Rush Limbaugh Issues DMCA Takedown To Censor Video Criticism
from the can't-take-the-heat dept
Radio personality Rush Limbaugh apparently has decided he can't handle criticism well, so he's abusing the DMCA to take down a video critical of him. The video does use Limbaugh video, but it seems like a pretty clear case of fair use. And, if we go by the standard established in the Lenz v. Universal case, those issuing a takedown are supposed to first consider fair use. If Limbaugh failed to do so, he could run into trouble.But, more to the point: WTF? Why do people keep abusing the DMCA solely to silence free speech that criticizes them, at the same time they claim to be supporters of the First Amendment. You would think, by now, that Limbaugh has enough advisers who might recommend against taking down a silly YouTube video no one's watching any more -- but he seems to keep doing it, even if it seemingly goes against many of his claims.
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: dmca abuse, fair use, lenz v. universal, rush limbaugh
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Introductions are in order...
I hope one of you can learn something from the other...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Introductions are in order...
The internet neither forgives nor forgets...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Introductions are in order...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Introductions are in order...
Streisand effect
let's make it happen : )
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Introductions are in order...
www.dailymotion.com/video/xqcn0f_rush-limbaugh-53-vile-smears-aga inst-sandra-fluke_news
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4r_C8TZCGQk
http://www.veoh.com/watch/v3 12900415n3F97bG ( currently processing )
Time to spam a few feminist blogs and the like.... lulz
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Introductions are in order...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Introductions are in order... (Streisand)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rush, Rush, Rush I thought that you were more savvy than that.
You are going to have to have a dialog with us. You can't just try and shut the collective "US" up. You need to address the issues expressed even if they are or are not valid.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Rush, Rush, Rush I thought that you were more savvy than that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Rush, Rush, Rush I thought that you were more savvy than that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Rush, Rush, Rush I thought that you were more savvy than that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Rush, Rush, Rush I thought that you were more savvy than that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Rush, Rush, Rush I thought that you were more savvy than that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Rush, Rush, Rush I thought that you were more savvy than that.
Argue with me on this and I will provide you link after link to prove my point. The left have always worked to control media. The right to control the message not the whole dialog.
Liberals control more of the dialog and news than the conservatives even could hope to control. Do some basic research.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Rush, Rush, Rush I thought that you were more savvy than that.
Really.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Rush, Rush, Rush I thought that you were more savvy than that.
Which is false. The far-right is less likely to censor than the far-left.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Rush, Rush, Rush I thought that you were more savvy than that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Rush, Rush, Rush I thought that you were more savvy than that.
both are fascists
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Rush, Rush, Rush I thought that you were more savvy than that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Rush, Rush, Rush I thought that you were more savvy than that.
It's a politically opportunistic mistake, most likely stemming from Hitler calling his party a version of "socialism", or worker's party, when it was actually authoritarian. It'd be like referring to a piece of bad legislation as in America's best interests because it's called "The Patriot Act"....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Rush, Rush, Rush I thought that you were more savvy than that.
I normally don't dive into the political bugaboo dialog, but that's absolute bullshit. Coming from a point of view that's relatively neutral (I hate both parties) both are absolutely as likely to censor as the other, albeit about different topics. The left will censor you over anything that involves feelings (hate-speech, political-correctness, etc.) and the right will censor you over business topics and nat'l security (Wikileaks, free-speech zones, etc.). These are not perfect generalizations by any stretch, but they're close enough.
Basically, both parties are equally happy to shut you the fuck up over things they don't want you talking about. So let's not pretend that this want to shut others up has anything at all to do with political party....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Rush, Rush, Rush I thought that you were more savvy than that.
That is mostly true. The statement was that the left are more LIKELY to censor which is true.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Rush, Rush, Rush I thought that you were more savvy than that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Rush, Rush, Rush I thought that you were more savvy than that.
Please take a moment to see any survey on the amount of all media people that are more likely to vote Democratic. The are the New-Speak world of 1984. I don't make this stuff up.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Rush, Rush, Rush I thought that you were more savvy than that.
The problem with this line of thought is that there is no right and left in this country. There's mostly just the kinda-right and the maybe-a-little-left-of-center-almost. We don't have a left wing in our political parties. Which I'm mostly okay with.
But this country is OVERTLY conservative all around, so much so, in fact, that are "leftist" party isn't leftist at all. They're moderate.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Rush, Rush, Rush I thought that you were more savvy than that.
I really don't have time to fight that fight but America is not even close to being mostly "kinda-right". Surveys put it close to 31%-right -- 36%-left and the rest independent.
The media in general is and has been "mostly-left" by their own survey results. Please no fight here. I was just stating facts. The media self-identifies as democratic by a wide majority. Every time!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Rush, Rush, Rush I thought that you were more savvy than that.
Ok, I'll try again, since apparently I wasn't clear last time: you're looking at this ONLY from a scale as represented by American politics. If you look at the global right and left, America is on the right, and decidedly so. We're a conservative nation, not as judged by our own skewed spectrum, but judged by the spectrum of all nations. That was my entire point. From the perspective of the rest of the world, our "leftist communist-socialist pigdogs" are "insane warmongering conservatives".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Rush, Rush, Rush I thought that you were more savvy than that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Rush, Rush, Rush I thought that you were more savvy than that.
Oh, come on, this is just silly. There are obvious areas where conservative thought is beneficial and obvious areas where liberal thought is as well. Nations get in trouble when they stray too far to either end of the spectrum and "better off / worse off" is simply a matter of values and perspective. Unless you have some quantifiable measurement by which you want to evidence that the more conservative the nation the better off they are, this is a pointless conversation....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Rush, Rush, Rush I thought that you were more savvy than that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Rush, Rush, Rush I thought that you were more savvy than that.
