Rupert Murdoch's Anti-Fair Use Comments Used Against Him In Court Yet Again

from the careful-what-you-wish-for dept

Fri, Aug 27th 2010 6:31pm — Mike Masnick

Remember back when Rupert Murdoch acted like fair use was a myth that would be "barred by the courts" when challenged? Yeah, that's been coming back to bite Murdoch. Earlier this year, we noted that a former advisor to Michael Jackson was suing News Corp. over Fox News' decision to air interview footage without a license, and the complaint highlighted Murdoch's anti-fair use statement. Of course, when it came time to defend itself (guess what?) News Corp. lawyers relied heavily on fair use.

Looks like that's happening again. News Corp. has been sued yet again for copyright infringement, this time for airing a video (without licensing the clip) of Brad Pitt having trouble driving a motorcycle. Instead, Fox News folks simply downloaded it from TMZ, a property owned by AOL. Wait a second... so with Rupert Murdoch running all over the place claiming that Google News linking to his content is "theft," yet Fox News has no problem downloading a video from a competing media organization and using it? Fascinating.

And, of course, the folks suing waste little time before bringing up Murdoch's comments on "fair use" in the complaint itself (bottom of page 2):

I actually agree with Fox News that this should absolutely be considered fair use, but it's astoundingly hypocritical of Murdoch to mock fair use, claim that courts won't recognize it, accuse others of "theft" for merely linking to your content... and then step up and claim fair use when you downloaded an entire video off another site and used it on your TV station.

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: copyright, fair use, fox news, rupert murdoch
Companies: news corp.

32 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Headbanger, 27 Aug 2010 @ 7:20pm

Indeed. It seems that Murdoch, in attacking the idea of fair use, may have forgotten that fair use plays a significant role in a typical TV news broadcast. I find Murdoch's dissent towards fair use baffling to say the least.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 27 Aug 2010 @ 7:28pm

What's so shocking? Lawyers twist words to distort their own corner of alternate reality. They can say whatever they want and it doesn't have to make sense or even be consistent to us who inhabit the real world.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 27 Aug 2010 @ 7:46pm

Murdoch tried to create some controversy to serve his purposes and it is now coming back to bite him, he deserves all the flack and pain he gets.

Next he will try to carve out some "exceptions".
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Gyffes, 27 Aug 2010 @ 8:46pm

Hypocrisy
Not just another dirty word, it's The Republican Way!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 27 Aug 2010 @ 8:58pm

Easy Solution
Why don't they just rel="no-follow" all the links to their content? So much less of it would be found or consumed, which seems to be the objective. The impact of that to News Corps business would likely change attitudes towards web content pretty quickly.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
silentsteel (profile), 27 Aug 2010 @ 9:11pm

Re: Hypocrisy
Democrats are the same way. Whatever suits their needs at the time.

Both sides are suspect at this point, the system is broken.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
tracker1 (profile), 28 Aug 2010 @ 12:20am

Re: Hypocrisy
You're aware the copyright lobby's golden boy, the seated VP is a Democrat, right?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Aug 2010 @ 12:37am

Mike, isn't it a little disingenuous to take the moral high-road of agreeing with Fox's invocation of fair use, then immediately condemn Murdoch as "astoundingly hypocritical" by misrepresenting the circumstances? I certainly don't have any love for Murdoch and his grab-bag of delusions of entitlement, but come on. Are we really going to start irrationally demonizing opponents of fair use in the same hysterical fashion that would fit in well at Fox News?

While it is certainly entertaining to imagine Rupert in front of his computer, giggling in demonic glee and emailing Bill O'Reilly the video - its irrational to believe that he should be personally accountable for the actions of some anonymous segment producer. If we're going to play the "Murdoch-is-a-hypocrite" card, we, as champions of the virtue and benevolence of fair use, might look kind of stupid if we can't even get the basic definition of "fair" right.

