Will Either McCain Or Obama Commit To Reforming The DMCA?

from the unlikely dept

With the McCain campaign upset at how the DMCA (which he voted for) makes YouTube take down videos even if they might not have infringing content, we wondered if he would go beyond asking YouTube for special treatment, and instead push to fix the DMCA. So far, the campaign has been pretty quiet on that issue, but Paul Alan Levy from Public Citizen has written a letter (pdf) to both campaigns, asking them to commit to having the DMCA reformed in a few significant ways once Congress is back in session.

The suggested changes would definitely be a big step in the right direction -- effectively moving the system from a "notice-and-takedown" system to a "notice-and-notice" system, which allows whoever posted any content to respond before it's taken down. It would also require a lot more openness in the process, including an initial notification to whoever uploaded the content, as opposed to just the service provider, and a system for making the takedown notices public. As it stands now, the system allows anyone to claim infringement and get the content taken down, without the original uploader or the public understanding why. The proposal would also make it easier to punish those who send false takedowns, which might help alleviate some of the problems. Somehow it seems unlikely that either campaign will get behind these proposals, but considering that they've both now seen how the DMCA has worked against them, it would be nice for them to make a concerted effort to fix it.

Filed Under: barack obama, copyright, dmca, fair use, john mccain
Companies: public citizen

YouTube Tells McCain He Doesn't Get Special DMCA Treatment

from the change-the-law-and-we'll-talk dept

Earlier this week, we pointed out the letter the McCain campaign had sent YouTube concerning observing fair use before complying with takedown notices on political videos. As we noted at the time, the problem with the situation wasn't with YouTube, but with the DMCA (which McCain voted for, by the way). Now, YouTube's Zahavah Levine has responded to the letter, and made the same point. YouTube won't change its practices because that would be granting special privileges to the campaign rather than everyone else. Instead, YouTube hopes that McCain will help fix the law so that this isn't a problem going forward:

While we agree with you that the U.S. presidential election-related content is invaluable and worthy of the highest level of protection, there is a lot of other content on our global site that our users around the world find to be equally important, including, by way of example only, political campaigns from around the globe at all levels of government, human rights movements, and other important voices. We try to be careful not to favor one category of content on our site over others, and to treat all of our users fairly, regardless of whether they are an individual, a large corporation or a candidate for public office.

The real problem here is individuals and entities that abuse the DMCA takedown process....

We look forward to working with Senator (or President) McCain on ways to combat abuse of the DMCA takedown process on YouTube, including by way of example, strengthening the fair use doctrine....

This is the right response. As problematic as the takedown process is, the answer should be to fix the law -- not make special exceptions for politicians.

Filed Under: campaign, copyright, dmca, fair use, john mccain, takedowns, videos, william patry, zahavah levine
Companies: google, youtube

McCain Campaign Sends Letter To YouTube Defending Fair Use

from the what-the...? dept

This is impressive, and somewhat unexpected. It's rather rare to see politicians (other than maginal ones, at least) showing any sort of recognition of fair use. It's certainly not an issue you'd expect to see raised by a presidential candidate (of either party). However, John McCain's campaign has sent a letter to YouTube complaining about the site's unwillingness to consider fair use in videos before taking them down. You can read the whole letter at that link or below (if you're not reading via a feed):

The letter basically notes that YouTube seems a bit too fast on the trigger in pulling down content based on DMCA takedown notices, in part parroting the some of the recent ruling where a judge said that those sending DMCA notices need to at least take fair use into consideration. Of course, that was directed at the sender of the DMCA takedown notice, not the recipient, as in this case. I'm sure the McCain campaign recognizes that YouTube is completely within its legal rights to automatically pull down the content, but in sending this letter the campaign is suggesting that, specific to videos put up by either political campaign (the letter cc's the Obama campaign), that YouTube take into account fair use.

The letter is addressed to YouTube's founder, Chad Hurley, as well as Google's Senior Copyright Counsel, William Patry (who we've talked about and quoted here many times) and Zahavah Levine, who is General Counsel for YouTube, who I've met and spoken with in the past. Both Patry and Levine are well aware of the legal issues here (probably better than just about anyone else), so it will be quite interesting to see how they respond. The real issue here has almost nothing to do with Google/YouTube -- but with the way the DMCA itself is structured. Since it provides clear safe harbor for a recipient of a takedown notice if they take down the content, it's a reasonable business decision to simply take down the content and then follow the proper procedures for letting the uploader file a response notice.

While it certainly would be nice for YouTube to take into account fair use before deciding whether or not to pull down the content, the real problem is with the law itself, and the incentives it puts in place for any recipient of such a letter. If the McCain (or Obama) campaign were really concerned with that, they should not just ask for this special exception to YouTube's official policies, but should promise to push for a change to the DMCA that makes an explicit point that recipients of such takedown notices shall retain their safe harbor protections even if they refuse to take down content, if they have a reasonable belief that the content in question is being used in accordance with fair use rules.

