HBO Forcing Takedowns Of Privately Filmed Videos Of Obama Inauguration Concert
from the legally-questionable dept
Against Monopoly points out that the Inauguration Committee apparently sold the broadcast rights of the Inauguration Concert (held this past Sunday night) to HBO (for a six month period). Because of that, HBO has been going around demanding all videos of the event be pulled down from YouTube. This appears to include privately filmed clips as well -- which seems pretty questionable. Sure, HBO probably wants to do more with the video, but is a short clip filmed from a camera phone really going to diminish HBO's ability to profit off this historic event? It would seem that such clips would only increase the value to HBO, allowing the company to do more with the full professional video.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: broadcast rights, concert, inauguration
Companies: hbo
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
I thought the Photog . .
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I thought the Photog . .
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: I thought the Photog . .
If it were so then the police would only have to declare that they have copyright over every "situation" and we wouldn't be able to film officers making arrests, pushing kids off their bicycles, etc.
HBO, you're gonna lose this BAD to someone because there's no way any copyright attorney doesn't know this aspect of copyright law and filing these in bad faith will surely land your asses in hot water. Think about it, I 100% know it's not a part of copyright law so if your attorneys are even twice as knowledgeable about copyright law as I am, they know they shouldn't have filed these at this point.
What HBO was granted was exclusive camera access so they could film the event instead of all the other networks doing so. This does not grant one copyright over the whole event. What's next? People's private photos from the event?
It'll be good to watch when someone fires back...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I don't see what's so hard to get about this...just because your tax dollars paid for the road you drive on, doesn't mean that you can go out into the middle of the street and start digging it up.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
The "we" and the "them" are two of the same. "We" employ "them". Its a federally funded entity (the committee), its NOT a private company who gets to then make private deals with the public property they oversaw.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
HBO's response is asinine, true, but are they within their rights? It was refered to as HBO's 'We Are One: The Obama Inaugural Celebration at the Lincoln Memorial'. Can you post a video of your favorite band in concert on youtube? This was a concert NOT the inauguration itself.
In conclusion: HBO-d*cks. Legal-yep.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
No, not legal. (IANAL, but I am really sure on this, as are ... just about all of the other posters)
You pay to get into a concert. And it is listed, in an agreement somewhere, be it on your ticket, or online before you buy it, that you cannot record.
However, if it is a public performance where you didn't pay for it and they are out in the open, there was no agreement to not record, so yes, you would have the right to record it and post it on youtube.
In this case it was completely open to the public, and there were no notices. Just look at the one poster's comments, he was there. (this of course gives them the benefit of a doubt that they are not lying)
So there was nothing what so ever restricting you from recording it yourself. So please explain to me how it is legal for HBO to own the copyright on your recording?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
technically...
Also when have you ever been paid back for your tax contributions?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not Possible
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No Federal Copyright to be claimed
TITLE 17 > CHAPTER 1 > § 105
Prev | Next
§ 105. Subject matter of copyright: United States Government works
How Current is This?
Copyright protection under this title is not available for any work of the United States Government, but the United States Government is not precluded from receiving and holding copyrights transferred to it by assignment, bequest, or otherwise.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Even though I don't agree with it...
Second if HBO BOUGHT the rights to it they more than likely paid the cost of it so do have rights to resell it.
That said I think what Mike is objecting to is that HBO just does not realize the benefit those short bad quality clips will do to increase the value of what they paid for.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Even though I don't agree with it...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Even though I don't agree with it...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Even though I don't agree with it...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Even though I don't agree with it...
I can see the organizer who is sort of a political party animal selling the rights to one network but not the right to control non-commercial uses of privately filmed material.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Even though I don't agree with it...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sounds like a bad faith DMCA notice. AFIK, HBO had exclusive access to record and broadcast the event, but I don't believe it has a copyright interest in the event itself, only its recording of the event, and, I expect, HBO had to pay rights to record and transmit any music used in the performance. Extemporaneous speech, for instance, is not copyright, and unless speakers wrote down their speeches before hand, and assigned their copyright in writing to the inauguration committee, then HBO does not own the rights to those, either.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Concert was Public, but Funding was Private
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Why I cancelled HBO
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I was there...and this is what I saw...
