Copyright As Censorship: Turkey's Prime Minister Copyrights His Recorded Calls To Get Them Off YouTube

from the copyright's-not-about-cenosrship? dept

Fri, Mar 14th 2014 12:39pm — Mike Masnick

Just recently, we noted that Turkish Prime Minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who has tried to shut down social media sites in the past, was once again threatening to ban YouTube and Facebook. The main issue: recordings of some of his phone calls were put online by those opposed to him. Erdogan has supported banning those sites by claiming that the recordings were "fabricated." Of course, it appears he's figured out there's a more modern and efficient way to censor content you don't want people to see: copyright.

Via Ankarali Jan comes the news that Erdogan has "taken out a copyright" in his own phone calls in an attempt to get them removed from those sites. Of course, that more or less admits that the calls are "real" -- though, as some have pointed out, he's never argued that the calls weren't his voice, just that they were edited inaccurately. Still, while more narrowly targeting the calls, rather than banning the whole site, may be seen as a slightly better path, the fact that his tool of choice is copyright should certainly remind us, once again, how frequently copyright is a tool for censorship, rather than having anything to do with its stated purpose.

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, erdogan, recep tayyip erdogan, turkey, youtube

20 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2014 @ 12:49pm

so how about that line again, that copyright enforcement has nothing to do with censorship?

I consider that myth totally busted...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
FreeCultureForFreePeople, 14 Mar 2014 @ 12:54pm

How can you "take out a copyright on something" when copyright is automatically granted on anything, and you have to make an explicit effort like releasing sth under a Creative Commons license if you want people to share, modify, mix, mash-up your works without infringing your copyright?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2014 @ 12:55pm

That's some old school copyright right there. A censorship tool in the advent of the printing press.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ima Fish (profile), 14 Mar 2014 @ 12:56pm

Mike copyright is never used for censorship. Clearly copyright gives the Prime Minister the monopoly right to monetize his phone calls. Someone exercising that natural god given property right should not be accused with such defamatory language. You should be ashamed.

On a related note, I'm really looking forward to buying CDs of Recep Tayyip Erdogan's phone calls at my local Walmart. Good times.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2014 @ 1:06pm

It doesn't get anymore crystal clear, than the Turkish Prime Minister scandal.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2014 @ 1:58pm

And why the hell would Google agree to take them down? Copyright CAN'T be used against political speech, no? Wouldn't that apply here?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
zip, 14 Mar 2014 @ 1:59pm

The Church of Scientology has claimed copyright on essentially every internal document ever written or recorded by that organization in its entire history. Every office memo, order, policy, fax, telex, email, surveillance notes, etc. - all copyrighted. (Perhaps even their copies of files they stole from the IRS in the 1970s.)

Not that it would hold up in court, but claiming copyright (and threatening court action) is a powerful weapon wielded to prevent anyone from publishing embarrassing "smoking gun" documents.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2014 @ 2:09pm

this guy must have an awful lot of stuff to keep secret!!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Mason Wheeler (profile), 14 Mar 2014 @ 3:47pm

Re:
That's how it works under US law. Does Turkey have a similar system?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Mar 2014 @ 3:49pm

The Ol' Scientology Defense
The Scientologists tried this with their stupid Sci-fi self help courses.

It uh... didn't end well for them. Not at all.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lawrence D�Oliveiro, 14 Mar 2014 @ 10:40pm

He Can�t Claim Copyright On The Recordings
Surely copyright belongs to whoever made the recordings (or paid for them). His performance is not copyrightable, copyright only becomes applicable once the performance becomes �fixed in a tangible form� (i.e. a recording).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jeffrey Nonken (profile), 15 Mar 2014 @ 2:29am

If the posted recordings have been edited, then the works are clearly transformative, and therefore protected under fair use. ;)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Mar 2014 @ 5:34am

I totally did not see this coming

Yes......sarcasm

Not funny/funny, more like Grinding teeth/Funny
[ link to this | view in thread ]
KingofthePaupers, 16 Mar 2014 @ 9:39am

Jct: Easy to beat copyright! Get into the picture
Jct: When the CBC Dragons' Den gutted my 15 minute presentation down to 1 minute with my speaking 15 seconds, I sued them, they had to give me a copy of the whole thing. I sat in front of the screen as I played it to become part of the production and making it a new video. That's how to beat this turkey's attempted censorship, just sit in front of the screen as you listen and comment to it! Har har har.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Fenderson (profile), 17 Mar 2014 @ 8:27am

Re:
Unless the takedown is challenged, Google does not do any kind of examination of if the copyright claim is legitimate or not. It only determines if the takedown was properly filed.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
mehmet, 17 Mar 2014 @ 1:01pm

misleading
Erdogan copywrited his voice. So if any tries to leak, produce or montage his voice clips, will be taken off
[ link to this | view in thread ]
fere, 14 Jun 2014 @ 8:40pm

Re: Copyright Censorship
Erdogan is a national PUBLIC figure and the principle of FAIR USE would apply and OVERRIDE any considerations.

US Censorship--

First it was
Hate Crimes/ holocost denial antisemitism to shut down exposure of zionist criminality.
then - National Security
now its copyright infringement

all to shut others up and damage management for the Elites in power. Turn their jibes on THEM- mainly "if you're not doing anything wrong, why should you care if you're being spied on?"

Once the herd caught on to the above scams- TPTB switched to shutting down EVERYTHING they dont like by calling it copyrighted. What a master cloak for murder.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
nilsll, 14 Jun 2014 @ 8:43pm

Re:
WRONG. FAIR USE of a PUBLIC FIGURE allows noncommercial, non-monetary distribution for educationaland research purposes. Check your law books. Been a standard for a century.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Jun 2014 @ 8:47pm

Re:
they dont have to be edited to be protected under fair use. Editing is NOT a prerequisite of Fair use rights.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Jun 2014 @ 8:50pm

Totally NO legal basis. And wouldnt over ride educational fair use anyway. His only real protection from violation of his voice? Resignation.
[ link to this | view in thread ]