Murdoch is a hypocrite, without doubt. As chief executive, he is infinitely more involved with his operation's legal representation than for the day-to-day activities of some video jockey; fair use being a legal matter, it is difficult to justify how his position could be lost in translation. But a low-level corporate drone? If we're going to try to blame Murdoch for the video AND for the legal defense simultaneously, we're put in a logically precarious position where News Corp is staffed top to bottom by worshipers of the Scripture According to Murdoch.

And honestly, that scenario is so disturbing that upon noticing, the Universe would immediately collapse in on itself, bewildered at how badly it misjudged it's scheduled appointment with The End and profoundly apologetic for this terribly unfortunate termination of service.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Chargone (profile), 28 Aug 2010 @ 2:02am

Re: Re: Hypocrisy
'course, from my point of view, you're All republicans...

the definition of 'republican' being 'one who advocates a republic' and a republic being a 'government that is not a monarchy'.

find me an American who's Not a republican, at least in public :D

Democrats in the American sense get an added whammy of hypocrisy, mind you. They're name implies they support democracy... reality says otherwise.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Chargone (profile), 28 Aug 2010 @ 2:03am

Re: Re: Re: Hypocrisy
err, that said, i don't think the Republican party supports democracy Either, they just don't have it right there in their name, so are not quite so hypocritical on the particular point i was discussing.

in case anyone was confused.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
BearGriz72 (profile), 28 Aug 2010 @ 3:10am

Quantum Mechanics Resolves This ;~)
Murdoch is not a hypocrite, his views on "intellectual property" are simply in a state of quantum superposition and unable to be completely or accurately described due to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle.

The Schr�dinger equations lead us to the understanding that chaotic systems create a random matrix of possible states making it impossible to determine with any great degree of accuracy or certainty the position he will take at a given moment in time.

{/sarcasm}
[ link to this | view in thread ]
BearGriz72 (profile), 28 Aug 2010 @ 3:11am

Re: Quantum Mechanics Resolves This ;~)
Darnit it was fine in the preview....
[ link to this | view in thread ]
slander (profile), 28 Aug 2010 @ 5:34am

Re: Re: Quantum Mechanics Resolves This ;~)
Well, that's your problem right there -- you previewed it before posting, and in doing so, changed the outcome.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Aug 2010 @ 6:55am

Re:
Huh? The entire business of Fox News (and most news organizations) relies heavily on fair use (for clips, for quoting text, etc.). Rupert would surely be aware of that...if he wasn't too busy whining about fair use.

It's not like Fox has some policy of only using their own clips and some random "video jockey" decided, one time, to use a clip from another source.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Aug 2010 @ 7:11am

Re: Re:
The only way FAUX News could entirely rely on their own footage is get out and report the news.

That is expensive. Bloviating is so much cheaper.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Marlamin, 28 Aug 2010 @ 7:12am

All According To Rupert's Plan?
What if Murdoch was doing this on purpose? His anti-fair use comments could be bait for companies to sue him. Then, after losing a few cases, he could use this as a precedent against fair use. From there, anyone taking snippets from him is fair game.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Aug 2010 @ 1:36pm

Re: All According To Rupert's Plan?
Never attribute to to evil intentions what can be adequately explained by stupidity, or this case, senility.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
kryptonianjorel (profile), 28 Aug 2010 @ 1:40pm

Re: Re: Hypocrisy
Nobody said you had to pass an IQ test to be a politician
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Nastybutler77 (profile), 28 Aug 2010 @ 3:51pm

"Fair use for me, but not for thee."

