Thank Copyright Infringers For Still Being Able To Hear Great Moments In World Series History
from the giants-win-the-pennant dept
If you're a baseball fan, you know that the World Series is going on right now, between the San Francisco Giants and the Texas Rangers (with the Giants looking damn good so far). On the night they won the League Championship Series to advance to the World Series, I was actually out walking my dog, listening to the game on the radio (it was a pretty nerve-wracking finish), and was actually a bit disappointed that radio announcer Jon Miller didn't pull out the obvious "The Giants win the pennant!" line, even though they had, in fact, won the pennant. As you hopefully know, that line was the famous call -- considered one of the greatest broadcasting moments in history -- back in 1951, when the (then) NY Giants' Bobby Thomson hit a homerun off the (then) Brooklyn Dodgers' Ralph Branca to secure the National League championship:The man we all need to thank is someone named Larry Goldberg, a travel agent who had the good sense to ask his mother to tape Russ Hodges' call so he could listen to it after work. Because of Larry, we have the most joyous call in the history of sports to enjoy forever.Yes, thanks to infringement, we have that moment in history.
And it's not the only one. Just about a month ago, the news came out that video tapes of the (previously lost) 1960 World Series had been found in the former wine cellar of Bing Crosby, who had been a part-owner of The Pirates. The final game of that series is considered one of the greatest games ever (well, less so if you're a Yankee fan...), but it had been lost... until last month. Crosby apparently couldn't bear to actually watch the game, he was so nervous (he went to Europe instead), but wanted to be able to watch it later, so he actually hired a film crew to record the official broadcast, and they were just recovered (actually, right outside of San Francisco...) last month.
So here we have two of the greatest moments in baseball that we only have the archive of the actual game recordings because of people technically infringing.
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: baseball, copyright infringement, world series
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Also, Whovians
When are people going to learn that copying isn't piracy, it's preservation?
I wonder if "The Preservation Party" wouldn't be a better name for the PP folks.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Also, Whovians
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Also, Whovians
So it wont compete with NEWER versions.
Iv seen 6 TYPES/styles of shows based on the idea of body snatching. And they all started from books.
there are even releases that are EBOOK ONLY now.
Even at that, let us not to Erase all of past history.(as if we hadnt already)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Also, Whovians
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Star Wars Holiday Special
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Star_Wars_Holiday_Special#Versions_and_availability_today
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Star Wars Holiday Special
And I actually like the prequel trilogy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What's the "techdirt" on Google Mike ??? you know with ORACLE ??? and JAVA ??
Where are you ????
Please be honest for once, and admit you are not talking about it, because its just too hard for you to spin it in such a way to make goolge look good. (after all they pay your bills)..
So what about a bit of balance, and honesty in reporting, why is it you only report on the subjects (purile mostly) that you can spin in such a way to make an 'argument'.
When when it is clear Google do very nastly things, and illegal things, they steal patents, code and anything else they can get their hands on..
You are unusually SILENT on the issue.. !!!!!!
So you are censoring us, ??? are you deciding what we should read and what we should not be allowed to see ?
SO thats what it is, Mikes own censorship system, if Mike feels that the information would be harmfull to his 'cause' then he will censor that information, to protect us poor, stupid plebs from knowing the full story, or the truth..
The fact you leave out Google stealing code, and include OLD tales about Halloween.. Mike.. as that an attempt of deflection ??
If it is, you suck at it..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What's the "techdirt" on Google Mike ??? you know with ORACLE ??? and JAVA ??
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What's the "techdirt" on Google Mike ??? you know with ORACLE ??? and JAVA ??
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What's the "techdirt" on Google Mike ??? you know with ORACLE ??? and JAVA ??
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What's the "techdirt" on Google Mike ??? you know with ORACLE ??? and JAVA ??
Oracle bought Sun. Prior to this purchase, Sun made Java Open Source, and used the GPL license which explicitly states:
ANYONE CAN FREELY USE THIS CODE. IF CHANGES ARE MADE, YOU MUST PUBLISH THIS CODE.
Google, complying with said license did just that.
Now Oracle, realizing that their "should be cash cow" is really nothing more than milked (see what I did there?) is having a fit because someone actually read the license meant for it.
Granted, it's a bit more complicated than this when it comes to corporate use and the fact that both Android and Java are platforms (and as such both have their own licenses,) but that's basically it. If you don't believe me, do the research.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What's the "techdirt" on Google Mike ??? you know with ORACLE ??? and JAVA ??
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What's the "techdirt" on Google Mike ??? you know with ORACLE ??? and JAVA ??
Also, it's a little boring hearing another of your anti-Mike whines. You could have brought this up in a much better way, such as saying "What about this topic?" or something similar, politer, and with less unnecessary personal attacking. Even better, you could have done a little research, given us a couple of paragraphs of actual info, and posted a useful link or two. But now, it's much easier to whine on about your personal beef with Mike.
