MLB Network DMCAs Video Of Bob Costas Torching MLB Pitcher, Which We'll Now Discuss At Length
from the swing-and-a-miss dept
I have to admit, I didn't see this one coming. We recently discussed how Bob Costas reacted to a video of him being more than a bit hard on Cubs MLB pitcher Pedro Strop by going full-tirade on the internet and social media. Within that post was the embedded video of the broadcast segment that featured Costas wondering aloud whether Strop pointed up to the heavens while walking off the field (something very common in sports) was him imploring a dead relative for forgiveness for his awful performance. That video, I should mention, was up and working at the time the post was being written. By the time it was published, however, it had been taken down with a notice that someone had filed a copyright claim on it.What's strange about this is that it was an MLB Network broadcast, meaning the likely party requesting its removal would be Major League Baseball itself. I say it's strange because MLB is really good when it comes to advanced media and the internet. No other sport does as well in getting videos and content out there for people to enjoy. A party so good at the internet, however, should know better than to try to hide an embarrassing moment for a broadcaster through obscurity via intellectual property.
Because, thank you Streisand Effect, now we're talking about it again. Oh, and the video is still available from a ton of places, including on YouTube from a variety of uploaders.
The result? Well the conversation continues when this whole thing could already have been put to bed. Costas reportedly apologized to Strop. Strop reportedly accepted the apology, saying he didn't want to be the kind of person to judge anyone. And it would have been over.
But now it's not, because for some reason MLB (most likely) thought it could hide what had happened when it couldn't. I suppose MLB could start an ineffectual game of whac-a-mole with all the other sources of the video out there if it really wants to, but it shouldn't. It never should have taken the first video down in the first place. Going any further would really get the tongues wagging, which was the exact thing the league was hoping to prevent.
![Hide This Hide this](https://ii.techdirt.com/s/t/i/topclose.png)
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: baseball, bob costas, copyright, discussion, streisand effect, takedown
Companies: mlb
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
allowed
aloud?
or was wondering allowed?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Or, maybe I'm modeling MLB with too much recursion.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I wonder if Techdirt and MLB are conducting an experiment right now, because nothing coming out of Techdirt makes any sense.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
And free corndogs, so I can yuke all over myself.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Much like her comment.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Still the dumbest controversy of the year
I guess we know which group Geigner is in.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Still the dumbest controversy of the year
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Still the dumbest controversy of the year
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Still the dumbest controversy of the year
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Streisand at the Bat
The score stood four to two, with but one inning more to play.
And then when Cooney died at first, and Barrows did the same,
A DMCA notice was issued to prevent comment on the game.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
TORCHING
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This shit storm is over what?
"Strobe is on his way out pointing towards the heavens we can only ask or wonder that he is asking some departed relative for forgiveness for this atrocious performance"
And the commentator apologised for THOSE words. Is this what this whole shit storm is about. I'm sitting here staring at the screen in disbelief.
What particular part of that is insulting? What particular part of it is so insulting the commentator had to appologise? What particular part of it was even mildly inappropriate?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Good marketers know precisely how to use the Streisand effect
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Good marketers know precisely how to use the Streisand effect
Suppose, as you say, a company deliberately uses really awful behavior to generate publicity. That's not the Streisand effect, as there's no censorship involved. It's old-fashioned shock advertising. And "We're really awful people" is a message that's going to backfire in the long run anyway.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bob, Bob..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Bob, Bob..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]