Homeland Security Issuing Its Own DMCA Takedowns On YouTube To Stifle Speech

from the seems-questionable... dept

We recently wrote about the fight over copyright/fair use in political videos. In the comments, someone anonymous pointed us to a YouTube page including a typical takedown notice.. Here's a screenshot.
This is actually the first time I can recall that I've seen a takedown that had "multiple" takedown notices. So it's interesting that YouTube even has such an error message. But what really caught my attention was the second claimant listed. United States Department of Homeland Security. Homeland Security? Issuing copyright takedowns? For what it's worth, the commenter who submitted this pointed us to another video, which they claim is the same as what was taken down. I have no idea if it's the same video or not, but it is some idiotic conspiracy mongering, taking one comment from a reporter completely out of context, and pretending President Obama said it, when he did not. I never understand conspiracy theories like that, but that's really neither here nor there.

The real question is why is Homeland Security issuing takedowns? Works produced by the federal government, of course, can't have copyright. However, it is possible for the government to hold copyrights -- mainly if someone else gets it and assigns it to the government. So it's possible that happened here, though it still seems like a strange move. If the video is the same as the other one pointed to, it's just conspiracy theory claptrap, and I don't see why DHS would even bother issuing a takedown.

But, even if we assume that the copyright itself and the takedown were legit, does this seem reasonable at all? Having a government agency directly using a copyright claim to take down a video? Especially when that group is DHS -- in which national internet censor ICE exists. Giving it the power to censor videos too just seems like it's going way too far. It's not as if Homeland Security is going to bring the work "to market" to make money, so it's not like there's an "impact on the market" for the work. The only reason to issue the takedown -- no matter how accurate the claim is -- is to silence speech. A government organization using a government-granted monopoly to stifle speech may be all too common, but that doesn't mean it should pass by unremarked upon.

I reached out to people at YouTube to see if they could explain why DHS appears to be issuing DMCA takedowns, and got back the equivalent of a "no comment." I also reached out to Homeland Security, who at first seemed interested in looking into the details and then completely stopped responding to emails. Having not received further communication from them in over a week at this point, I'm just going with the post as is, in the hopes that maybe someone out there can explain why the federal government is using copyright to censor speech?


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 1st, 2012 @ 10:14am

    Having homeland security block your video is like gold to a conspiracy theorist.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Aug 1st, 2012 @ 10:33am

      Re:

      Having homeland security block your video is like gold to a conspiracy theorist.


      “... and go to jail, which is what I thought all reporters aspire to anyway. I mean all of us aspire to be committee chairman. I thought that was the crown jewel in a reporter’s resume is to actually go to jail....”

             — U.S. Representative Trey Gowdy speaking at a House Judiciary subcommittee hearing on Wednesday, July 11, 2012 (video)

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Christopher (profile), Aug 1st, 2012 @ 6:11pm

      Re:

      Yes, it is, because it makes it appear that the government has something to hide.

      Newsflash for the 'gobmint wouldn't harm us' people out there: if the government goes to these means to take something out of public circulation, they probably do have something to hide and there might be some truth in the thing somewhere.

      My Lai was called a 'conspiracy theory' until hard evidence came out that it actually happened, so don't be too willing to say that these people are nuts.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Jay Couture, Aug 29th, 2012 @ 1:30am

      Re: The Dumbing Down of America

      Read the book, "The Dumbing Down of America" about censorship or watch some Noam Chomsky vids. Food for thought.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Jason, Aug 1st, 2012 @ 10:15am

    Defamation!!

    Everyone knows what the REAL implication of that video is. If I were Dark Helmet, I would sue.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Baldaur Regis (profile), Aug 1st, 2012 @ 10:23am

    I also reached out to Homeland Security, who at first seemed interested in looking into the details and then completely stopped responding to emails.
    That's because they took the time to look up Techdirt....you dirty commie. /sarc

    And they probably used a phone book to do it. I'm very surprised ANYBODY at DHS could find an onramp to the Information Superhighway. But hey, maybe Techdirt is listed on AOL.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Baldaur Regis (profile), Aug 1st, 2012 @ 10:32am

    On a more serious note

    Is this the formal moment when DMCA notices have jumped the shark from "copyright concerns" removal to flat out "I don't like this" takedowns?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      ChimpObama McBinLadenBurton, Aug 1st, 2012 @ 2:07pm

      Re: On a more serious note

      Yes. Seriously.

