see that you signed up for DMCA Safe Harbor protection. I have no idea what it costs, but you might want to share that for the next fundraiser.
Thanks for the ping.
Laz - are you a closet journalist?
Not only is treating blogs as lesser sources zero defense against winding up with copyrighted material - it cedes an air of legitimacy to the newspapers.
I deny that your post has any merit ethically, intellectually, or politically as it pertains to blogs in general. I supported Bill Roggio when he first struck out precisely because the MSM was and is inferior
Flame on.
They are trying everything possible to hush up the little sheeple.
I don’t believe they actually know what they are pushing for. They are the “people of unintended consequences”.
Apparently, they don’t know how to learn a lesson or two, or three, or four.....heck infinity!!
Copyright notice
BTTT
No, please let me correct you.
If you held a loaded gun to my head you could not make me care less about what you think about anything I say here at Free Republic.
Kippis!
I do not care a whit if my comment does not matter to you alone, my purpose is to defeat the idea you put out and did jot try to defend. You did not, because you can not. From Walter Duranty to Jason Blair, and all periods in between, the accuracy of the mainstream press stands revealed. Their record of copying one another is every bit as striking as their record of fabrication.
If I did not persuade you personally, I did soundly thrash your lame point. That was my goal.
Have a nice day.
Or start a separate fund when the time comes to pay the extra expenses...court costs and other related expenses.
We've just gone through that at Free Dominion.
We raised over $2400 for the Free Dominion Fund in under a week. We could do the same thing at FR when ever it is needed.
Connie and Mark were in court today for Richard Warman's motion to prove "Prima facie" in his case against them.
(Details: Warman, a lawyer, uses the human rights commission in Ontario to fight speech he does not agree with. (opinion)/ His case is based on libel law. Some posters on Free Dominion called him some names. Like, "Bully", and "Censor". He is suing Mark and Connie to get the names and IP addresses of those posters. Free Dominion's position, (from what I understand) is that he has no right to ask for the names, since he is a public figure, and the general population has every right to an opinion.)
I never knew that harboring (lol) anonymous posters who don't like him (richard warman), was against the law. *snicker*
Jim, I’m glad to see that you signed up for DMCA Safe Harbor protection. I have no idea what it costs, but you might want to share that for the next fundraiser.
I read his comment a little differently:
It cost us an arm and a leg and we are not completely inoculated, but as part of our settlement agreement, Righthaven has agreed to send us DMCA takedown notices rather than suing us if someone slips up in the future.
I interpret his comment to mean as part of the settlement FR paid Righthaven for future DMCA protection from them not the government. DMCA protection merely requires registration and payment of an $105 fee, which can not be "the arm and leg" cost mentioned by Jim.
It's not quite that bad. From the Denver Post copyright reminder:
... fair use of our content restricts those who want to reference it to reproduce no more than a headline and up to a couple of paragraphs or a summary of the story. (We also request users provide a link to the entire work on our website). The fair use rule generally does not entitle users to display the whole story or photograph on their website. To do so is a violation of our copyright and we will use all legal remedies available to address these infringements.
Read more: Notice to readers about Denver Post copyright protections - The Denver Post http://www.denverpost.com/ci_16594528#ixzz17TyE1beL Read The Denver Post's Terms of Use of its content: http://www.denverpost.com/termsofuse
Why not? Seems to be working with music and movies. Litigation appears to be all they have left.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.