Oscar-Nominated Filmmaker Misuses DMCA To Take Down Video Of Reporter Asking Him Tough Questions
from the copyright-as-censorship dept
And here we are with yet another example of someone using copyright for censorship. Stephan Kinsella points us to the news that Josh Fox, the Oscar-nominated filmmaker of the documentary Gasland, has apparently sent a takedown notice to YouTube, concerning a video of a reporter asking him some pointed questions about apparent omissions in the film. The reporter posted the 3-minute video to YouTube, which is almost entirely footage of him asking Fox questions at a screening. Early in the clip there is 26-seconds of footage from Gasland to provide the context of the questioning. This seems like a classic case of fair use, and yet if you visit the YouTube clip that the guy uploaded, you see this:Fox is free to argue that the clip misrepresented him, misquoted him or otherwise was unfair or questionable, if he believes that's the case. He can argue that he didn't give good answers and would like to answer the questions more fully. But what he should not be able to do is to issue a totally bogus copyright claim on the video which is clearly fair use, and where he's obviously not using copyright law as intended, but as a way to silence a critic of his.
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, dmca, fracking, gasland, josh fox, videos
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
What I want to know is how you can get an Oscar nomination for blatantly lying.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
One minute the Vimeo video is there. The next minute it's gone.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
A:1/10
Transcript?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Well That Was Fast...
"Sorry, "Gasland director hides full facts" was deleted at 12:54:30 Tue Jun 7, 2011. Vimeo has removed or disabled access to the following material as a result of a third-party notification by Gasland Productions, LLC claiming that this material is infringing: Gasland director hides full facts. We have no more information about it on our mainframe or elsewhere."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
Ermm... That is kinda what you normally get them for... Documentaries are supposed to be the exception :)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
And it's gone
[ link to this | view in thread ]
***B-Z-Z-Z-Z!*** Wrong answer!
Anyone who has actually watched the video should be expecting men in black suits at their door with hypodermic needles filled with sodium anathol and being asked questions about bringing down the government and other terrorist activities.
How dare you all sound off about free speech and claim to be American!!! We need to follow our government blindly and trust that they shall point us the way through the storm. We need authoritarian rule! We need to give up our rights as human beings. It's the only way to be American!
And while you're at it, read my name!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
"Early in the clip there is 26-seconds of footage from Gasland to provide the context of the questioning"
Ignore me...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
What is wrong with you?
those people were not able to light their water on fire before the fracking started, and now they can.
citing studies in other parts of the world, at other times in history is complete BS and a ridiculous tactic.
The clown asking questions is a buffoon and an idiot.
He is using non-sequiturs, taking things out of context, and it will be interesting to follow the money on him.
The documentary is scientifically sound and the guy is not lying. If you have to do your -own- research, then do it.. but the fact is the fact..
Besides, what the hell is wrong with you people? do you really want those chemicals pumped into the ground and contaminating your water? seriously.. are you stupid?
well, you don't have to answer that.. but I can tell you this.. if you try that "drill baby drill" s***t and that fracking in the great lakes region of the upper midwest.. you're going to learn about second amendment solutions really quick.. so good luck.. we like our water here, and we are only trying to protect your water supply, so quit your whining and convert to a free competition economy so we can have new energy sources.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Well That Was Fast...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Why didn't the BP oil documentaries show all the oil that naturally is released into the ocean?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: What is wrong with you?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: What is wrong with you?
Are you stupid? What the heck do the goods and bads of fracking have to do with the price of rice?
This story is about censorship, not fracking, thats just the backdrop.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: What is wrong with you?
None of which is infringing on copyrights.
those people were not able to light their water on fire before the fracking started, and now they can.
Which has nothing to do with the copyright claim.
citing studies in other parts of the world, at other times in history is complete BS and a ridiculous tactic.
Which has nothing to do with the copyright claim.
The clown asking questions is a buffoon and an idiot.
Which has nothing to do with the copyright claim.
He is using non-sequiturs, taking things out of context, and it will be interesting to follow the money on him.
Which has nothing to do with the copyright claim.
The documentary is scientifically sound and the guy is not lying. If you have to do your -own- research, then do it.. but the fact is the fact..
Which has nothing to do with the copyright claim.