      And another question:

      Do those sharks have friken'laser beams attached to their heads?

      Because that would be a dangerous thing for any DMCA notice to attempt.

      COMBB

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        justok (profile), Aug 1st, 2012 @ 11:38pm

        Re: Re: On a more serious note

        "sharks have friken'laser beams attached to their heads" has been copyrighted by Dr Evil Various Organizations. You will be sued for 1 MILLION dollars...er 1 BILLION dollars.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 1st, 2012 @ 10:34am

    It might be a false takedown.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Aug 1st, 2012 @ 10:44am

      Re:

      If we later hear that this was a false take-down issued by one of the MAFIAA groups, and they explain it with "well it was all a misunderstanding, we thought the DHS was on our side on this and we mistakenly thought we could issue a take-down in their name" it will be gold.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 1st, 2012 @ 10:43am

    Godwin's law violation.

    I'm surprised Lucas isn't listed as the take downer. I love the bad editing of the Star Wars music but the shift to Hitler just makes call a violation of Godwin's Law.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
     
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 1st, 2012 @ 10:50am

    Actually, I can think of a few ways that homeland security might have control of copyright material.

    While works produced by the feds may not have copyright, works created FOR the feds may have copyright, and that copyright assigned to the feds as a result.

    A typical conspiracy nut video could very likely contain shots from PSAs and other materials produced for Homeland Security by third party companies. Those companies would have to secure copyright on various things, and assign that copyright to the feds.

    Sorry Mike, but your massive "censorship" claptrap rings empty once again. Don't you ever get tired of being wrong?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      E. Zachary Knight (profile), Aug 1st, 2012 @ 10:56am

      Re:

      Wrong? Wrong about what? That those sending take downs aren't properly considering if fair use comes into play? Wrong that the system is completely and utterly imbalanced in favor of the accuser over the accused?

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Pickle Monger (profile), Aug 1st, 2012 @ 10:59am

      Re:

      Woooshhhhh! Hear that? That is the sound of you missing the point. Not to mention not bothering to read the post to the end.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Jeremy2020 (profile), Aug 1st, 2012 @ 11:00am

      Re:

      Did you read the article? He asked Homeland Security and they just stopped responding

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Aug 1st, 2012 @ 11:13am

      Re:

      Even if what you say is true.... the point is the Feds shouldn't be exercising those powers. They serve us... They shouldn't be limiting us....

      - Peter

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      John Fenderson (profile), Aug 1st, 2012 @ 11:14am

      Re:

      A typical conspiracy nut video could very likely contain shots from PSAs and other materials produced for Homeland Security by third party companies.


      And the use of those shots in your typical conspiracy nut video is extremely likely to be legitimate fair use, so who owns the copyright wouldn't matter.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      gnudist, Aug 1st, 2012 @ 4:21pm

      Re:

      Mike already mentioned that works produced FOR the feds can be under copyright if a copyright holder assigns it to them.

      At least read the fucking article before attacking it.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Jay (profile), Aug 1st, 2012 @ 10:58am

    Embarrassment

    Having not received further communication from them in over a week at this point, I'm just going with the post as is, in the hopes that maybe someone out there can explain why the federal government is using copyright to censor speech?

    I'll keep it simple. It's embarrassment. The government is overstepping on the 1st Amendment and DHS is not going to provide due process here. The entire team of the DHS and the DoJ has become politicized to the point that they want to censor things. This isn't being conspiratorial given how the Obama administration has reacted to whistleblowers and the leaking of information. More than likely, someone is looking at this and even if it's insignificant, they want to cover this up.

    I have no doubt that in the very near future, you'll see even more abuse of the Youtube takedowns to censor people and free speech since the DMCA allows for copyright takedowns without any regards to free speech concerns.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Aug 1st, 2012 @ 11:26am

      Re: Embarrassment

      This whole thing is pretty suspicious. Why would YouTube go "no comment" if it's legit? More likely the "no comment" was substituted for "we got duped, again". The Obama-as-Nazi theme is a well worn tactic of the Teabaggers and associated nutters. And what better way to get such transparent shit-slinging than to cry "censorship".

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Rikuo (profile), Aug 1st, 2012 @ 11:29am

        Re: Re: Embarrassment

        Okay. I'll bite. Why is this not censorship? Even if the works were produced by a third party and the copyrights then turned over to Homeland Security...how can there be a valid complaint of harm given that Homeland Security isn't in the film-making and selling business?