Filed Under: campaign, copyright, dmca, fair use, john mccain, takedowns, videos, william patry, zahavah levine
Companies: google, youtube

Dear Bands: No Matter How Much You Dislike John McCain, He Can Most Likely Use Your Song

from the can-we-get-this-over-with? dept

The latest in a long line of musicians complaining about Presidential candidate John McCain for his use of their music at campaign stops would be the band the Foo Fighters. Now, as we've pointed out in the past, there are two separate issues to keep in mind here:

1. In most cases, there's nothing these bands can do from a legal standpoint. Assuming the venue where the music is being played has paid its standard ASCAP license, they can play whatever they want. So when the Foo Fighters make statements like: "It's frustrating and infuriating that someone who claims to speak for the American people would repeatedly show such little respect for creativity and intellectual property" is somewhat misleading. It implies that McCain is somehow breaking intellectual property laws. He is not. No matter how much a musician dislikes it, they can't stop these kinds of uses, thanks to the way performance licenses work.
2. That said, it still seems rather dumb, from a PR standpoint, for the McCain campaign to keep doing this. By now, it should be clear that in a highly-charged political campaign, a band will speak up against the use of a song, if they don't like the candidate. That just leaves the campaign open to more negative press coverage in a way in which many people will sympathize with the musician against the politician -- even though the politician may be on the legally correct side.

Since the McCain campaign has so far ignored these requests in the past, I'm guessing it will continue to do so. But, to avoid these sorts of stories, it would be smart to start asking musicians whether or not they support the candidate before using their song. Or, perhaps, just start using public domain music.

Filed Under: copyright, foo fighters, john mccain, music, performance rights, presidential campaigns, royalities

Is It Copyright Infringement For A Political Campaign To Use A Snippet Of A News Broadcast In An Ad?

from the fair-use? dept

Reader Video Savant alerts us to the fact that CBS Interactive is the latest entity to ding the McCain campaign for copyright violations. In this case, CBS has sent a takedown notice to YouTube concerning one of McCain's latest commercials. The commercial uses a brief clip of CBS Evening News with Katie Couric. CBS explains that it does not endorse a candidate for president, and it's inappropriate for either campaign to use a clip containing Couric. You can certainly understand why CBS (or any news station) wouldn't want to appear to have endorsed a candidate if they have not -- but it's difficult to see how those viewing the clip would assume that Couric was actually endorsing the campaign (or the ad, which appears to be almost entirely misleading -- isn't presidential politics great?).

So, the question, then, is whether or not this is fair use, and whether CBS is correct in having the ad taken down. It's a very short clip of Couric (about 5 seconds), and it seems quite likely that this would be found to be fair use. According to the article, it looks like CBS just sent the takedown to YouTube, while the ad remains on McCain's site. It would be interesting to see if CBS tries to take it down from McCain's site or other sites that are hosting the ad as well. While I think the ad is incredibly disingenuous (and, honestly, a totally stupid issue -- what happened to debating on the important issues?), it's difficult to see how this is copyright infringement.

Filed Under: campaign ads, copyright, fair use, john mccain, katie couric

McCain Campaign Ignores Cease-And-Desist; Keeps Playing 'Barracuda'

from the legal,-yes,-smart? dept

Last week, we noted that the band Heart had sent a cease-and-desist letter to the McCain campaign for its use of their song "Barracuda" as part of the intro for VP candidate Sarah Palin (nicknamed Sarah Barracuda -- or, as someone noted, Sarahcuda). As we pointed out, it appeared that the cease-and-desist was pretty worthless on legal grounds. As long as the venue had paid the proper performance license they could play whatever songs they wanted. However, just because it was perfectly legal, didn't mean that it made sense. After all, picking songs from artists who disagree with your positions seems like a recipe designed to give someone else a platform to speak out against you.

However, it looks like the McCain campaign is sticking with the fact that this is a perfectly legal use of the song, and is ignoring the cease-and-desist. Video Savant writes in to let us know that the campaign is still using the song at campaign appearances by the candidates.

Filed Under: barracuda, copyright, heart, john mccain, performance rights, sarah palin

Heart Demanding McCain Campaign Stop Using Its Song

from the not-much-leverage dept

Last month it was singer Jackson Browne suing the McCain campaign for using his song in a commercial. As we noted at the time, since it was used in a commercial, it was most likely infringing, but if McCain wanted to use it at an event, he could as long as he paid the proper performance licensing fees. So, now we have another situation where exactly that scenario has happened. At the Republican National Convention earlier this week, the speakers played the Heart song "Barracuda" for VP candidate Sarah Palin (who apparently went by the nickname "Sarah Barracuda"). This is perfectly legal, assuming that the RNC has paid the required performance license, and there's no reason to think they didn't, given how much music was used at the convention.

But, that's apparently not good enough for the band, who complained and had its label, Sony BMG, and its publisher Universal Music Publishing send cease-and-desist letters to the campaign. On what legal basis? They don't seem to have an answer for that. The whole thing is kind of silly. There's almost certainly no legal leg to stand on here, but it's surprising that the RNC wouldn't check first, given how others, like Browne, have reacted and the fact that the press would almost certainly cover the story (as they are). So, while there may be no legal basis for the complaints, it still is surprising that the RNC and/or the McCain/Palin campaign wouldn't bother to first check with the band to see if the members would be upset about the usage.

