Glenn Beck Not A Fan Of Fair Use; Claims US Gov't Paying Remixers To Create Anti-Beck Propaganda

from the communists,-socialists-and-fair-use dept

Fri, Oct 15th 2010 11:05am — Mike Masnick

One of the good things about intellectual property issues is that it's really a non-partisan debate. While, in practicality, this seems to mean that both of the major political parties support bad copyright and patent law, at the very least, it leaves ridiculous political rhetoric out of the debates on things like copyright. But, sometimes, weird things happen. Such as when Glenn Beck seems to think that "fair use" is a choice of some sort. Apparently, in political circles, there was a lot of attention paid recently to a video mashup showing Donald Duck being influenced by Glenn Beck -- created by Jonathan McIntosh, who I saw speak earlier this year at the first Fair Use Day in DC. The video, which I had not seen until this, apparently made the rounds in political circles.

But, now, Glenn Beck has seen the video and he's not at all happy about it. On his radio program, he condescendingly mocks the videos creator for being involved in "fair use activism." Beck's enunciation is really bizarre. He reads McIntosh's bio with odd emphasis, in a tone suggesting something sinister in ideas like "fair use activist" and "open video alliance." Then he puts on the super sinister voice and says that these remix videos are "getting federal funding to 'help culture understand culture.'" He promises to investigate further.

Um. Yeah, those evil remix artists are really federal stooges? That must be why the federal government keeps trying to make copyright law ever more stringent to wipe out remixes, huh?

Ah, and then we learn of Glenn Beck's basic confusion over the concept of fair use. Since the video involved Donald Duck, he starts talking about Disney, and how Walt Disney hated communists, and he finds it odd that they're okay with fair use:

Of course, it's all fair use! So they can use Disney... apparently Disney doesn't have a problem with Donald Duck cartoons now being remixed and politicized...

Um, hey, Glenn: the whole point of "fair use" is that it doesn't matter if the copyright holder is okay with it or not. That's why it's called "fair use." It's a situation where the users can use it no matter if the copyright holder has a problem with it or not. It's part of this thing called Free Speech found in the First Amendment of a document you seem to like, called the Constitution. And, of course, this is Disney we're talking about, the company that has single-handedly done more to expand copyright than just about any other company in its efforts to protect Mickey Mouse. To suggest that Disney has somehow gone soft on copyright is pretty laughable.

Of course, someone else put together another brilliant remix showing Mickey Mouse reacting the "news" that the US gov't is using this sinister fair use to create propaganda remix videos:

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, donald duck, fair use, glenn beck, jonathan mcintosh, remix
Companies: disney

54 Comments

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

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

thublihnk (profile), 15 Oct 2010 @ 10:39am

I like how he references that 'Walt Disney hated the Union bosses because he thought they were communists' and then prattles on about more crap that Disney took a principled stance against. Walt Disney's #1 enemy were the Jews, if I'm not mistaken. Good to know Beck is invoking such a paragon of virtue for his cause.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Gabriel Tane (profile), 15 Oct 2010 @ 11:28am
  
  Re:
  And against blacks, if you remember Song of the South. But as far as Glenn goes, anyone who does not fly the Beck Banner and preach his gospel is not only an enemy of Beck, but an enemy of freedom, democracy, America, justice, fairness, little puppies and God.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Big Mook, 15 Oct 2010 @ 12:55pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Sorry, but Song of the South was not "against blacks" as you say, and the story itself makes it exceedingly clear that Uncle Remus is wiser than the white plantation owners to which he is in servitude. Yeah, the situation is bad, and the movie accurately illustrates the abject poverty in which most blacks were living at that time in history, but anyone with half a brain could see that Uncle Remus was the real brains around there.
    
    How about not playing the race card every chance you get.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - The Mighty Buzzard (profile), 15 Oct 2010 @ 1:11pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Half a brain is far too much to ask on the Internet.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Gabriel Tane (profile), 18 Oct 2010 @ 5:20am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      I know, I know... I was feeling pithy when I wrote that. I know it actually showed him in an honorable light... it just showed what would be considered now as derogatory stereotypes... but then again, what now-a-days ISN'T a derogatory stereotype.
      
