Fair Use: The Foundation Of Jon Stewart's Success

from the celebrating-fair-use dept

Jon Stewart's announcement on February 10 that he will be retiring from The Daily Show later this year has been met with tributes to his comic genius and his impact on political discourse. But these tributes have overlooked the legal doctrine that has enabled Stewart to be so effective: fair use. (This is my second post this week about the importance of fair use to popular culture; on Tuesday I wrote about how the Fifty Shades of Grey trilogy was first written as fair use-dependent fan fiction based on the Twilight vampire series.)

Stewart's most powerful critiques result from his juxtaposing clips of politicians and commentators on news broadcasts to demonstrate their hypocrisy. He'll contrast a clip of a Fox News commentator expressing outrage at President Obama taking a particular action with a clip of the same commentator praising President Bush for taking a similar same action. Stewart also uses montages of clips from CNN and other news networks to demonstrate their simultaneously sensationalistic and superficial coverage of disasters and trials. But for fair use, Stewart's rebroadcast of these clips would be willful copyright infringement, subject to statutory damages of up to $150,000 per clip.

Jon Stewart's heavy use of clips for the purpose of humorous political criticism has inspired other comedians to emulate him, most notably his former "correspondents" Stephen Colbert on The Colbert Report and John Oliver on Last Week Tonight. Stewart's reliance on clips no doubt has also encouraged the growth of the remix culture online, where individuals combine clips of preexisting works for the purpose of political or artistic expression.

Stewart's reliance on fair use likely made him progressive on other copyright matters. He supported fans distributing excerpts of The Daily Show online, he questioned the position of Viacom (the owner of Comedy Central, the channel that carries The Daily Show) in its litigation with YouTube, and he opposed SOPA.

Additionally, Jon Stewart's fair use of clips has had a positive impact on policymakers. The Daily Show is perhaps the easiest example to give lawmakers and their staffs of the importance of fair use. A reference to The Daily Show makes them instantly understand how fair use functions, in Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's words, as one of the copyright law's built-in accommodations to the First Amendment. Further, The Daily Show demonstrates clearly that large media companies (e.g., Viacom) rely on fair use.

Jon Stewart has not announced what he will do after he leaves The Daily Show. But it is hard to imagine that the greatest practitioner of fair use in this generation will not at some point embark on another venture that employs fair use.

Reposted from the Disruptive Competition Project

Filed Under: clips, copyright, fair use, jon stewart, journalism, news, reporting, satire
Companies: viacom

It Takes Jon Stewart To Finally Ask Obama About Civil Liberties... But Lets Him Off The Hook On Bogus Answer

from the sad dept

In the various Presidential debates, no one seems to want to bring up President Obama's near complete about-face on his promises concerning civil liberties. It's so ridiculous that the Democratic party simply removed the issue from their platform -- and that's because he hasn't just continued former President Bush's abuses of civil liberties, he's gone even further with them. And no one seems to want to ask the candidates about it... except a comedian. When President Obama appeared on The Daily Show recently, Jon Stewart actually asked him about this:

STEWART: I think people have been surprised to see the strength of the Bush era warrantless wiretapping laws and those types of things not also be lessened—That the structures he put in place that people might have thought were government overreach and maybe they had a mind you would tone down, you haven’t.

OBAMA: The truth is we have modified them and built a legal structure and safeguards in place that weren’t there before on a whole range issues.

However, as the EFF explains in great detail, President Obama's answer is simply not true. It's not even close to true.

To the contrary, there’s no indication that the still-active warrantless wiretapping program—which includes a warrantless dragnet on millions of innocent Americans’ communications—has significantly changed from the day Obama took office. With regard to the FISA Amendments Act, the Obama Administration has actively opposed all proposed safeguards in Congress. All the while, his Administration has been even more aggressive than President Bush in trying to prevent warrantless wiretapping victims from having their day in court and has continued building the massive national security infrastructure needed to support it. 

They then go on to look more closely at all of these different promises from President Obama related to this, all of which he's fallen down on. Unfortunately, Stewart doesn't push back on this point, as they then go straight to a joke, before moving on to another topic. Of course, for those of us who aren't shackled to a party and, instead, find civil liberties to be a key issue, we're left with two major candidates who don't seem to care about massive abuses by the federal government.