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Aug 1st, 2012 @ 2:23pm

          Re: Re: Re: Embarrassment

          What I'm saying is that I doubt that it was DHS or CBS that was responsible for the notice. I think the juvenile delinquents who posted it engineered a false flag takedown as a vehicle to shout "CENSORSHIP" and draw attention to their drivel. It makes perfect sense that Google would soil itself if it thought the takedown came from DHS. It makes no sense that either CBS or DHS would shine a light on this offal by submitting a takedown request.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Rekrul, Aug 1st, 2012 @ 2:41pm

        Re: Re: Embarrassment

        Why would YouTube go "no comment" if it's legit?

        Because unless you're a lawyer who might potentially sue or file charges against them, it's Google's policy not to talk to anyone.

        Seriously, just try and find a contact link on any Google related site.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          Torg (profile), Aug 1st, 2012 @ 7:30pm

          Re: Re: Re: Embarrassment

          "Seriously, just try and find a contact link on any Google related site."

          I Googled "google customer service", found this in 0.55 seconds.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            identicon
            Rekrul, Aug 1st, 2012 @ 10:24pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Embarrassment

            OK, I admit I didn't know about that page, but maybe that's because its not linked anywhere that I could find from the Google website, YouTube, etc.

            Also, read the comments from all the people who tried to contact them.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    BentFranklin (profile), Aug 1st, 2012 @ 11:07am

    My bet is that it is a fake takedown by the same nutjobs who put it up.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Aug 1st, 2012 @ 11:21am

      Re:

      My thoughts exactly. What better way to get attention for their hatchet job than to claim they're being "censored".

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        yearight, Aug 4th, 2012 @ 7:04am

        Re: Re:

        There's no way someone went to college, became an employee of youtube.

        Just so they could fake taking down their video.

        They'd definitely still want to drink their orange juice in the morning and keep their job.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 1st, 2012 @ 11:15am

    I can give a number of reasons, none of them polite...And all of the solutions involving violence against government officials.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Dreddsnik, Aug 1st, 2012 @ 11:29am

    " I'm just going with the post as is, in the hopes that maybe someone out there can explain why the federal government is using copyright to censor speech? "

    Because they can, and there isn't a damn thing we can do about it anymore.

    There MAY have been a time when we could have done something, but because of 9/11 we have given too much away. We all know that once the government takes a right they never give it back.

    We've given them too much, and it's too late to get it back.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Matthew A. Sawtell, Aug 1st, 2012 @ 11:31am

    DHS acting like the CCP? "Harmony' comes to the U.S.A.

    Hm... looks like the type of 'Harmony' I have seen out of the CCP with the GFW in P.R. China. But do not worry, it is to 'keep everyone happy, calm, and polite to others'.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    quawonk, Aug 1st, 2012 @ 12:25pm

    So, what sayeth the "it's only censorship if the government does it" excuse-makers, huh?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Jasmine Charter, Aug 1st, 2012 @ 12:35pm

    Isn't it obvious?

    Isn't obvious why the government is doing it?

    Because we let them.

    If you act like sheep... don't be surprised when you get herded.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      art guerrilla (profile), Aug 1st, 2012 @ 1:55pm

      Re: Isn't it obvious?

      either:
      ...don't be surprised when you get fleeced
      or,
      ...don't be surprised when you're in the slaughterhouse
      would be more correct
      art guerrilla
      aka ann archy
      eof

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    davebarnes (profile), Aug 1st, 2012 @ 1:54pm

    Obama is a Nazi?

    I am confused.
    I thought Barack was a Kenyan Mau-Mau terrorist.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    That One Guy (profile), Aug 1st, 2012 @ 2:43pm

    Honestly, other than the 'the person who submitted it reported it himself to try and given his video credibility' idea posted above, my first thought was that someone in the government is just trolling the poor nut.

    Think about it: their actions, especially when someone disagrees with them, paints their collective mental maturity in the very young range, so one of them probably saw the nutter while looking for targets for his bosses to sue, and figured he'd get a laugh getting it taken down in the name of a government agency, thereby giving said nutter even more paranoia fuel.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 1st, 2012 @ 3:05pm

    Well I, for one, feel much safer now.

    Спасибо, KGB.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Mike, Aug 1st, 2012 @ 3:59pm

    I made the Original Post MORE INFO

    I made the Original Posting. There are Several Hundred similarly removed videos by Homeland Security as well. I am not a conspiracy theorist, just very disturbed that "Homeland Security" is ripping the videos down, any videos.