      Consider me chastened and corrected.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Gabriel Tane (profile), 15 Oct 2010 @ 11:30am
  
  Re:
  Oh, and heaven help you if you don't "get it" like he does.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Oct 2010 @ 11:25am

The creator of these cartoons is certainly placing a lot of faith in "fair use" as a defense. I am not at all sanguine that his faith is well placed.

Clearly, his work is a satire of Mr. Beck, and not a parody of the original work(s) created by Disney. As a general rule, under copyright and trademark analysis where one attempts to rely upon some form of a fair use defense, parody holds greater sway in the eyes of the courts than satire. Of course, there is a gray area in between, so to some degree how this would come out if it was litigated may come down to simply the luck of the draw when cases are assigned to judges.

Candidly, I believe that Mr. Beck would have a difficult, if not impossible, time trying to convince a court that he may have a justiciable claim against the creator. Disney, however, is quite another matter.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- jc (profile), 15 Oct 2010 @ 12:37pm
  
  Re:
  The cartoon is both a parody and satire.
  
  Disney was heavily involved in government propaganda during world war 2.
  
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walt_Disney's_World_War_II_propaganda_production
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- RemixThis, 15 Oct 2010 @ 2:29pm
  
  Re: Disney shorts
  I would argue that the remix is also a commentary and criticism of the original Disney cartoons. Notice how well Beck's xenophobic rhetoric mirrors some of the racial stereotyping in the Disney shorts. Also the commentary on comparing the depression era cartoons to the economics of today should be obvious. Plus many of the shorts used were actually funded by the State and Treasury Departments as propaganda during and after WWII (even Panchito Pistols from The Three Caballeros).
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
redwall_hp (profile), 15 Oct 2010 @ 11:28am

I'm slowly becoming convinced that Beck and company aren't idiots, but are actually evil.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- The Mighty Buzzard (profile), 15 Oct 2010 @ 1:37pm
  
  Re:
  Then you've never actually listened to or watched enough Beck to have a good sample size. I don't particularly care about or agree with what he has to say but it's extremely obvious that it's what he genuinely believes and has put significant thought into. Usually. This particular instance I'd chalk up to a typical human's first reaction to being made fun of.
  
  But hey, it's easier to give someone you disagree with a label that allows you to dismiss them without having to listen to or think about what they say. Hence the entire two party system, racism, and every other unreasoned prejudice throughout history.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 15 Oct 2010 @ 5:56pm
    
    Re: Glenn Beck: Idiot Or Evil?
    If he genuinely believes what he says, then why wouldn’t he answer when asked whether he’d vaccinated his children against swine flu or not?
    
    After playing up the fears on both sides, it was quite clear he would lose credibility either way. We have a name for people like that...
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
MrWilson, 15 Oct 2010 @ 11:29am

You know who else was persecuted by the government? Jesus Christ.

Beck's emphasis on particular words in McIntosh's bio seemed to highlight words that Beck has previously scorned in regards to Obama and his other targets like ACORN; words such as "activist," "social justice," "alternative," "community," and "Chicago." He's drawing a parallel between McIntosh and other "bad people" using the vocabulary of "bad words" that he's acquainted them with over the years.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
tetron (profile), 15 Oct 2010 @ 11:31am

Nobody every accused the right wing of intellectual consistency... IP issues are a perfect example of government policy distorting the natural market, but since it is framed as a "property rights" issue, increasingly draconian IP regimes can be spun as increasing freedom rather than taking it away.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- The Mighty Buzzard (profile), 15 Oct 2010 @ 1:38pm
  
  Re:
  s/the right/either/
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Robert Ring (profile), 15 Oct 2010 @ 11:39am

I gotta say I have very little reaction to this article. What would REALLY have me interested is if Beck were to say something sensible.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
fogbugzd (profile), 15 Oct 2010 @ 11:49am

Satirist's Union
The Union of Professional Satirists has recently advised its members to stop making fun of Glen Beck. Their professional rules of conduct prohibit shooting fish in a barrel, carrying coals to Newcastle, or making fun of the the criminally insane. Apparently, making fun of Glen Beck violates all three guidelines.