Filed Under: barack obama, civil liberties, jon stewart, warrantless wiretapping

Jon Stewart Blasts Viacom For Stupid Blackout; Viacom Sheepishly Turns Web Streams Back On

from the do-they-have-no-one-who-thinks-this-through? dept

Last week, we wrote about Viacom's really short-sighted decision to use its fans as hostages in a silly dispute with DirecTV over fees. To prevent any DirecTV customer from seeing any of its key shows, Viacom stopped streaming them online... for all customers, meaning that even those who had nothing to do with any of this couldn't legally watch the shows they liked. As we noted, this would likely only serve to drive more people to find unauthorized versions. Late in the week, we saw AMC smartly take the opposite approach and provide more online access to customers disrupted by a similar fight it was having with Dish Network.

Of course, one of Viacom's most popular shows -- and one of the key ones turned off from streaming -- is The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, which had been on break last week anyway. However, it returned last night with a vengeance, and target number one: his corporate masters at Viacom for acting as if they were China in blocking the internet, and likely driving more fans to unauthorized streams. You can watch it here (if you're in the US) complete with Viacom appending a commercial bitching about DirecTV beforehand: When we wrote about this last week, one of our usual critics told us, in some of the most angry language imaginable, how objectionable it was that we dared to mention the obvious fact that if you don't make things available legally, people might find unauthorized versions. However, Stewart made the exact same point in his discussion of the situation.

"You're pulling the shows from the internet?!? What are you, China?!? And by the way, you don't think the kids already have a workaround? This morning, when I woke up, my 8-year-old son was watching Dark Knight Rises in 3D. They're already figuring it out. So basically you're blocking old people from watching the show, and just giving people a chance to discover that there's other entertaining s**t in the world...."

In response, Viacom has somewhat sheepishly backed down and put the Daily Show & Colbert back online (though it seems some others may be blocked). It tried to make a joke of this a bit by pointing to Stewart's mocking and noting that "The Daily Show continues to exercise the creative and editorial freedom that makes it consistently great." In other words, someone at Viacom realized they totally screwed up and even their own high profile employees were calling them on it publicly. It really makes you wonder if they have anyone at Viacom who thinks how the world will react to its crazy moves.

Filed Under: blackout, dispute, fans as hostages, jon stewart, the daily show
Companies: directv, viacom

Bill Maher Comes Out In Support Of SOPA/PIPA Despite Knowing Nothing About The Bills

from the yes,-intelligent-debate dept

When Jon Stewart finally learned about just how ridiculous the SOPA/PIPA bills are, the first comment we received was someone wondering if comedian Bill Maher would deliver a similar message. Maher and Stewart are often compared -- as talk show hosts who poke fun at authority and government, and who (fairly or not) are often linked to being liberal. However, as a bunch of folks have been pointing out, it appears that Maher went the other direction from Stewart on his own show, coming out in support of the bills: Of course, as he admits right at the beginning, he hasn't actually read the bills and doesn't understand the details. He then goes on to talk about "the moral issue" and complain about how much he "lost" from people downloading his own documentary. Yeah. And then he pulls out the totally ridiculous argument that "people just want free stuff." Of course, that's been proven false time and time again... but facts apparently don't matter here. It seems clear he has no understanding of the details -- and really seems to think that every downloaded copy is a lost sale. Thankfully, all three members of his panel push back -- including Matt Lewis who points out how this would chill investment into the internet and could prevent "the two guys in a garage... building the next Facebook." Jennifer Granholm then points out that this is an issue that might need a scalpel, that's being dealt with by an ax. But, that doesn't stop Maher from insisting that it's all about people wanting free stuff. Yeah. Maybe next time, actually learn what you're talking about, Bill.

Filed Under: bill maher, jon stewart, pipa, protect ip, sopa

Jon Stewart Now Knows About SOPA/PIPA... And He's Not Impressed

from the hello-fair-use dept

Remember how, based on an audience question, Jon Stewart promised to study up on SOPA/PIPA for a future show. Looks like that happened. And, apparently, he did his homework before Wednesday, so he could actually use Wikipedia. In last night's show, Stewart used yesterday's blackouts and protests as a jumping off point to discuss the bill. There were two main points: (1) Congress is trying to pass laws about an internet they don't understand at all, and (2) fair use is incredibly important, and anything that potentially damages fair use is dangerous to culture. For the first point, he played some clips of Rep. Mel Watt proudly displaying his ignorance of technology -- and then points out that Watt is the ranking member on the IP sub-committee. He also mocks the calls during the markup from various Congressional Reps. to have a hearing with "the nerds" by reminding them that it's not "nerds" they're looking for... it's experts. Something in short supply in Congress. For the second point, he ably uses a ton of short clips, fair use style, to demonstrate how important fair use is to a show like his... while mocking Viacom and its own lawyers for trying to limit fair use. Good stuff all around. And yes, for those people who live in foreign countries that don't have a deal with Viacom, I apologize that you can't see the video below. It's just one more example of how Viacom encourages infringement by not giving people what they want.