Completely irrelevant, as the "media people" aren't the ones who determine the message that is being given. The media owners do.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Rush, Rush, Rush I thought that you were more savvy than that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Rush, Rush, Rush I thought that you were more savvy than that.
Okay, just to be fair, I'm going to fight this side of the coin as well as being equally untrue. The religious right may like to censor, but certainly to no more extent than the political correctness police....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Rush, Rush, Rush I thought that you were more savvy than that.
I don't think they're in the same league as the library culling and outright suppression of material committed by the right.
YMMV
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Rush, Rush, Rush I thought that you were more savvy than that.
Its ok we get it you like one side over the other... i find both sides moronic and nethanderal... as i do most people that profess (or show allegence) to them as well...
Im in favor of discuss and ideas...not hate (which you both do, and call the other the evil bastards)
bothsides want control of your thoughts, money, and actions... and both claim to know better than the other.. Both can blow my ass
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Rush, Rush, Rush I thought that you were more savvy than that.
To be fair, on a global scale that just means you hate right-of-centre and far-right... America doesn't have a left-wing mainstream political party.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Rush, Rush, Rush I thought that you were more savvy than that.
Thanks for saying to me what I've said 3 or 4 times in the comments section already :)
To be honest, I mostly hate the idea that anyone can identify on either end of the spectrum. Saying "I'm left" or "I'm right" is stupid. I'd rather just say, "I do my best to be correct on any particular issue".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Rush, Rush, Rush I thought that you were more savvy than that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Rush, Rush, Rush I thought that you were more savvy than that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Rush, Rush, Rush I thought that you were more savvy than that.
Oh Jesus, you make it sound so tempting.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Rush, Rush, Rush I thought that you were more savvy than that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Rush, Rush, Rush I thought that you were more savvy than that.
Indeed. But it's odd that you single out "the left" on this, considering that it's equally true of literally every group that seeks power.
This is objectively incorrect, and yes, I've done a lot more than basic research. The truth is that this isn't a left vs right thing. This is a corporatist vs noncorporatist thing. The vast majority of media in the US is tightly controlled by major media corporations, and they control nearly the entire dialog outside of the internet.
Corporations are not left or right. They use the fake left vs right dichotomy in order to maintain their power.
The reality is that there isn't really much of a "left" in the US anyway until you start talking to normal people. In the media and in our choices for politicians (with less than a half-dozen exceptions), the range is "right leaning moderate" to "ultraright".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Rush, Rush, Rush I thought that you were more savvy than that.
And Conservatives definitely want to control what you do, obsessibely starting with the bedroom...
They also love to punish you for not having a trust fund.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Rush, Rush, Rush I thought that you were more savvy than that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Interesting dichotomy
Yet, when these windbags abuse the DMCA button, nothing happens.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Because Rush Limbaugh really does NOT support the First Amendment. If Limbaugh supports the Patriot Act and all the other forms of Bush-Obama censorship, and NDAA arrests of people who criticize the government's "war on terror," then he does NOT support the First Amendment!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Several things need to change
Since at present fair use is a blurry line, possibly requiring litigation, and risk, then there ought to be a statutory penalty for a false DMCA takedown over fair use. It is not fair that the risk is only on one side. If you're going to pull the trigger on accusing of copyright infringement, and you don't consider whether the work is fair use, then if you lose, there ought to be some serious bite.
Finally, there ought to be some serious penalties for a defective DMCA takedown, no matter for what reason it is defective. Fair use. Falsely claiming to be the copyright owner or their registered agent. The penalty for false copyright ownership claim should triple in obvious cases, such as claiming copyright to someone's nature sound recordings.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Several things need to change
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Several things need to change
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Several things need to change
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Several things need to change
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Several things need to change
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Several things need to change
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Several things need to change
Unfortunately, it really doesn't work that way. Fair Use is a only defense against copyright infringement and can be fairly subjective. The right's holder will claim it's infringement and the defendant will claim it's fair use. It's up to a court to determine who is right and it has to be on a case by case basis because there will always be an untold amount of variables and variations.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Several things need to change
I'll also add one more thing to my original. There should be severe penalties for misusing the DMCA merely to silence critics or material that is embarrassing to a public figure.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
One of the big problems with DMCA takedowns....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: One of the big problems with DMCA takedowns....
Sadly, the trial lawyers won't let something like that pass.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: One of the big problems with DMCA takedowns....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: One of the big problems with DMCA takedowns....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: One of the big problems with DMCA takedowns....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
http://vimeo.com/40888702
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
None
Second, it all is pretty much favorable to Limbaugh. He actually should be thanking Daily Kos for making his point so well. Kind of shows how biased they are at Daily Kos since nothing on the tape is hurtful to Limbaugh. Only the Daily Kos died in the wool liberals would think there was anything wrong with what Limbaugh was saying.
Anyway, Limbaugh shouldn't be complaining and using the DMCA to take it down is kind of a pussyfied thing to do.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: None
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: None
Chances are, due to his age, overweight and unfitness, he is suffering from erectile dysfunction. He needs to seek professional help, plus spend more time getting down to his correct weight and improving his fitness. In a way, his rage is a cry for help.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I can see it now, Rush alone in his back room..."Oh Sandra, you dirty little whore, oh, oh, oh take it you nasty prostitute!" I'm sure it would be repeated over and over.
Someone needs to get laid.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
It's probably not a good idea to mix Oxycontin and Viagra. Just sayin'.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
add this one
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Why do people always go nuclear?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
her basic claim is birth control is expensive, although she is attending a very expensive school
so she wants the governemnt to pay for it, so that does bascially mean, she can't keep he legs closed and wants us to pay for her to have sex without consequences
[ link to this | view in chronology ]