News Corps new motto.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
interval (profile), 28 Aug 2010 @ 5:20pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Hypocrisy
You mean the the Democratic part supports democracy like Nancy Pelosi seeking to investigate anyone who voices dissent regarding the Ground Zero Mosque, or the way political correctness dictates what people can and can't say, the way the democrats are discussing global warming legislation behind closed-door sessions, that kind of democracy?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Hephaestus (profile), 28 Aug 2010 @ 9:30pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Hypocrisy
interval we are a republic not a democracy.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Hephaestus (profile), 28 Aug 2010 @ 9:32pm

Re: Easy Solution
"Why don't they just rel="no-follow" all the links to their content? "

News corp already has done the "no-follow" thing. It put up a paywall.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Hephaestus (profile), 28 Aug 2010 @ 9:36pm

Re: Re: Quantum Mechanics Resolves This ;~)
Yeah the darn cat got out of the box and stepped on the keyboard again didn't he. I hate when that happens ... ;)

Frakin cat shoud have died the first time around. Frakin 50% mirrors...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Hephaestus (profile), 28 Aug 2010 @ 9:41pm

Re: Re: All According To Rupert's Plan?
"Never attribute to to evil intentions what can be adequately explained by stupidity, or this case, senility."

Really long rant excluded ....

Obama administration ???
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Suzanne Lainson (profile), 29 Aug 2010 @ 1:51am

Murdoch and money
I've skimmed some of the Techdirt articles on Murdoch. Hasn't it been suggested that his views on paywalls will hurt his companies?

Maybe that's not such a bad thing.

The Billionaires Bankrolling the Tea Party
[ link to this | view in thread ]
darryl, 29 Aug 2010 @ 11:17am

Re:
Mike, isn't it a little disingenuous to take the moral high-road of agreeing with Fox's invocation of fair use, then immediately condemn Murdoch as "astoundingly hypocritical" by misrepresenting the circumstances? I certainly don't have any love for Murdoch and his grab-bag of delusions of entitlement, but come on. Are we really going to start irrationally demonizing opponents of fair use in the same hysterical fashion that would fit in well at Fox News?

If we're going to try to blame Murdoch for the video AND for the legal defense simultaneously, we're put in a logically precarious position where News Corp is staffed top to bottom by worshipers of the Scripture According to Murdoch.

You expect consistancy from Mike ??

But well said, and quite correct..
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 29 Aug 2010 @ 5:20pm

Re: “Fair Use” Hypocrisy
...isn't it a little disingenuous to take the moral high-road of agreeing with Fox's invocation of fair use, then immediately condemn Murdoch as "astoundingly hypocritical" by misrepresenting the circumstances?
In what way is this “misrepresenting the circumstances”?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Kingster (profile), 30 Aug 2010 @ 5:36am

Re: Fair use myth
Wow. That's one HELLUVA spam right there. I can think of no better way to push your sites than what you just did.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Aug 2010 @ 8:53am

goal
destroy any nation other then the usa to make any culture or entertainment

the truth will show that with all the eggs in military and entertainment , both which will soon not be needed if needed now LOL , soon will fail and thus collapse the usa for good into a third world wannabe
[ link to this | view in thread ]
nasch (profile), 30 Aug 2010 @ 10:28am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Hypocrisy
That depends on how you define democracy. By some definitions the US is a democracy, by others it is not.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Mike Masnick (profile), 30 Aug 2010 @ 10:34am

Re:
Are we really going to start irrationally demonizing opponents of fair use in the same hysterical fashion that would fit in well at Fox News?

Wait how is it demonizing him to accurately point out his comments and then point out that the company he controls is actively using the thing he hates as a legal defense.

Murdoch is a hypocrite, without doubt.

Hmm. You just yelled at me for calling him that. Now I'm confused.

If we're going to try to blame Murdoch for the video AND for the legal defense simultaneously, we're put in a logically precarious position where News Corp is staffed top to bottom by worshipers of the Scripture According to Murdoch.

We're not talking about a staffer. We're talking about News Corps' official response to lawsuits. That comes from the top.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
nasch (profile), 30 Aug 2010 @ 10:35am

Re: Re: Re: Quantum Mechanics Resolves This ;~)
Other interesting results:

http://icanhascheezburger.com/tag/schrodinger/
[ link to this | view in thread ]