Also this is a dangerous principle. If there was no notice of restriction and it is in a public space, why can't anyone film this and publish their content? Copyright only protects the expression of an idea and a private filming of this event would be a separate expression from a different vantage point. Also if I go film the Lincoln Memorial today with nothing going on, would I get the same pressure if I titled it the same with empty footage of the Memorial. HBO is being completely abusive in this. Maybe the people with their own footage should counter HBO in the exact same way. Contact a court for a DCMA take down and stoppage of ever broadcasting this show again- since the HBO show is way too close to their personal copyrighted footage. Either everyone needs the right to show this or no one should have the right.
Also why was this not on public television? Not everyone is a slave to the cable companies. I did not like the whole HBO thing to begin with...I knew something like this would happen...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I was there...and this is what I saw...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Monopoly....again
Lets call this Whine-opoly!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
First, it was a public event. Now, simply because an event is on public land or in a public park does not make it a public event, but in this case the event was fully open to the public.
Second, there were no T's and C's notices posted, nothing at all warning people not to record or photograph the event.
Third, the Inauguration Committee is not a government entity, and it is not taxpayer funded. It is a private committee, funded by private sponsors. It organized the event, it found sponsors for the event, it paid for a significant portion of the costs of securing the event, directing traffic, setting up porta-potties, and all those things, and it most definitely had the right to license exclusive rights to HBO to record and broadcast the event.
Fourth, however, HBO did not obtain a license to be the only cameras in that park. It merely obtained a license to have the exclusive right to set up its cameras where it chose, to have access to areas for its cameras and microphones that the public did not have access to, to park its production trucks and set up its production equipment where it wanted, and to then edit all the footage and broadcast it on its network for a six month period.
Fifth, a licensee always has the right to take action to enforce intellectual property rights that it has licensed.
But sixth -- and most important here -- HBO does not have any right whatsoever to be issuing takedown notices with respect to recordings other people made at that event and posted to Youtube or anywhere else. It did not license those rights, and the Inaugural Committee did not purport to transfer or license those rights to HBO. It was a freakin' open, public event with loads of people all over the place holding up cameras and camcorders and camera phones. Not a single event security person, nor any HBO representative, nor a single representative or agent of the Committee ever went over to a single one of those people and asked them to put their device away, because there were no restrictions.
That's the bottom line here. Had the Committee instead rented the park space from whichever government entity controls that, and enclosed it, sold tickets, posted signs, and warned people not to record it -- just as they do at concerts all over the U.S. every single day -- then HBO might have some sort of argument (depending on the terms of the license agreement). But under the circumstances, it is really straying way beyond what any reasonable person in the business of content creation and broadcast could possibly believe in good faith to be enforcement of its rights.
I just hope that one of the people whose recordings was forced down by this is some litigious sob, maybe even a lawyer herself, and refuses to go down quietly. This entire inauguration was an incredibly historic event, and Obama and his people made clear from day one that all the principal official events leading up to and surrounding it were to be free and open to all. What HBO is doing here is truly appalling.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Stop feeding them
If you cannot imagine a life without TV, then try to enjoy a walk outside this evening, prepare a good dinner, read a book, play with your kids and living partner, and keep the TV off. Let us know how you like your new life!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anyone interested in fighting this directly/ testing the principle?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Be good little consumers, and subscribe to HBO...
From 1 to 2, tune in for Obama Coin Hour, where you can buy 24 carat gold Obama Coins personally autographed by Barack himself! For tickets to be in the studio audience, call 202-737-0002.
From 2 to 3, tune in for Michelle's Fashion Hour, where special guest designer, Jason Wu will show off his newest spring looks.
From 3 to 4, tune in for the hour romp of "Joe Biden's Verbose Internet and incredibly Sarcastic and Funny Prank Show" (Note: All new, exciting format! Similar to "The Graham Norton" Show) For tickets to be in the studio audience, call 202-737-0002.
And from 5 to 6, join Sasha and Malia as they will show you the newest Obama Action Figure, "Muttley". Order the 35-piece family set online and get "Muttley", the Dog at a discounted price!
It happens all this Saturday, so tune into HBO!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
All your copyrights are belong to us.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This story, though predictable, makes me sad.
