Posted on 10/13/2015 4:26:36 PM PDT by MarchonDC09122009
http://dailycaller.com/2015/10/13/congressional-review-of-copyright-law-may-threaten-drudge-report/
Congressional Review Of Copyright Law May Threaten Drudge Report Photo of Kerry Picket Kerry Picket Reporter 5:20 PM 10/13/2015
WASHINGTON — Congress may update digital copyright law affecting aggregator sites, like the Drudge Report and Real Clear Politics, along with news sites in the near future.
“Two years ago, the House Judiciary Committee launched a comprehensive review of our nation’s copyright laws, which have not been updated since 1976. As technology continues to rapidly advance, we have a responsibility to ensure that our laws are keeping pace with these developments,” Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte said in a statement.
Since March of 2013, the House Judiciary Committee has conducted 20 hearings, which included testimony from 100 witnesses on the subject of copyright law in the digital age. The topics range from fair use to scope of copyright protection to music licensing.
“The committee has been conducting a comprehensive review of U.S. copyright law to ensure that the law keeps pace with the digital age in which we live. The goal of the listening tour is to step out of Washington, D.C. to hear from creators and innovators in terms of what is and is not working for them in their various fields,” a committee staffer told The Daily Caller.
The committee staffer would not say how the laws would affect aggregators and news sites and said that only “all stakeholders are invited to come in and meet with staff in order to give their thoughts or express concerns. Those meetings are ongoing.”
Drudge Report site owner Matt Drudge told Alex Jones of InfoWars last week that copyright laws could very well end his popular site.
“I had a Supreme Court Justice tell me it’s over for me,” said Drudge. “They’ve got the votes now to enforce copyright law, you’re out of there. They’re going to make it so you can’t even use headlines.”
He explained, “To have a Supreme Court Justice say to me it’s over, they’ve got the votes, which means time is limited,” he added, noting that a day was coming when simply operating an independent website could be outlawed. That will end [it] for me – fine – I’ve had a hell of a run,” said Drudge, adding that web users were being pushed into the cyber ‘ghettos’ of Twitter, Facebook and Instagram.”
Drudge added, “This is ghetto, this is corporate, they’re taking your energy and you’re getting nothing in return – nothing!”
In July, Chairman Goodlatte and Democrat Ranking Member John Conyers invited witnesses from the Committee’s previous copyright review hearings as well as other interested stakeholders to meet with committee staff to provide additional input on copyright policy issues.
According to the committee, almost 50 meetings were scheduled and those will take several more weeks. Additionally, Goodlatte and Conyers announced that the House Judiciary Committee would conduct a listening tour as part of the copyright review.
I have read from JR that FR will continue, that perhaps freepers will write their own reports. That would make FR a discussion/news/commentary site. Much the same as it is today.
And, there is always the avenue of requesting of sites the authority to link to their information. I suspect there are many sites that will welcome that.
The truth is that I don’t see a lot of NYT threads here on FR, anyway.
Personally, I tend to visit sites that also honestly cover conservative viewpoints. It would be a benefit for such a site to authorize FR to link to them.
They want to copyright “news”? Goebbels would be proud!
There’s no bill yet. It’s just in the review stage right now.
No. That was Rep. Hank Johnson. He said that about Guam.
Tyrants never quit.
I REALLY hate this government.
And if they can't do that, they can't stop us.
And as for Drudge, he is basically a link service anyway and there is no way for the government to prevent a site from linking to articles. Even the publishers of the articles wouldn't go killing links because that would drive down traffic.
FR drives a massive amount of traffic to sites and that means ad revenue for said sites.
FR will easily get permission.
Thats not necessarily true.
If media outlets make a calculation that traffic will remain constant, just shift from originating at Drudge and FR to Twitter or Facebook, then it’s a wash. Some hate Drudge and FR so much that they’ll refuse to grant permissions out of spite.
The bigger issue is that if media outlets have total control over their headlines and links to their stories, and can pick and choose who to give use permissions to, they can negotiate those permissions for a price. Rather than being a straight cash payment, it’ll more likely be the sharing of user information.
I don’t imagine Jim Robinson would ever willingly agree to share user information with the press. But that would most certainly be the price demanded by the press.
Great but their modus operandi is to bring it to the floor and shove it through at warp speed. That's why Drudge is worried, especially since he's outed so many of the vermin.
I don't see how the links themselves can be copyrighted anymore than the news itself can be copyrighted.
COMING SOON- FREEREPUBLIC UNIVERSITY!
Fair use at educational institutions will always be protected.
I couldn’t see how Americans could be forced to buy health insurance by calling it a “tax,” either.
The key point is Drudge’s comment that a SC Justice told him that the “votes are there”. SC rulings trump whatever our understanding of copyright law may be. The practical always wins over the theoretical ...
Some people go pay big bux for a dominatrix to get the debasement they require. Some save cash and get their kink on by posting idiocy on conservative sites.
Or TeH stupidZ just burns. Either way results in the situation we live in today. People intentionally electing liberal Republicans that lack the intelligence to understand how liberal republicans keep getting elected.
Conyers? Oh, we’re doomed.
Well, that's certainly true.
But a link is nothing more than some http and an address. While only one firm or person (or more) can own the right to reside at an address, the address itself cannot be prohibited from mere mention by others.
But as you say, we live in a strange new world, so who knows what can or cannot happen.
As someone who makes a living off copyrighted materials (photographs) I can assure you that it is generally not that difficult to determine the owner, and their contact information.
You cannot imagine how many times I’ve had to challenge publications and institutions who feel it is their right to lift my work from other legitimate sources and use them without permission or compensation. I was actually driving down the street and saw an image on a freakin’ billboard.
If I hadn’t registered my work with the copyright office my case against these people would have been difficult to prove, I would have lost my income and control of my property. By working within the copyright rules, I am able to flex some strength and get some payments.
So, while your points are valid on some older written works, the new age is digital. I have the right to protect my assets and assure a living off from my work.
If Drudge wants to lift my photos for use on his site, they are not in the public domain. He had better contact me and be prepared to pay for every click.
maybe its time for a few million of us to march on congress...
I think we should also march to the Republican National Convention in 2016 to let the GOPe know we are NOT HAPPY.
I sesne that they haven’t thought this through very well...yet.
Hi Ho, Hi Ho, its away off shore we go!
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.