Besides, what the hell is wrong with you people? do you really want those chemicals pumped into the ground and contaminating your water? seriously.. are you stupid?
Which has nothing to do with the copyright claim.
well, you don't have to answer that.. but I can tell you this.. if you try that "drill baby drill" s***t and that fracking in the great lakes region of the upper midwest.. you're going to learn about second amendment solutions really quick.. so good luck.. we like our water here, and we are only trying to protect your water supply, so quit your whining and convert to a free competition economy so we can have new energy sources.
Which has nothing to do with the copyright claim.
Again, as I said, I have my concerns about fracking, and I agree that some of the questions, and even the video edits may have been questionable. But none of that means it's okay for the filmmaker to abuse copyright law to take down the video.
I find it stunning and disgusting that you would so misread what I wrote. I even noted in the post that I have my concerns about fracking. And you then still claim that I support it? What's wrong with *you*?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
That may well be, but that has no bearing whatsoever on the copyright issue.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The notice on the screen refers to New Video. Do you think maybe just maybe they have lawyers? OR a desire to get more attention?
"Marketed and distributed in the U.S. by New Video."
http://www.newvideo.com/docurama/gasland/
I mean controversy is fun and a seller and everything, but seriously all reports of the director being behind it source to 1 guy. Funny didn't see a copy of the notice on his website, just a claim about someone he thinks is an evil liar to begin with.
The issue of frakking aside, have we really fallen into this trap so easily? Us vs Them mentality rules everything nowdays, and just helps reenforce the idea we gotta get them before they get us.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Well That Was Fast...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: What is wrong with you?
I think also you might be wrong about the copyright claim, I think you need permission to use actual footage from a film. A lot of people don't care, because in the film industry "any publicity is good publicity", but if someone wants to call you on it it is their choice.
I think this is a "fair use" of copyright law.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Meh....
If Phlegm is as interested in the truth as he claims, then let him release the entire unedited video exchange and lets see where it goes from there.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
but thanks for replying.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: What is wrong with you?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Well...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: What is wrong with you?
I think this is a "fair use" of copyright law
You are wrong. The whole point of fair use is that it allows you to use works without permission.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: What is wrong with you?
Umm...no you don't have to ask for permission. The the whole purpose of copyright's fair use clauses are so you don't have to ask for permission to use small snippets in order to critique or comment on the work.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: What is wrong with you?
Sorry, but I have to bite...why were people trying to light their drinking water on fire before they knew that fracking was starting? Because this statement implies a comparison.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: What is wrong with you?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: What is wrong with you?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: What is wrong with you?
Heck, I had a lot of original work up on a facebook page I had made.. it was all original, there was nothing borrowed, in any way, at all.. and they took it down for some kind of copyright issue or something.. when i asked them about it, they told me to get a lawyer..
maybe someone just did not want people to read my writing, maybe it was someone who felt as though I was their competition and just lied to get my stuff removed from FB.
I do not know, I will never know. FB will not respond or return my material to me even privately.
So maybe the film maker is being a douche, or maybe he has a good reason.. Your concerns are valid.. but I hope there is a way to get to the whole issue.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: What is wrong with you?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Missing the point...
Think of it this way... You own 40 acres of prime Florida land and I want to buy it. Why can't I use "eminent domain" to force you to sell it? Because while eminent domain is a valid option in some cases, it's not valid for me to use it that way - just like using the DMCA to pull down this video isn't valid when used the way it was used.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: What is wrong with you?
You're a huge piracy apologist Masnick, and a steaming pile of hypocrisy.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: What is wrong with you?
The whole point of this article is that this appears to be a misuse of the DMCA takedown procedure to censor something the filmmaker didn't like.
Heck, I had a lot of original work up on a facebook page I had made.. it was all original, there was nothing borrowed, in any way, at all.. and they took it down for some kind of copyright issue or something.. when i asked them about it, they told me to get a lawyer..
You might be confusing Facebook's TOS with copyright law. If FB's TOS is like most, they can remove your material whenever they want for any reason (or no reason).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: What is wrong with you?
Nice to know where you stand.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Won't Bother Watching
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: What is wrong with you?
OK, so you are saying the DMCA takedown provisions are working mostly like they should. OK, good, that's a start.