/sarcasm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- KnownHuman (profile), 15 Oct 2010 @ 1:07pm
  
  Re: Satirist's Union
  This union needs to happen.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jim, 15 Oct 2010 @ 11:51am

What if Glen Beck is Right
I'm not a fan of Glen Beck and think he is just stupid most of the time, but many groups are going to great lengths g to silence him. Does it change things if Glen Beck is right and this guy is federally funded?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Hulser (profile), 15 Oct 2010 @ 12:17pm
  
  Re: What if Glen Beck is Right
  many groups are going to great lengths g to silence him
  
  Since when is making fun of someone the same as trying to silence them? Freedom of speech cuts both ways. You can support the right to publicly ridicule someone without wanting to remove their right to publicly say things that are worthy of ridicule.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Y Draig Goch (profile), 15 Oct 2010 @ 12:30pm
    
    Re: Re: What if Glen Beck is Right
    ...And Beck gets to ridicule the guy who made the videos just as most of the comments to this blog ridicule him. That's not the point.
    
    I think the discussion started out about his lack of knowledge about "fair use". If he's right (and quite often he has his facts right, it's just that his conclusions are often not on target) about federal funding going to an organization that promotes videos such as this, that would be bad, regardless of the argument about "fair use".
    
    It's not only Beck. From Rupert Murdoch on down, News Corp (and it's Fox subsidiaries) seem to have a problem understanding fair use, copyrights, trademarks, etc...
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- PopeRatzo (profile), 15 Oct 2010 @ 1:24pm
  
  Re: What if Glen Beck is Right
  Jim, who is trying to "silence" Glenn Beck?
  
  You're sounding as paranoid as he is. Do you believe that any criticism equals an "effort to silence"?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - The Mighty Buzzard (profile), 15 Oct 2010 @ 1:43pm
    
    Re: Re: What if Glen Beck is Right
    A concerted effort by a political party to ridicule/marginalize one person isn't illegal and is protected speech. It's still extremely underhanded and distasteful though.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - WimpyCollins, 15 Oct 2010 @ 3:00pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: What if Glen Beck is Right
      "A concerted effort by a political party to ridicule/marginalize one person...is... extremely underhanded and distasteful"
      
      What's good for the goose...
      
      Substitute "political party" with "media organization" and "one person" with "President Obama" and see how that sentence reads.
      
      Substitute "political party" with "Glenn Beck" and "one person" with "anyone who disagrees with him" and see how that sentence reads.
      
      Glenn Beck is all about "underhanded and distasteful" methods. As soon as he adopts a respectable approach to voicing his opinions (and subsequently loses his audience since they're looking for fiery commentary from a guy who shares their persecution complex), I'll agree that his treatment by his critics is unfair.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 15 Oct 2010 @ 4:20pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: What if Glen Beck is Right
        Substitute "political party" with "media organization" and "one person" with "President Obama" and see how that sentence reads.
        
        ok.
        
        "A concerted effort by a media organiztion to ridicule/marginalize President Obama isn't illegal and is protected speech. It's still extremely underhanded and distasteful though"
        
        Was that supposed to somehow make the quote objectionable?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - The Mighty Buzzard (profile), 15 Oct 2010 @ 5:41pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: What if Glen Beck is Right
        Says the person who does not watch/listen to Glenn Beck and has no idea what he actually says day to day. When you know not whereof you speak, your mouth is best used for chewing.
        
        And yes, I would find it extremely underhanded and distasteful if all the media organizations went on an anti-Obama crusade, exactly as I did when it was Bush in that position.
        
        Glenn Beck, or any individual for that matter, spouting opinions against something much larger than themselves, I have zero problem with. One trash talking a million is insignificant, a million trash talking one is pathetic.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Oct 2010 @ 11:54am

I'm confused. Am I supposed to buy gold or non-hybrid seeds to survive the Federal Fair Use Propaganda Conspiracy?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Free Capitalist (profile), 15 Oct 2010 @ 11:55am

Gibberage
Beck is an interesting entertainer, in an infomercial kind of way. I see what he's trying to sell and his compelling-in-a-way emotionally pitched delivery, yet I pity the poor souls who actually buy it.

Actually.. I guess that's how I view all so-called partisan discourse these days.