Filed Under: barracuda, copyright, heart, john mccain, performance rights, sarah palin

Jackson Browne Sues McCain For Using His Song In An Ad Without Permission

from the legal-complexities dept

What is it with politicians who position themselves being big pro-copyright supporters being caught potentially infringing on copyright themselves? Singer Jackson Browne, who is apparently a supporter of Senator Obama's presidential campaign, has sued Senator McCain for allegedly using a Browne song in an advertisement without permission. Of course, this isn't as clear cut as you might believe. McCain's campaign points out that the ad isn't actually from the campaign. And, while it's true that there's no compulsory license for pairing a song with a video, this is almost certainly infringement -- but Browne's claim of an implied endorsement may not get very far, because there are ways that it's quite likely that McCain could make use of Browne's song without Browne's permission.

Welcome to the bizarre, arcane, and confusing world of copyright licenses.

Depending on whether or not Browne's music is licensed to a performance rights organization like ASCAP, BMI or SESAC (and chances are, they are), McCain's campaign could most likely pay a royalty to them to use one of Browne's songs at an event (if not in a commercial). And, since there is compulsory licensing on covers of songs, in theory, McCain's campaign could have someone else cover Browne's song at a campaign stop, and Browne wouldn't have much he could do to stop it (again, other than make a stink out of it, getting McCain to back down). While it does seem as though there is an infringement claim here (and McCain's campaign knows it's not wise to turn this into a big deal), this story does highlight just how ridiculous various music licensing has become these days. Though, still, in general you would think that any political campaign (or its surrogates) would at least be a little careful to avoid using music from someone who supports the other guy -- as it's just asking for a PR headache.

Filed Under: campaigns, compulsory licensing, copyright, endorsement, jackson browne, john mccain

Is McCain Really Saying eBay Will Save The Economy?

from the not-quite... dept

First off, before we get into the details here, I'll state upfront that I have not yet decided who to support in this year's Presidential election. I'm neither a Democrat nor a Republican. I've seen plans from both sides that I find problematic. Still, it bugs me when I see plans from either side mischaracterized, and I believe that's the case with this somewhat mocking criticism of McCain's "jobs plan" as being "the eBay model" (sent in by reader Rose M. Welch). At issue, is the fact that McCain has repeatedly referred to the 1.3 million people around the globe who "make a living off EBay."

As the article notes, the figure is clearly exaggerated. However, many of the other criticisms of what McCain says seems misguided. It seems like a stretch for anyone to think that McCain is suggesting that people will find jobs selling on eBay. Rather, he's using the example of eBay to note that innovation leads to new ways for people to make money -- using the rise of the ecosystem around eBay as an example -- not as the definitive method for creating jobs. And, on that, he's correct. Continued innovation does tend to lead to job growth.

The second part of the criticism that seems incredibly unfounded, is the assertion by a few economists that eBay is just a business model for moving junk around, and that it doesn't add anything to the GDP. This is simply incorrect, and it's really strange that prominent economists would make such an assertion. eBay is about making an efficient market. Plenty of people use it to sell new products, rather than just "junk." And, many of the people who use eBay to "make a living" do so by adding value to products which they then resell. That does add to GDP. eBay is about a lot more than just moving around junk. In fact, a rather large percentage of our GDP is based on taking already built goods, adding value to them and reselling them. To pretend this doesn't happen on eBay is simply incorrect.

Now, before anyone thinks that this means I support McCain's economic positions, I don't. I think his continued disdain for basic economics, and his seeming assumption that economics can be handled by someone else is problematic. And, of course, his proposed gas tax holiday is just downright nutty.

Filed Under: economics, economy, gdp, growth, innovation, jobs, john mccain
Companies: ebay

Mitt Romney To Fox News: Here's A Lesson In Fair Use

from the fair-use-on-the-campaign-trail dept

Who thought that the presidential campaigns would have anything to do with copyright issues? If you said yes, you'd be in a small group. However, as we pointed out last week, Fox News has been sending cease-and-desist letters to Republican candidates for using snippets of the Republican presidential candidate debates in their ads and on their websites. Other networks have agreed to allow the content to be used freely, but not News Corp.-owned Fox. We figured that most candidates would back down rather than getting tangled in a legal battle, but that might not be the case. Against Monopoly points out that Mitt Romney's campaign sent Fox News a letter describing the campaign's use of the material as clearly falling under "fair use". Fox News has shot back that it does not, but so far that seems to be as far as things have gone. Where it will get interesting is whether either side is willing to file an actual lawsuit (News Corp. being much more likely to actually file, but the Romney campaign could always try to get a declaratory judgment). Considering how little attention gets paid to copyright issues during presidential election cycles, this may be about as close as it gets.

Filed Under: copyright, fair use, john mccain, mitt romney, presidential candidates
Companies: fox