Double Bogus DMCA Takedown All The Way!
from the what-does-it-mean? dept
HappyCabbie alerts us to the news that "Hungrybear9562," whose real name is Paul Vasquez, but is much better known as the "Double Rainbow Guy" for his viral video hit "Double Rainbow" (perhaps one of the most viral videos ever), has gone on a fascinatingly ignorant DMCA takedown binge, using some questionable theories. Basically, he's decided that if there's a video he doesn't like, he can take it down. He put up his own bizarre video in which he explains his views on the DMCA:Throughout the video he makes it clear that his main concern is that he "doesn't like" these videos, which apparently are somewhat mean and make fun of him, but copyright is not made for censoring speech you don't like. Amazingly, Vasquez even seems to be issuing DMCA takedowns on videos that try to explain this to him, including one from HappyCabbie which tries to explain the Streisand Effect to Vasquez:
Now some may claim this is just a case of a fairly ignorant guy abusing the DMCA, but that's what happens when you provide such a tool for easy censorship. It gets abused by people to censor speech. What does it mean? It means that we have a double free speech problem all the way...
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, double rainbow, fair use, hungrybear9562, paul vasquez, youtube
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
lol, i just used DMCA as a verb. :)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Question:
This is what happens with a Democrat in office. The Yetis take over the intertubes. I'm getting a gun....
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Question:
Well, just borrow one from a nearby spaceball...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
http://www.soku.com/search_video?searchdomain=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.soku.com&searchType=video&a mp;q=double+rainbow
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Question:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Question:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Question:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Willful ignorance
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Question:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Why nobody has sued him yet is beyond me.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
untended consasquatches
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
It's starting to look like a triple DMCA.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Who owns the copyright?
So... I guess god owns the copyright?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Thanks Mike!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Piracy pays.
"Abstract: The New York Times today (page B1) is reporting that "more than one-third of the two billion views of YouTube videos with ads each week are ... uploaded without the copyright owner's permission but left up by the owner's choice." The content owners are choosing to not request that the posted material be taken down because YouTube splits the ad revenue with them. The Times notes that "[h]undreds of these [content] partners make more than $100,000 per year.""
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Who owns the copyright?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Question:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
It's not like I'd get fines or jailtime for it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
IS "just a case of a fairly ignorant guy abusing the DMCA".
So why write it up? -- Fills space and doesn't exceed the grasp of Mike's fanboy base.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Question:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: IS "just a case of a fairly ignorant guy abusing the DMCA".
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Question:
Trust me on this, you NEVER want to go to plaid. It's a ludicrous prospect and you're likely to overshoot your target.
Seriously, trust me on this....
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: IS "just a case of a fairly ignorant guy abusing the DMCA".
fixed.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
It's hard to blame hosting companies. It's the law that's the problem.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Question:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I wonder if there is no cow dung in it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
DMCA offers counter notification - use it.
Is he abusing it... probably.
but file the counter notification, get the content re-enabled and start the clock..
He has a limited amount of time to file his suit and something tells me he is not likely to do so.
DMCA, when used properly is powerful for both sides.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: IS "just a case of a fairly ignorant guy abusing the DMCA".
And even if it's just for his products, why do you find it acceptable for him to censor critics?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: IS "just a case of a fairly ignorant guy abusing the DMCA".
I assume you are a paid shill, but there's a good chance that you do this for fun.
Why is it fun for you?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Question:
Everybody get together and try to love one another
Right now
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Oh and in response to several stupid partisan comments: Guess what you clowns, both major political parties are just wings on the same corporate vulture, circling high overhead its witless quarry. If you, as an ordinary citizen, are actually dumb enough to believe that either the Democrats or Republicans are "on your side", then you're a born dupe. The incumbent two-party system only creates an illusion of choice. Both parties answer to big money, not the voting masses (as the DMCA itself ought to make evident). Elections provide the illusion of control, wealth secures actual control. Most Americans have been outwitted and pitted against their own best interests without even knowing it. Now go sing the national anthem, suckers.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I saw an ad....
at 5:40, someone pointed out "Notice no ads?". I had to X out of the google ad right at the beginning (the one at the bottom of the screen that pops up).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
If a hippy gets stoned in the forest and posts it on Youtube, no you should not care.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
I like Jim Goads description better:
"...they are mere flippers on the same thalidomide baby..."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
simply pitiful...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Question:
Come get him.;)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: simply pitiful...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Willful ignorance
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: simply pitiful...
Yep, just your ordinary, run-of-the-mill copyright maximalist shilltard.
Did you do the description from memory, or did you cheat and look in the mirror first?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Gatekeeper
Hmmm.
Maybe it should be $500.00 US.
Or maybe a better way would be to just shorten copyright and patents to 14 years, and then make them Public Domain.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Masnick searches out an example of an opposing view presented by an obviously slow-witted, possibly mentally ill, hillbilly/hippie hybrid and proceeds to shred his rambling discourse. You must be very proud Mike, being able to dispatch such a formidab
We’ll wait.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Unwarranted takedowns
Now if he is taking down other people's videos just because he doesn't like them, and they are not using any of his content. then that's a whole 'nother matter. Then he *is* violating the law.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Unwarranted takedowns-oops
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: IS "just a case of a fairly ignorant guy abusing the DMCA".
Allowing any censorship of speech, especially just because someone 'doesn't like it,' inevitably leads to censorship of more speech which in all likelihood affect many others.
It's the principle behind it, and you and he are both WRONG.
How much did you earn for posting that comment?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Masnick searches out an example of an opposing view presented by an obviously slow-witted, possibly mentally ill, hillbilly/hippie hybrid and proceeds to shred his rambling discourse. You must be very proud Mike, being able to dispatch such a form
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Willful ignorance
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Response to: Anonymous Coward on Sep 7th, 2011 @ 2:54pm
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Masnick searches out an example of an opposing view presented by an obviously slow-witted, possibly mentally ill, hillbilly/hippie hybrid and proceeds to shred his rambling discourse. You must be very proud Mike, being able to dispatch such a formidab
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: simply pitiful...
[ link to this | view in thread ]