    Regarding the First Video that You Reported;
    The video's URL is from an "Annotation Link" embedded within another YouTube video
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?annotation_id=annotation_654674&feature=iv&src_vid=6vlYJ UM52yE&v=0CV8Xt2VWvc

    This is the STILL LIVE YouTube video with the annotation link pointing to the removed video;
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6vlYJUM52yE

    This is the "Removed by the Homeland Security Video" featured in this article
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0CV8Xt2VWvc That results in the Homeland Security Takedown "Sorry" notification..

    =======================================

    Google Search the Unique Video Code for that removed video to find all the spots that the video was embedded. v=0CV8Xt2VWvc

    You will see ALL the Pages that had the Video Embedded. Look how the embedding rate Skyrocketed the week before it was removed.

    ========================================

    You will also find many Blog Postings pointing to it with the same Google Search; For Example, below.

    http://antimisandry.com/chit-chat-main/obama-calls-new-world-order-berlin-17886.html#axzz2 2KuT0Pe2

    This Blog posting dated 15th-January-2009; Shows this link with the original title. The embedded videos still display the original video title as well.

    http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=0CV8Xt2VWvc]YouTube - Obama Calls For New World Order In Berlin

    ======================================

    You can go to Archive.org The internet Wayback Machine
    http://wayback.archive.org/web/*/http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0CV8Xt2VWvc
    To see the Cached copies of the video back to 2008

    Here is the Cache from March 8 2011, This video had 516,043 views
    http://web.archive.org/web/20110308070526/http://www.youtube.com/watch?

    Here is the Original Video Title and Full Description

    Obama Calls For New World Order In Berlin
    Uploaded by jettercat on Jul 25, 2008
    Taken from another vid site...

    Friday, July 25, 2008 The media hailed Obama's Berlin speech in front of hundreds of thousands yesterday as a call for a vision of America as part of a "new world order".

    Excerpts from The International Herald Tribune:

    "I come to Berlin as so many of my countrymen have come before," Obama said, confronting the delicate issue of campaigning abroad. "Tonight, I speak to you not as a candidate for President, but as a citizen — a proud citizen of the United States, and a fellow citizen of the world."

    Obama was warmly embraced by the German press, which frequently referred to his aura, or as the newspaper Bild put it in Thursday's paper, the "political pop star."

    "Yes, there have been differences between America and Europe," Obama said. "No doubt, there will be differences in the future. But the burdens of global citizenship continue to bind us together. A change of leadership in Washington will not lift this burden. In this new century, Americans and Europeans alike will be required to do more — not less. Partnership and cooperation among nations is not a choice; it is the one way, the only way, to protect our common security and advance our common humanity."

    http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/07/24/america/sub25obamacnd.phpv=0CV8Xt2VWvc

    ===== =======================================

    Now go back to that same Internet Wayback Machine Page and look at the Related Videos

    http://web.archive.org/web/20110308070526/http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0CV8Xt2VWvc

    Th e ones with "Grayed Out Thumbs" represent videos no longer available on YouTube. Several Hundred Similar were taken down by Homeland Security.

    Many "Grayed Out" uniquely refer to Obama and "New World Order".
    HOWEVER Videos with Bush+New World Order and Ron Paul+ New World Order Remain untouched

    Videos that compare Obama and Adolf Hitler also display "Homeland Security Takedowns"

    ================================================

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Aug 28th, 2012 @ 6:40pm

      Re: I made the Original Post MORE INFO

      Welcome to the harsh reality of political stifling and false elections. The majority of straw poll delegates were just jilted out of the GOP because of rule changing mid-game.Meanwhile,DHS are censoring vids relating our current Pres to any NWO conspiracies. Hrm..sounds like a conspiracy.Lol!

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Aug 28th, 2012 @ 6:43pm

      Re: I made the Original Post MORE INFO

      Welcome to the harsh reality of political stifling and false elections. The majority of straw poll delegates were just jilted out of the GOP because of rule changing mid-game.Meanwhile,DHS are censoring vids relating our current Pres to any NWO conspiracies. Hrm..sounds like a conspiracy.Lol!

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    MIKE, Aug 1st, 2012 @ 4:23pm

    Takedowns for Censorship ABOUND!