If we are going to suffer through this miserable economy my only prayer is that Pepsi, Target, Staples, Invesco, and whoever else has contributed to the commercialism of sports and public venues go out of business and thereby render those commercial brandings useless.
HBO, get a clue.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
more sadly
Moreover, there's a fairly easy counter-notice and putback procedure in the DMCA, and I would guess most courts would want to see a plaintiff having attempted that before suing. I would guess if HBO started to get hit with counter-notices forwarded by Youtube, it would back down.
And I am having a hard time imagining what the actual damages are to an ordinary citizen who was at the event, recorded it, and then elatedly put it up on Youtube to share with the world. It sucks, but the law is really crass about these things, and there really aren't any actual money damages.
That doesn't mean such a case would not have merit -- and assuming HBO receives a bunch of counter-notices does not back down, it would come closer to a real case on behalf of a larger group of plaintiffs. But even so, the next step is for HBO to sue people for copyright infringement. If within 10-14 days after service of the counter-notices, HBO does not sue anyone, Youtube is actually required to put the material back up.
So again, I think the odds are very much stacked against people who had their content wrongfully taken down in this instance. What the DMCA needs to balance things out is a statutory damages remedy similar to that for willful infringement of copyright -- between $750 and $150,000 per infringement (or in this case, per takedown notice that was knowingly and materially false).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
even worse
In fact, when HBO first started in the business, it wasn't even scrambling its satellite signals. It wasn't until it learned that bars, private clubs, union halls, etc. around the country were putting in TVRO satellite earth stations so their patrons or members could come and watch (and homes around the US were doing it as well instead of subscribing to what were then very primitive cable systems), that it began to scramble its signals. And those early efforts were laughably easy to break, because all they did was mess around with the interlacing. It took them a few more years to begin to truly encrypt their signals in a somewhat more secure manner.
It wasn't until after all of this (HBO, ESPN and a couple others were the first to scramble), that they hired lobbyists and got Congress to make the decoding of those signals a felony offense, that these pay networks and the cable systems really began to take off as long-term profitable businesses.
And as everyone knows, it took the cable companies a lot longer to figure out that the physical "filters" they put on peoples' lines if they didn't subscribe to certain services required nothing more than a drill, a piece of wire and a soldering iron to bypass in a way that the companies' techs wouldn't detect with visual walk through audits of neighborhoods. So how did the cable systems protect their interests? Precisely how the RIAA is doing it now, albeit on a much smaller scale. By going after individuals in court and publicizing those cases. The only difference was that those laws were criminal laws, and local authorities were more than happy to prosecute people since their municipalities were getting so much money for granting the monopolies.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
copyright? maybe
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Suck that. HBO Boycott time...
With a new day of Independence,
Returns The Power to the People!
Thomas'73
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Even worse
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
despicable
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Stop Whining
People saying you are gonna sue? For what? By being part of the celebration, you give up all rights to be filmed, use your likeness, etc. when you step in to the Inaugural grounds.
If it's that much of a problem, why don't you just go to another video hosting site???????? Stop crying about Youtube & HBO and realize there are other hosting sites on the net.
Vimeo is my video hosting site of choice.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
But, to those who keep insisting that because this was a public event, was on public lands, was historic, was in part funded by tax dollars (which is questionable, at least insofar as how material the tax dollars were compared to the private sponsors), or anything else related to that: your tax dollars pay for loads of things, and that does not give you any particular rights in them. Go ahead, put your theories to the test. Walk up to the White House, the Hart Senate Building, any military base of your choosing, or any of the zillions of other government properties or facilities.
Or even try to walk into a private wedding ceremony somewhere like the cafe in the middle of Central Park, or get into a gated event at Central Park, or organize an unpermitted march down the middle of Fifth Avenue on a Tuesday afternoon.
Just because it's paid for with tax dollars does not by any stretch give every taxpayer full rights to access, use, or in any other way exercise rights over something. Never was that way, never will be.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
DC was in a state of emergency
Bad enough they scam the "declaration" of an emergency, then they grant the rights to events that were used as a justification for the "emergency" is just malicious.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Pulling homemade footage of the inauguration
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mayweather vs Maidana Boxing online
[ link to this | view in chronology ]