Filed Under: blackouts, copyright, fair use, jon stewart, mel watt, pipa, protect ip, protests, sopa, the daily show
Companies: viacom

Jon Stewart Promises To Study Up On SOPA

from the internet-has-asked... dept

Well, this is kind of cool. A Reddit user got some VIP passes to go see the taping of The Daily Show on Wednesday evening... and asked Reddit what he should ask Jon Stewart about SOPA/PIPA if he could. And... at the pre-show Q&A, he was able to say:

"the internet sent me to ask you what you think of SOPA and why you haven't mentioned it on the show."

Stewart basically admitted he hadn't heard of it, asked if it had anything to do with net neutrality, and then admitted that they all "had their heads up their asses" due to focusing on election stuff. However, he apparently also looked at one of the show's writers, and promised to research the issue.

And then... in the opening to the show Stewart actually cracked a joke about it (video below), where he joked that the next night's guest would be "the internet" and then said "we'll be all SOPA what?!?" and then noted:

Here's all I'll say about that: I've got some reading to catch up on...

Please do, Jon. Please do.

Filed Under: communities, jon stewart, pipa, politics, protect ip, sopa, the daily show
Companies: reddit, viacom

Daily Show Highlights Seal Team 6 Trademark & FCC Commish Joining Comcast

from the that-was-fast dept

It's always nice when either The Daily Show or The Colbert Report touch on stories that we regularly cover, so it was cool on Monday that TDS did a single segment, beautifully named "Well, That Was Fast" to cover both the story of Disney trademarking "Seal Team 6," just two days after Osama bin Laden was killed by SEAL Team 6, and the story of FCC Commissioner Meredith Attwell Baker joining Comcast as a lobbyist just a few months after helping to get their deal with NBC Universal approved. While these may just seem like fun little stories, they're important in showing the problems with the existing system, and it's good to see them getting mainstream attention:

Filed Under: corruption, daily show, jon stewart, lobbying, meredith attwell baker, seal team 6, trademark
Companies: comcast, disney, nbc universal

City Paper Mocks Competitors For 'Policies' Over Stewart/Colbert Rallies

from the restoring-sanity dept

It's been pretty amusing watching various journalism outfits issue official "rules" to their journalists about this weekend's "Rally to Restore Sanity/March to Keep Fear Alive" put on by Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert. NPR specifically banned journalists from participating while the Washington Post similarly warned reporters, that they could "observe," but "cannot in any way put themselves in a position that could be construed as supporting (or opposing) that cause." Yes, how dare reporters be seen supporting sanity!

Now, as a bunch of folks have sent in, the much smaller Washington City Paper has issued an amusing satirical memo to its own staff, mocking the leaked memos from those other news organizations:

1. You may attend the rallies in a non-participatory fashion.
2. However, because the rallies are comic events, you may not laugh.
3. The act of not laughing, though, can be just as politically loaded as the act of laughing. Therefore, staffers are advised to politely chuckle, in a non-genuine manner, after each joke.
4. To avoid any perception of bias, please make sure to chuckle at all jokes, whether or not you find them funny. As journalists, we must make sure to not allow our personal views of "humorous" or "non-humorous" to affect our public demeanor.
5. Likewise, it could be devastating to our impartial reputation if our staffers were seen laughing at something that was not intended as a joke, thereby appearing to mock the entire event. If we are lucky, the comedians will have a drummer on hand whose rim-shots may be used as a cue for when to politely chuckle.
6. If no non-verbal cues for laughter are available, please observe audience members around you. If they are laughing, imitate their laughter with a non-genuine polite chuckle. If they are not laughing, remain stone-faced. Whatever you do, do not apply your own personal cognitive skills to determining the humorousness of any particular clip. Such an approach exposes us to charges of bias.
7. On the other hand, a situation could arise where partisan foes of the Comedy Central hosts laugh at them in a derisive manner unrelated to the timing of their on-stage jokes. In this case, your failure to join in the mockery could potentially be interpreted as a sign that you disagree with the derision--an equally distasteful indication of bias. Please follow the above guidelines and also chuckle politely, but not genuinely, at any instances of counter-comedy.
8. In our experience, public appearances by comedy figures also draw audiences whose members frequently make jokes amongst themselves. These attempts at humor might not necessarily fit into the rational example of protesters versus counter-protesters outlined in the guidelines above. However, you could nonetheless indicate a great deal about your personal biases via your decision as to whether or not you laugh along when the person next to you riffs about, say, marginal tax rates. Please make sure to follow the above guidelines and respond via polite, non-genuine, mild guffaws to the jibes of amateur comics in the audience.
9. We're also aware that the large crowds expected at the rallies could produce a cacophonous din, one in which you are unable to discern which jokes are being made by audience members, counter-protestors, or the day's main attractions--and, worse still, where observers may think you are laughing at an anti-Republican joke when you are actually laughing at an anti-Democrat joke. To protect our cherished reputation against such a danger, I have arranged for each of you to be issued a pair of earplugs. Should the event grow too raucous, please insert these earplugs immediately. Once you have inserted the earplugs, please chuckle politely, and non-genuinely, every 74 seconds, to maintain the appearance of non-biased and appropriate responses to the event.
10. You are free to laugh heartily and genuinely at any jokes that target the terrorists.