Point: "You're gonna love my nuts."
Counter-point: "No way.. they're activated by the water that you and I drink!"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Oct 2010 @ 12:01pm

Ya not really getting the whole "Fare use is bad" from his response. Its more the "social justice project" is bad and that it might be fed funded. But ya know... what ever, ppl hear different things depending on what they believe all the time.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 15 Oct 2010 @ 12:31pm
  
  Re:
  case in point (see above)
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
out_of_the_blue, 15 Oct 2010 @ 12:14pm

It's foolish to analyze Beck.
He's an over-the-top clown intended for distraction and to put over a few key points. A shock-jock from the 80's who admits to heavy cocaine use. Frankly, it amazes me that *anyone* watches his show, let alone believes that even he believes what he says; just a small part of his random hypocrisy is that he appears to be against the gov't, while believing every lie in the "security" theater that the gov't puts on, that's a crucial area that fingers him as a neo-con tool.

Oh, and he uses some trick to cry on cue, too.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
iamtheky (profile), 15 Oct 2010 @ 12:20pm

Re:
I often use "Chicago" colloquially as a bad word. As in:

That hooker was a fetid pile of Chicago.

Or

Taco Bell gives me the Chicagos.

Beck just lumps that in so others seem correct as well.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Derek Bredensteiner (profile), 15 Oct 2010 @ 12:48pm

Enunciation?
I don't think his emphasis on particular words is intentional (nor sinister). I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he just emphasizes words at random and actually has zero understanding of the script he's reading. Why else would he emphasize words in every sentence like "youth" and "new media"?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
anonymouse, 15 Oct 2010 @ 1:07pm

Left lives up to expectations
Once again the marxists live up to expectations, totally missing the point. It's about who PAYS. The govt should not be PAYING for this. Idiots.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Gabriel Tane (profile), 15 Oct 2010 @ 1:37pm
  
  Re: Left lives up to expectations
  Did I miss something? Sorry, my Marxist brain was focused on controlling everything...
  Read the post again... it's about Beck's misunderstanding over the 'choice' of fair-use and the fact that it applies even, as Mike states, "...if the copyright holder is okay with it or not..."
  
  Yes, Beck mentions that this guy is receiving federal funds (without providing evidence and then saying he'll 'investigate further'), but that's a minor point that Glen (known for having a conspirator's bent) wove in. Again, all without any evidence. After a brief (and by NO means exhaustive) search, I was unable to find anything to backup this federal funding. Although to Glen's credit, perhaps the government did a great job in covering it up. /sarcasm
  
  So, Glen puts on his tinfoil hat to attack someone who's mocking him (very successfully) by saying it's a federal government conspiracy and WE'RE the ones missing something? Honestly, I'm surprised he didn't cite a Nazi involvement... he does have Nazi-Tourettes', you know.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Mike Masnick (profile), 15 Oct 2010 @ 1:51pm
  
  Re: Left lives up to expectations
  Once again the marxists live up to expectations
  
  Since when am I a "marxist"?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - GrouchoMarxist, 15 Oct 2010 @ 3:52pm
    
    Re: Re: Left lives up to expectations
    Of course you're a Marxist, Mike.
    
    Anyone who doesn't goosestep in line to the chorus of "we need to give the corporations more power and less liability" is clearly a Marxist.
    
    You're not a real Americun either. Where's your Tea Party membership badge?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- RemixThis, 15 Oct 2010 @ 2:40pm
  
  Re: Left lives up to expectations
  Local CBS news segment where they ask the remixer point blank if the video was federally funded.
  
  Looks like Beck was just making stuff up as he goes again...
  
  Donald Ducked - CBS Channel 5 Evening News
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sEK2-8DgEo8
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- nonanonymous, 15 Oct 2010 @ 3:05pm
  
  Re: Left lives up to expectations
  Once again the marxists live up to expectations, totally missing the point. It's about who PAYS. The govt should not be PAYING for this
  
  But it's okay to pay for puff pieces praising own efforts as they did during Bush administration? You might want to pick a standard that's not going to backfire at you on the spot.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
interval, 15 Oct 2010 @ 1:12pm

If anyone needed any more proof
That Beck is a nutbag conspiracist crank, well, here ya go.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
RD, 15 Oct 2010 @ 1:26pm

Glenn Beck is a lunatic
A complete, far-right-conservative-whatever-A-#1-nutbag. He really should seek therapy, he has so much hate and bile and insanity (hannity?) that spews from his mouth.