When DMCA takedown procedure is being misused to stifle speech, then yes, it should be pointed out and brought to the forefront. Censoring of speech is not the purpose of the DMCA and the vigil against that should be continued.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: What is wrong with you?
I apologize that you can't adapt to the state of the world. I know its probably your mothers fault, but I apologize anyway.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: What is wrong with you?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
He isn't really a journalist per se and so far his only claim to fame is an unsuccessful "produced for personal profit" film based on attacking another highly successful film.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: What is wrong with you?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: What is wrong with you?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Won't Bother Watching
because the last thing you'd want to do is know what you're talking about.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Missing the point...
Because you don't have the right political connections yet. You simply need to donate a little more to your local councilmember's next campaign.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Documentaries
I don't have a particular view on the practice of fracking; but I do know that I will be no more enlightened after watching this documentary. They are tools to espouse a particular opinion, not to objectively present facts. If you believe they're objective, you're falling for their deception. They're persuasive documents, not informative documents.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
That fails both the smell test and the definition of "fair use" under copyright law.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: What is wrong with you?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
but I have seen both the Doc. and also the little spooge fest the LNG paid-off guy made, and it was BS. It was all edited and manipulated and out of context using unrelated anecdotes to prove a non-point. So if Gasland found a way to use copyright infringement properly, i do not blame them.
No, if Gasland is using DCMA to censor, that is not right.. but if giant dinosaur technology man has any legitimacy, he will release something else, and present some science and fact, and not try to capitalize on his butchery of someone else's hard work.
Also, no one has to like the documentary, or agree with it, or even drink water, they can just die of thirst, that is the right of anyone.
Anyone should have the right to drink methane and all the fracking chemicals they want. I would never stop a Palinista or a Tea Partier from drinking all the trimethylbenzene they want to, that's fine. Have at it. Say hi to Jesus.
Also, dickwipe sounds like he is from somewhere else, and does not have to drink the water here.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: What is wrong with you?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
But enter DMCA and I can only assume that Mr. Fox, in fact, does suck.
Pulling the DMCA card is getting like the 'race' card. It's overused and use of said 'card' makes you appears as though you are a cok-goblin.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Surprise!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: What is wrong with you?
It's easy to know "how it was done." Under the rules of the DMCA, the site receiving the takedown notice has tremendous incentive to remove the video, or they could face liability themselves. So they have little incentive to determine if the copyright claim is legit. They just remove. The user then has the right to counternotice, but during that time, the content is still removed.
Heck, I had a lot of original work up on a facebook page I had made.. it was all original, there was nothing borrowed, in any way, at all.. and they took it down for some kind of copyright issue or something.. when i asked them about it, they told me to get a lawyer..
Tough to know the specifics of your situation without detail, but Facebook, as with YouTube and Vimeo is required to accept counternotices, and if there is no lawsuit filed within 10 business days, they're supposed to put the content back up.
I do not know, I will never know. FB will not respond or return my material to me even privately.
Did you file an official DMCA counternotice?
So maybe the film maker is being a douche, or maybe he has a good reason.. Your concerns are valid.. but I hope there is a way to get to the whole issue
We know the issue: he filed a bogus DMCA takedown. That's known as copyfraud, and doing so can result in him having to pay fines.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
I suppose it boils down to whether you personally believe what Phlegm is attempting constitutes as fair. Apparently the Gasland people do not believe that what Phlegm is attempting is fair.
Maybe Phlegm just needs to go make a better movie so he doesn't have to rely on attacking other more successful films in order to promote his own work.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: What is wrong with you?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
That is not how fair use works. I would suggest reading up on what fair use means. It is not at all determined by whether or not the copyright holder believes it is "fair."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Frack copyright
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: What is wrong with you?
Lots of people die of natural causes every day - that doesn't mean that murder should be ignored as statistically insignificant ?
(Or are you simply being sarcastic - hard to tell really).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
WHERE IS THE INTERVIEW? Link?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
> for blatantly lying.
It worked for Al Gore and Michael Moore...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Missing the point...
> Why can't I use "eminent domain" to force you to sell it?
Now you can.
Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: What is wrong with you?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
Ask Al Gore.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: What is wrong with you?
you should have written "trademark delusion"
[ link to this | view in thread ]