Fake Cable Ad Apparently Hits Too Close To Home; Bogus Defamation Claim Censors Video In Canada
from the what-is-defamatory? dept
Back in March, we had written about an absolutely hilarious fake cable ad by the good folks at Extremely Decent Films. It's funny, and you can watch it again here... if you're not in Canada:
Update: YouTube has now reinstated the video, telling us: "Sometimes we make the wrong call. When it's brought to our attention that a video has been removed or blocked mistakenly, we act quickly to reinstate it." It's still not clear who made the original defamation claim, unfortunately.
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: cable, canada, censorship, defamation, parody, takedown, youtube
Reader Comments
The First Word
“You're so vain...
... you probably think this [video] is about you...Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Hacker!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "Hacker"
Probably have him listed as a terrorist because he uses a computer.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Success.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Definition:
Proposition. Something declarative, which inherently can only be either true, or false, but not both.
Consider now the sentence:
"if changing your ip to get around a block is a violation of cfaa, is the converse true?" to be two propositions p and q
p: changing your ip to get around a block
q: Is a violation of cfaa.
In the scenario, it is the implication that if p, then q is also true. (p -> q)
That is, if p is true, then q must also be true.
Now let us examine the converse where (q -> p) that is, if q is true then p must also be true.
Semantically this makes no sense: Is a violation of cfaa, change your ip to get around a block!
Now! remember, if q is true, that is, you are in violation of the cfaa, then p must also be true!
Thus we conclude inconsistency as you can be in violation of the cfaa but not have changed your ip!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Screw you Entertainment Industry and and the various bs acronym named groups you hide behind.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I thought truth was an absolute defense to defamation.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
(all canadian cable providers)
"He is obviously talking about OUR company! Sue!"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
OR some copyright minimalist filed an equally fake claim!
Since you don't know, and apparently aren't going to bother, don't need facts to gin up controversy among your twenty or so fanboy-trolls, then your claim that "whoever decided to file such a claim on the video basically decided to censor a video because they don't like what it says" is on same level as Kerry's claims about Assad regime behind the chemical attacks: SHEER ASSERTION.
This post mainly to point up how little substance Mike has, and how easy his technique is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: OR some copyright minimalist filed an equally fake claim!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: OR some copyright minimalist filed an equally fake claim!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: OR some copyright minimalist filed an equally fake claim!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: OR some copyright minimalist filed an equally fake claim!
The claim having no substance whatsoever matters.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: OR some copyright minimalist filed an equally fake claim!
It's weird that in amongst the endless stream of nonsense that pours out of you, every now and then there's a bit that looks like a well considered thought.
Unfortunately, as it's smothered by the torrents of inane drivel you propound it takes on a dreamlike quality where you recall very clearly that you were piloting a plane but then the hood on the car you were a passenger in flipped up and totally blocked your view of the WWF match your grandparent's were in as a tag team, but then granny switched sides and it was 3 against 1 and you were shouting no no it shouldn't be 3 against 1 it's supposed to be two, two, two, number two and then woke up having had an undefined accident.
Right up until the moment you say it out loud, it seems to make sense and then you realise you don't even have that type of carpet, either at home or work.
***** scanned for sense *** none found
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: OR some copyright minimalist filed an equally fake claim!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You're so vain...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
..."Sheep lie."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
http://deletecable.com/funny-cracked-com-video-if-your-cable-company-told-the-truth-by-ext remely-decent-films/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
hmmm...
This is just truth in advertising...that ALL the major American cable companies live by while trying to shown themselves as the �good guys� and not the lying cheating thieving bandits that they really are.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You broke it, you bought it
So now, basically, it's their network, and if they say your video comes down it comes down.
The best we can hope for now is to create some alternative to the Internet. Something that does not rely on the telecommunications industry. And by the way, that same telecommunications industry is the weak link in regard to privacy. Once this new network comes into being, then we have to make sure it doesn't become just another shopping mall or cable television.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
OOTB
He wins every time you write to refute his nonsense or respond to him. Whenever he/she can derail the discussion, away from the topic at hand.
Just click to hide his posts and be done with it. That would drive him/her crazy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: OOTB
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: OOTB
.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: OOTB
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hello Miss Streisand!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Hello Miss Streisand!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Hello Miss Streisand!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Hello Miss Streisand!
They don't seem to be censored in Canada and there is even a mugging in Canada that explains very well how ISPs work up here. (Although they extend the process to TV and phones.)
Enjoy!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Being from the West, I instantly envisioned Shaw as the target for the parody, but that's also because they are my only option for cable internet in my area. My only other option for non-cellular ISP is ADSL from the other member of the Canadian telecom oligopoly, Telus.
In case you've heard any of us Canadian's bitching, you'll notice the same few names over and over again.
Internet: Rogers, Telus and Shaw
Cellphone: Rogers, Telus, Bell
Media: Rogers, Bell, Telus and Shaw
If you heard talk about Verizon possibly moving into Canada (Which they recently decided not to), you'll notice that there was a major attack ad campaign going on against it, sponsored by Rogers, Telus and Bell... Mainly complaining how it's unfair to allow an foreign company to buy up smaller providers when they are not allowed to do the same. (Due to competition laws they can not buy out the smaller carriers as they would gain a true monopoly in the marketplace. But as it stands, they already have over 90%)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
There's plenty of small isp's if you don't live in the middle of nowhere by the way. (Videotron is by no means small, but just confined to one province).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1xadoX2E7wY
If the censors-that-be take down this one, I, badassbrian, do so solemnly swear to put it back up again. You "anti-defamationists"/pro-censorship folks have my word on that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"You won't like it. And there's no other option."
(at least in North America).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Well people who make their living off of youtube are having trouble too
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Repost
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3BzWxwceYjE
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
LOL
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Tried googling the title and clicked through to youtube from there. Yup, can still see it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hits too close to home...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Fixed now?
My work is part of a government CIDR block, and I have no problem viewing there either.
Is this fixed, or is it only showing up on certain providers?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not banned
I can watch it here in Ontario. I suspect the video is taken down automatically when the complaint is made and is then reinstated when a human determines there is nothing wrong with the clip.
It happens hundreds of times a day. You all just got caught in the producer's PR campaign to get more viewings.
Don't you feel ashamed?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Guilty- YOU must prove your innocence
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Your Dirty Video
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Watching it in Canada
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
best ever
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Abuse of users by youtube
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
To act so idiotic and shrill about this, only BHell (Bell) could be considered to have caused this. Even if they aren't a cable company. The colours (this type of blue over white background) is a staple of their commercial since 20 years+
[ link to this | view in chronology ]