Also, I understand he raped and murdered a 12 year old girl back in 1990, or some such. At least, I havent seen any evidence to the contrary, so....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Matt (profile), 15 Oct 2010 @ 2:03pm

Who is Glen Beck and why does he deserve my praise, respect and sympathy? (I'm not stupid I come from the UK and have never heard of him)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- JonesSmithHarris, 15 Oct 2010 @ 3:57pm
  
  Re:
  He's a right-wing tv and radio show propagandist who tries to seem patriotic and grass-roots despite the tens of millions he makes in income from large corporations.
  
  You could google Glenn Beck or read his Wikipedia entry, but for a hilarious sample of his craziness, check out the Daily Show's clips (hopefully they play in the UK):
  
  http://www.thedailyshow.com/videos/?term=glenn+beck&start=0
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Oct 2010 @ 3:37pm

Hate to be picky...
I hate to be picky, but the First Amendment is not actually a part of the Constitution but a part of the Bill of Rights. I know you know this, Mr Masnick, so I'm just going to assume you were tired or something.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Mike Masnick (profile), 15 Oct 2010 @ 4:37pm
  
  Re: Hate to be picky...
  I hate to be picky, but the First Amendment is not actually a part of the Constitution but a part of the Bill of Rights. I know you know this, Mr Masnick, so I'm just going to assume you were tired or something.
  
  Bill of Rights is a part of the Constitution...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- The Mighty Buzzard (profile), 15 Oct 2010 @ 5:48pm
  
  Re: Hate to be picky...
  From a physical document standpoint, you're correct. By every other measure, you're wrong. We have a constitution and amendments thereto because by the time we had easily editable documents, we'd grown quite fond of the originals.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Esahc (profile), 15 Oct 2010 @ 7:27pm
  
  Re: Hate to be picky...
  Epic comment fail:
  
  http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html
  
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Cons titution
  
  http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution.html
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Free Capitalist (profile), 17 Oct 2010 @ 8:08am
  
  Re: Hate to be picky...
  I hate to be picky, but the First Amendment is not actually a part of the Constitution but a part of the Bill of Rights.
  
  Great angle. Fold a crease just above the junk you don't like and RIP.
  
  I'm (every tyrant ever impeded by law throughout history), and I approved this message.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 15 Oct 2010 @ 4:17pm

What Glenn Close is back?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 15 Oct 2010 @ 5:59pm

If He Doesn�t Becking Like It ...
... he can go beck himself.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jay (profile), 17 Oct 2010 @ 12:48pm

Isnt one of the fundamentals of free speech not being forced to endorse something. Hardly free speech if my brand can be freely used to endorse something I dont agree with. I support fair use, but in the cartoon mash up with Mickey and Pluto that would fly pretty close to implying Disney supports the message being told... maybe not close enough... but surely thats a fair argument to limit fair use in some cases...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mark Liedtke, 18 Oct 2010 @ 12:17pm

Beck is popular
And here we have another point in his popularity, he gets a post on a blog that rarely posts anything political. I don't care if you like him or not, you must admit that if his goal is to get as much exposure as possible, he is a master at that.

He gets the fair use angle wrong, but for some reason I think Disney will be legally entangled in this some way.

[sarc]
Beck doesn't care about restoring our country to economic prosperity or the US being a world leader again or living up to the lofty principals set forth by the founding fathers, he is just in it to make a buck like the D.D. remix says.
[/sarc]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wolfy, 18 Oct 2010 @ 9:36pm

Just like they morphed the concept of sharing which used to mean an act of kindness to friend, into a criminal act that demands punishment because of it's obvious utter depravity. You repeat the lie often enough and my idiot fellow countrymen and women swallow it hook, line and sinker. What's worse, they forget they ever thought differently.

Now come the rethuglicans with a new definition for fair use. Beck is certifiable in my opinion... he seems to have a very pronounced thing for nazi's.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Gabriel Tane (profile), 19 Oct 2010 @ 5:37am
  
  Re:
  Look for the Dailey Show and "Nazi Tourettes"... seriously funny stuff.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]