    Here are MORE Questionable Take Downs
    http://web.archive.org/web/20100607123639/http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lh4JHB3yo0s&feat ure=related

    Today
    Takedown by;
    Revolution Pac
    RonPaulGrassroots
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lh4JHB3yo0s&feature=related

    Why are 7 year old videos being taken down by Brand New Political PAC Groups anyway???

    Why is Statfor Taking Down literally hundreds of Unflattering "Occupy Wall Street" bystander Videos. Does Staford even Produce videos?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Mike, Aug 1st, 2012 @ 5:45pm

    Ron Paul Revolution PAC Takedowns

    I guess the Main Purpose of PACs is toTakedown Videos that they Do Not Like!

    http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/lookup2.php?strID=C00499335

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Mike, Aug 1st, 2012 @ 5:50pm

    Ron Paul Revolution PAC Takedowns

    I guess the Main Purpose of PACs is toTakedown Videos that they Do Not Like!

    http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/lookup2.php?strID=C00499335

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Darin, Aug 1st, 2012 @ 6:38pm

    FREE EXPRESSION

    Obama and his NAZI DOGS against free expression. I can't wait until November. Too bad I can only vote for another Jack off. At least Romney isn't a war pig and is OK with free speech. Worst of 2 major evils.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      hiawatha, Aug 1st, 2012 @ 10:12pm

      Re: FREE EXPRESSION

      ten-four on the OB-RA blues. But the TX Republican Party offers to repeal the NDAA, DAA, defrock TSA and NSA/HSA etc. Ron Paul voted against those bills back when they were introduced, and has continuously been opposed to them as unconstitutional in the first place. Consider Senator Paul.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Aug 2nd, 2012 @ 1:54am

      Re: FREE EXPRESSION

      I think you'll find that Romney has pretty much stated that he doesn't mind if Israel starts world war III, and he'll even help them in their stupid feud with Iran.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Brian, Aug 2nd, 2012 @ 1:41pm

      Re: FREE EXPRESSION

      Obama is a censoring Nazi? You are aware that this is the President that took a stand on net neutrality, right?

      That he has spent his time in office making government more transparent?

      Read a newspaper and turn of Sean Hannity. You are just as bad a sheep as a lot of the liberals out there

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 1st, 2012 @ 6:56pm

    No goyim, go back to sleep.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Eric, Aug 1st, 2012 @ 7:23pm

    I'm just going to file a Freedom of Information Act request to Homeland Security since apparently you didn't.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Nomad of Norad, Aug 1st, 2012 @ 8:06pm

    Clearly DMCA abuse....

    Well, the more of this sort of stuff happens (where an outfit not related to the ones who own the copyright on something perform a DMCA takedown), the more likely it is that some sort of reforms to DMCA will be demanded to take place. People will get fed up with this. One idea I've heard multiple times would be make those who issue wrongful DMCA takedown requests (for stuff they do NOT own) pay a heavy fine for each one they do. But it would also make sense to make it absolutely mandatory that all ALL places that have user-submitted content, and that therefore must comply with DMCA takedowns, MUST provide a party and means independent of the supposed content owner AND independent of the ones who submitted the content to go to in cases of dispute over the validity of a DMCA takedown request, and that this independent party MUST have veto power over ALL DMCA takedowns. And it MUST be appealable to an agency higher than that in the case of the first party declaring the takedown valid. In other words, make it so DMCA-takedown-rubberstamping is absolutely forbidden, but also make it so someone cannot just keep submitting DMCA takedowns again and again on the same material. I.e. someone can appeal a DMCA takedown for as long as it takes to overturn it, but one cannot just keep appealing an overturning of a DMCA takedown until they get the overturning overruled.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    jessica, Aug 1st, 2012 @ 9:36pm

    Just a random thought but where the hell is CBS's grounds for a DMCA complaint? That news report in the video said to be a duplicate is from Sky News in the UK. That doesn't sound like it came from the Sky/CBS studio in Chicago. Is CBS claiming to own the Nazi propaganda footage added at the end? Is CBS saying that Sky News used their footage for the report? Not much of anything in the reasons the video was removed makes sense to me.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Androgynous Cowherd, Aug 1st, 2012 @ 10:56pm

    Account Banned

    It says the video's gone because the account it was posted by was removed for copyright complaints. The complaints may have been for other videos than this one. YT apparently has decided that if enough of your videos are deemed infringing they all go.