I don't think Mike is 'protecting' anyone from anything. If he had the 'cause' you claim he has, why does he have a prominent link saying "Why I Hope The RIAA Succeeds"?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What's the "techdirt" on Google Mike ??? you know with ORACLE ??? and JAVA ??
It's always a good idea to stay on topic, but wth, let us know what you really think.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What's the "techdirt" on Google Mike ??? you know with ORACLE ??? and JAVA ??
If it wasn't for you, I would never ever hear about this story because NO WAY do I read other tech news sites (like Slashdot, that is linked in the front page of this website).
Incidentally, did Oracle hire you to spread FUD, or is your head filled with bricks?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What's the "techdirt" on Google Mike ??? you know with ORACLE ??? and JAVA ??
So you are censoring us, ??? are you deciding what we should 'read and what we should not be allowed to see ?
SO thats what it is, Mikes own censorship system, if Mike feels that the information would be harmfull to his 'cause' then he will censor that information, to protect us poor, stupid plebs from knowing the full story, or the truth.. "
Listen bucky, and listen good. Its not censorship if you simply DONT TALK ABOUT SOMETHING. How is Mike censoring YOU? Or anyone on this site? Did he alter or remove your comments? No? Then its NOT CENSORSHIP.
CHOOSING to NOT speak about something
IS
NOT
CENSORSHIP
Got it? I know, you dont, you have such a burning hatred-hard-on for Mike you are blinded to anything resembling logic and reason, but it had to be said anyway.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What's the "techdirt" on Google Mike ??? you know with ORACLE ??? and JAVA ??
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What's the "techdirt" on Google Mike ??? you know with ORACLE ??? and JAVA ??
Since it only implements 99% of the Java api, it is not called java. But it is compatible with the other 99% of the Java API and byte code. Sun doesn't like this.
Sun wants to be the ONLY gateway into making a Java compatible VM, but the open source community didn't want to play by Sun's rules. The API and byte code that the open source VM does use, is actually open source. Sun documented and released those APIs and byte codes under open source themselves.
Essentially, Sun wants to say that 99% of Java is open source, but you can't *just* implement the open source parts, you must implement the whole thing. But this is contrary to the open source license it was released under.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Another "pirated" call from NBA lore...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Infringing or fair use?
If so, it's another example of how important fair use is to society as a whole, and how it may also benefit the copyright holders themselves. (The aforementioned Doctor Who case is another example.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Infringing or fair use?
Conclusion: Copyright lasts entirely too long and our current fair use laws aren't the solution.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Infringing or fair use?
He didn't. From a more detailed article in the NY Times:
Now, if the copyright owners had themselves not distributed it, you would be right.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Infringing or fair use?
As an addendum, I just wanted to say that I agree with this 100%. That doesn't diminish the fact that fair use is important.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
That's how.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101022/04042611537/fallacy-debunking-successful-n ew-business-model-examples-are-the-exception.shtml#c1683
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Basic human nature.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Encouraging infringement???
Techdirt has a whole slew of articles about why making backups for archival purposes should be legalized:
Should Organizations Get To Ignore Copyright For The Sake Of Preservation?
How Copyright Is Denying Us Our Own History
Film Archives Being Eaten Away; Would Be Nice If People Could Make Copies To Preserve
Historical Audio Recordings Disappearing; Copyright Partly To Blame
This post is obviously in the same vein. It is not, at all, remotely, even close to "condoning illegal downloading."
Stop being an ass.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Probably because you don't have any but simply are talking out of your butt.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Why is it intellectually dishonest? I don't share Mike's apparent respect for the law, but I can still understand and accept it. You seem to suggest that it is impossible to make decisions based solely on whether something is legal or not. Respect for the law aside, is it intellectually dishonest to consider the negative consequences of your actions, or is that just rational thought?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
For one thing, the recording he talks about here happened for different reasons, and in different circumstances, than illegal file sharing. (File sharing generally isn't done for archival purposes.)
For another thing, it's entirely possible to advocate for changing laws, without encouraging lawbreaking, and without encouraging the illegal behavior itself.
I'll give you an example. I believe that marijuana should be legalized. Yet, I don't smoke pot myself, don't particularly like most stoners, and don't encourage getting high. There's no hypocrisy involved.
Why not encourage illegal file sharing? Well, maybe because he doesn't want to encourage any illegal behavior. Or maybe because he would be giving bad advice - if you get sued, your life is ruined. Or maybe because he believes that the rights holders' wishes should be respected, even if they're wrong-headed. Or any other number of reasons.
You seem to be angry that Mike doesn't encourage illegal file sharing. Well, you can still do it if you want to - you don't need Mike's approval. But by believing he's a hypocrite, you're making the same "for us or against us" mistake that drives ideologues like "John Paul Jones."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You appear to be missing my point totally. I'm not saying infringement is okay. I'm saying it's dumb to protect these works with copyright in the first place, and we'd be better off if the *rights holders* freed them in the first place.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I read the linked article last week, thanks.