Separately, it should be noted that the Washington City Paper was kind enough to publish this memo itself. The similar memos from NPR and the Washington Post were, instead, published by competing outfits that had the memos "leaked." Kinda makes you wonder why those news outfits leak internal emails for others to report, rather than reporting on such things themselves...

Filed Under: jon stewart, journalism, policies, rallies, stephen colbert
Companies: washington city paper

Author Claims Patents Made Industrial Revolution Possible; Then Shows Why He's Wrong

from the wow dept

A bunch of folks have been submitting the story about author William Rosen appearing on The Daily Show hyping his new book about the steam engine, where he claims that the industrial revolution happened because of the ability to "own ideas."

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
William Rosen
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Tea Party

Admittedly, it's Jon Stewart who tries to summarize/paraphrase Rosen's thesis by saying:

Jon Stewart: You say that the big difference there was the 'democritization of inventing.' This idea that, once people owned the idea of inventing... and I guess this happened in Britain... once the idea that ideas could be yours, and you would own them, that's what opened the floodgates.

William Rosen: Exactly. Once you actually empower people to get wealthy and famous as inventors, the floodgates are open. And an Oklahoma landrush starts to begin, where everyone's chasing not land, not 40 acres, but the next new invention. And the steam engine comes along right about that time.

Nice theory. Too bad the actual research has long debunked it. The mistake that Rosen makes here is a simple one that trips up plenty of people: it's confusing correlation with causation. The problem is that when people have looked at the issue in more detail, they've actually discovered that the correlation doesn't work the way that Rosen and other patent system proponents predict. In fact, it happens the opposite way. That is, greater IP protection trails periods of greater innovation. That is, what happens is that the industrialization period or a period of great innovation happens, and then those who led the way get upset about new competitors and new upstarts, and push for greater protectionist policies to keep the competitors out of the market. In fact, Rosen's later comments highlight why intellectual property tends to slow down the rate of industrialization, rather than aid it:

William Rosen: Sustained technological innovation is incremental -- small improvements. And that was the real magic of the era: all these micro inventions from one-time blacksmiths and carpenters... And that's why a steam engine could be made to operate a toy in the first century in Alexandria, but a working one... takes a village.

Odd wording choices aside, the problem with patents is that they get in the way of this kind of incremental innovation. Patents are designed to protect the big breakthroughs... and then limit follow-on innovation for the course of the patent. If the big breakthrough is the most important thing, then you can maybe make an argument that patents make sense. But, most innovation is, as Rosen notes, about that incremental improvements, where "it takes a village." But a patent denies the "village" the opportunity to make those improvements (at least without adding a significant cost) and thus delays innovation.

In fact, this is why research into the history of the steam engine suggested that innovation on the core James Watt invention was limited until after his patents expired.

Filed Under: jon stewart, patents, steam engine, william rosen

Hulu Loses The Daily Show And Colbert

from the building-community dept

For a while now Comedy Central's two most popular shows, The Daily Show with Jon Stewart and The Colbert Report have been available for streaming online on both Hulu and on the Comedy Central websites for each program. I'd always wondered why Viacom had allowed those two shows on Hulu, seeing as Hulu is basically owned by Viacom's competitors -- and those two shows are some of the most popular on Hulu. Over those two years, though, Viacom has also built up its own online sites -- actually building some (weak, but still some) aspects of community around both sites. Apparently, it realized it had all the leverage, and Hulu wasn't willing to pony up. So Viacom is pulling both shows from Hulu next week. This is a pretty big loss for Hulu, though the company is trying to shrug it off. But it does suggest yet another potential problem with Hulu's business model. For all the crap we give Viacom over things like its YouTube lawsuit, the company has worked hard to try to build community around these particular shows -- but other shows that are relying on Hulu can't do that as easily.

Filed Under: colbert, daily show, jon stewart, online video, stephen colbert
Companies: hulu, viacom