    So the bad behavior here is mostly by Google, though Homeland Security has no business issuing takedowns for any videos for the reasons already noted.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 2nd, 2012 @ 4:44am

    Nothing to see here, it's just CBS showing that DHS works for them.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 2nd, 2012 @ 6:35am

    The Janet's are at it again. An uptight bitch who hasn't opened her legs in 50 years is now able to tell everybody what to do. What a nightmare. Why keep putting old crotchety bitch women in these positions of power? Torture, the presidents actually enjoys being tortured by a bitch.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Adam Jensen (profile), Aug 2nd, 2012 @ 10:28am

    CBS owns Sky News?

    The clip in the video was from a Sky News report. Isn't Sky news owned by News Corp/Fox and not by CBS?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Gene Cavanaugh (profile), Aug 2nd, 2012 @ 2:14pm

    Homeland Security takedown

    OUCH! To the conspiracy theory nut-cases, this move by "the government" will "prove" the 'government is covering up something evil it has done".

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    James J. Gormley, Aug 2nd, 2012 @ 6:21pm

    Dept of Homeland Security

    The U.S. government cannot own or claim copyright, with some rare and unusual exceptions:

    http://www.usa.gov/copyright.shtml

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    ThisGuy, Aug 3rd, 2012 @ 1:15am

    You all realize that Obama will be out of office in short time, who ever replaces him will no doubt do a better job as the President of the United States of America. He is a disgrace to the Office of the United States President and a terrible financial investor. He has wasted the money of every hard working American and placed it in the hands of incompetent free loaders who would rather reap the benefits of being lazy than working for an honest wage and making a life for themselves. He has put this country so far into debt that we will NEVER find a successful way to climb out and it is disappointing that our children and our children's children will have to deal with his POOR choices. I pray that we find a way to fix his mistakes, if not then this country is in grave danger down the road. -An intelligent onlooker

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    somagical, Aug 3rd, 2012 @ 1:41am

    how do we know that this isnt fake?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    take the streets, Aug 3rd, 2012 @ 2:05am

    land of the free?

    Orwellian:
    a good capitalist model wouldnt be imperialist or based in debt, or censorship.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Dr_Zinj, Aug 3rd, 2012 @ 8:11am

    DHS Takedowns

    The Department of Homeland Security is the same as the 3rd Reich's Gestapo.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous, Aug 3rd, 2012 @ 11:18am

    The rest of the story

    DHS was created to be a wholly owned uncontrolled subsidiary of corrupt enforcement for the criminal corporations, politicians and elite. They do the bidding of their masters. Your taxes and quantitatively devalued dollar help to ensure they can buy hundreds of millions of rounds of ammunition and act as a military body within our formerly free country. DHS has no authority to order take downs, make raids to threaten and intimidate others or enforce any of these actions. Only the courts can give orders to do this and even then DHS does not have the authority to do anything. They have granted this power to themselves and few if any have the backbone to stop them. So far in this country few if any have dared to stand up for their rights and what is right. If this continues then we will all lose these rights permanently at some future point.

    Simple solutions ensure that every post you make on corrupt tube is in some way legally covered by your Constitution rights to not be taken down. But never fear they will do it anyway so be prepared for a fight. Nobody said keeping your freedoms was easy. Just ask the millions that have died in previous wars to help us obtain or protect these rights.

    Make the post under Free Speech use. Maybe add commentary. Or make it a parody in some way. If it is for educational purposes then do something to educate someone on it. Or use something else covered under fair use and make that clear when you post it.

    Then tell them to all to go F*ck (f-word self-censored) themselves. Ironic that I have to sensor my own freedom of speech or an internet company posting an article about illegal censorship of Free Speech will do it for me.

    Think people!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    RURdy4It, Aug 3rd, 2012 @ 5:20pm

    DHS TAKE DOWN...

    I will tell you exactly why in my next vid I have been researching all day... RURDy4It

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Aug 3rd, 2012 @ 9:25pm

    Yep, that video was insane. However, even crazy ass people get to have their crazy ass opinions.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Ed Darrell, Aug 3rd, 2012 @ 10:25pm

    DHS looking for piracy

    It most likely has to do with DHS roles in enforcing anti-piracy law -- CBS is rather jealous of its material, moreso in the U.S. than BBC. See this 2010 article: http://digitaljournal.com/article/300770

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Andy, Aug 6th, 2012 @ 2:29pm

    Might try calling DHS, it's a lot harder to brush someone off over the phone than it is by email.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    chuck, Aug 28th, 2012 @ 7:04am

    I hate liberals

    I hate liberals so much! I wish all of the Pepe involved in the "occupy movement" would face a firing squad!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Amaroq (profile), Aug 29th, 2012 @ 1:23am

    I can comfirm the full title

    I can confirm the full title of the video that was blocked with a DMCA takedown. "Obama Calls For New World Order In Berlin". Almost the same title as the video that you linked to in your article.