"It makes sense for Mike to consider the consequences of his actions but why should he care about your actions?"
Why shouldn't he care?
"Its bogus to say look at all of the good things that come from recording/copying/sharing but then to say that you should not do it."
I think Karl has sufficiently explained why it is not bogus.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What's the "techdirt" on Google Mike ??? you know with ORACLE ??? and JAVA ??
Let's see... Take a breath. Inhale. Pause. Exhale. Repeat.
Good boy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: What's the "techdirt" on Google Mike ??? you know with ORACLE ??? and JAVA ??
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
joyous call?
Hmmm@that. To a Giants fan, perhaps. I say the best call ever is each final call when the Spurs won their championship(s).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: joyous call?
As for classic moments, how about Germany vs England a few months ago ;)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: joyous call?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: joyous call?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Google Suing Oracle
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
How was that 1951 Shot Heard Round the World recorded?
I suppose someone else filmed the game, or parts of it, at the stadium, either with no accompanying audio, or just the ambient audio in the stadium, then Goldberg's audio was later combined with that film. But it would be nice to know whether that is correct, and if so, the details.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: How was that 1951 Shot Heard Round the World recorded?
Russ Hodges' famous lines were only delivered on the radio. So, obviously the film footage is from a different source. (Not sure which one.)
On a separate note: Bobby Thomson, the Giants player who hit the home run, died on August 16th.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
STILL NOTHING !!!! Hello Mike .... you there ??? answer us ?? :) be honest if you can..
Silent on an imporatant issue.
But leaves TD to talk about a over 50 year old baseball match.
Ofcourse, its too hard for Mike to spin the google story his own way, its beyond him.
Fair enough, we all know Mike is not that skilled in these things..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: STILL NOTHING !!!! Hello Mike .... you there ??? answer us ?? :) be honest if you can..
The Java programming language specification is licensed under the GNU GPL, and so are it's main libraries (most of them, I think). It is free (as in speech and beer), so Oracle has no claim here.
But the language specification and libraries, by themselves, are useless. You need an to implement mechanisms that "executes" that language. In Java's case, that would be the Virtual Machine (and associated mechanisms). Now, as far as I know, Google implemented their own version of the JVM (the Dalvik Virtual Machine or somesuch), so Oracle, again, has no claim here.
So, as you see, Oracle has no claims here. It bought Sun and now is being a bitch to pretty much everyone that ever used anything Sun-related (just because they can).
If you pay attention, you'll see that developers of Sun-related technologies (like Open Office or the OpenJDK) are trying to run away as far as possible from Oracle and it's patent-and-copyright-fueled nuclear arsenal. Oracle is digging itself a pretty nice hole with this mess.
There, happy?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: STILL NOTHING !!!! Hello Mike .... you there ??? answer us ?? :) be honest if you can..
It would be looking dark for MySQL as well other than the fact that the licensing goes back to day one on that project though I'm sure Oracle will try something.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: STILL NOTHING !!!! Hello Mike .... you there ??? answer us ?? :) be honest if you can..
Keep raving, lunatic. It gives us all a good laugh. :D
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: STILL NOTHING !!!! Hello Mike .... you there ??? answer us ?? :) be honest if you can..
psst... Darryl... over here...
Oracle's First Big Move With Sun? Use Sun's Patents To Sue Google
Why The Oracle Java Patents Were Literally A Joke Played By Sun Engineers
Google Points Out That Oracle Asked Sun To Open Source The Java Tech It's Now Suing Google Over
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: STILL NOTHING !!!! Hello Mike .... you there ??? answer us ?? :) be honest if you can..
Hi Darryl. No surprise. I generally take the weekends off. This weekend I was in Hollywood talking with movie execs and filmmakers, so no time to spend here answering bizarre illogical rantings. Sorry.
In the meantime, if you honestly think I don't write negative stories about Google, you need to check your reading comprehension scanners. Just last week I called for the company to fire its CEO. Pay attention Darryl, you seem to miss a lot.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's probably not piracy
In other words, you can't claim copyright of a live radio broadcast unless there was simultaneously recorded.
This is also true for live television: The NFL didn't acquire a copyright in the Jets / Green Bay game yesterday unless it was simultaneously recording the game. (Which it was, so it did.)
Simultaneous recording was less frequent in the 1950s. Considering the only copy we have to the play call from the shot heard round the world is a recording from a listener, not the broadcaster, means it is highly likely the broadcaster didn't acquire a copyright.
Interestingly, the person recording does likely have a copyright in the work. It will be thin in the sense it only covers duplicates of the sound recording, but courts have ruled that even millisecond copies of sound recordings violate copyright.
Of course, back in the 1950s the acquisition of a copyright also required you follow proper filing procedures, so no copyright may have been acquired on those grounds.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
the giants win the pennant
[ link to this | view in chronology ]