    When I found out about this, I wanted to know what it was that was taken down. Because obviously if the government wants a video taken down, there must be a reason.

    I started googling around trying to figure out if I could find a copy of the video cached by google's caching service that lets you view cached copies of a site. I was unable to find a cache of the video itself. But I was able to find a cached page of the video in question. The cache lead to the embed URL for the video that had been taken down.

    http://www.youtube.com/embed/0CV8Xt2VWvc

    As you can see, the "0CV8Xt2VWvc" indicates that it's the same video that was taken down. And this is on youtube live. Hover your mouse around the screen, and the full title of the video will show up. However, the video won't play. And the google cached version of the video was nothing but a black screen that wouldn't do anything.

    It doesn't -necessarily- prove that the content in the copy you linked is the same. But it proves that the title of the video was "Obama Calls For New World Order In Berlin". If the linked video is the same video that was taken down, then someone up there didn't like the comparison between Obama and Hitler.

    Maybe someone out there with better google-fu than me can find the cached video.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Amaroq (profile), Aug 29th, 2012 @ 3:33am

      Re: I can comfirm the full title

      I've got some more information now.

      I continued trying to find a cached copy of the video. Out of curiosity, I tried used something called the Wayback Machine to find a cached copy of the original youtube page this was on. The actual page with a description, comments, etc. Not just the URL. Here is the cache.
      http://web.archive.org/web/20110714162638/http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0CV8Xt2VWvc
      (Note that any links you click will be relative to the archive url and thus won't work. If you want to view the article he linked in his description, you must copy/paste the text of it.)

      Out of curiosity, I decided to check out the userpage of the guy who uploaded this video: jettercat.
      http://www.youtube.com/user/jettercat

      But as you can see, jettercat's account was suspended as well.

      Now that I have this new useful tool for viewing page caches, I used Wayback Machine to view jettercat's cached account page.
      http://web.archive.org/web/20090611144643/http://www.youtube.com/user/jettercat

      There content of that page may give some insight into what the guy's views may have been. There's a video at the top about the teaparty. In his description, among other things, he says he's a right-leaning libertarian.

      But, among the information there is a link to another account of his that he apparently uses as a video blog. GunClinger.
      http://www.youtube.com/user/GunClinger

      This account is live. And among its featured channels, is "Street Sand AveNEWS", which is a link to the jettercat user!

      Thus I believe I have tracked down the man who posted the video that was taken down. I've sent him a message asking him to confirm whether the alternately-linked video is the same video as the one that was taken down.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Amaroq (profile), Aug 30th, 2012 @ 2:43am

        Re: Re: I can comfirm the full title

        I got a response.

        "Ah crap... Stupid mobile, just lost my reply to you.... Yes, my old channel was one that contained that video. I don't know why channels are being yanked, when Ppl are staying well within the lines of the law. The same week mine was pulled, ronpaul2008 and nufffrespect were down as well.. I'm sure many others. I made a video reply for you, feel free to share it. Btw, that was not the only upload I had that was flagged in such a way. Rather bizarre..."
        -GunClinger

        Here's the video he made in reply to me. I really liked it. He seems like a really positive guy and I got a good chuckle out of watching it.
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NLuXixZ5_A

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    daniel cherry, Nov 14th, 2012 @ 9:09am

    sensorship

    What video?I guess you were censored.Try using some thing other than you tube to do this so i can see it

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Amaroq (profile), Nov 14th, 2012 @ 9:23am

      Re: sensorship

      Were you responding to me? I can see the links I posted in my comments. My first comment has one link, my second comment has four links, and my third (last as of this post) comment has one link. Some of which are youtube links.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Amaroq (profile), Nov 14th, 2012 @ 9:33am

    They Changed It

    It's a good thing the author of this article took a screenshot, because it's been changed now. It no longer says who issued the DMCA takedown notice. It just says "multiple third party notifications of copyright infringement".

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This