http://www.techdirt.com/ Easily digestible tech news.... http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130522/00412423167/fair-use-me-not-thee.shtml#c114 Fri, 24 May 2013 15:36:28 PDT http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130522/00412423167/fair-use-me-not-thee.shtml#c114 http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130523/19133923200/copyright-patent-its-all-same-to-worlds-third-largest-news-agency.shtml#c733 Fri, 24 May 2013 15:35:00 PDT http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130523/19133923200/copyright-patent-its-all-same-to-worlds-third-largest-news-agency.shtml#c733 http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130522/00412423167/fair-use-me-not-thee.shtml#c101 Fri, 24 May 2013 15:34:03 PDT http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130522/00412423167/fair-use-me-not-thee.shtml#c101 http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130523/17515223193/riaa-copyright-reform-we-need-is-to-make-everyone-else-copyright-cops.shtml#c1167 Fri, 24 May 2013 15:31:28 PDT http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130523/17515223193/riaa-copyright-reform-we-need-is-to-make-everyone-else-copyright-cops.shtml#c1167
Since the reason for the 'shoot first, ask questions later' plan of taking everything down 'just in case would' be to avoid potential lawsuits, it would also only apply to those groups(like the *AA's) that have proven to be lawsuit happy, and not independents.

So *AA music/movie trailers/reviews? Gone.
Independent music/movie trailers/review? Still up.

Sorry for the confusion, should have been more clear I guess.]]> http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130521/21222323165/another-ca-cop-thinks-cell-phone-might-be-dangerous-weapon.shtml#c667 Fri, 24 May 2013 15:27:21 PDT http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130521/21222323165/another-ca-cop-thinks-cell-phone-might-be-dangerous-weapon.shtml#c667 These cops sound like they're egging each other on]]> http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130522/00412423167/fair-use-me-not-thee.shtml#c88 Fri, 24 May 2013 15:26:04 PDT http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130522/00412423167/fair-use-me-not-thee.shtml#c88 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_law

I don't think it means what you vaguely imply that it means.

Copyright isn't based on precedent, it's statute based. That kind of makes it "not common law".]]> http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130522/00412423167/fair-use-me-not-thee.shtml#c81 Fri, 24 May 2013 15:25:36 PDT http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130522/00412423167/fair-use-me-not-thee.shtml#c81 http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130521/18265123163/reporters-find-exposed-personal-data-via-google-threatened-with-cfaa-charges.shtml#c859 Fri, 24 May 2013 15:23:37 PDT http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130521/18265123163/reporters-find-exposed-personal-data-via-google-threatened-with-cfaa-charges.shtml#c859 http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130524/10542823205/another-court-tells-prenda-to-pay-up-attorneys-fees.shtml#c113 Fri, 24 May 2013 15:23:34 PDT http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130524/10542823205/another-court-tells-prenda-to-pay-up-attorneys-fees.shtml#c113
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121130/17100821190/copyright-troll-case-tossed-fraud-court-after-abbott-costello-worthy-hearing.shtml]]> http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130523/19133923200/copyright-patent-its-all-same-to-worlds-third-largest-news-agency.shtml#c708 Fri, 24 May 2013 15:23:01 PDT http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130523/19133923200/copyright-patent-its-all-same-to-worlds-third-largest-news-agency.shtml#c708 http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130524/00583723201/if-you-thought-copyright-was-mess-earth-what-does-it-look-like-space.shtml#c278 Fri, 24 May 2013 15:22:56 PDT http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130524/00583723201/if-you-thought-copyright-was-mess-earth-what-does-it-look-like-space.shtml#c278 http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130522/00412423167/fair-use-me-not-thee.shtml#c64 Fri, 24 May 2013 15:22:24 PDT http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130522/00412423167/fair-use-me-not-thee.shtml#c64
It has gotten to the point where content owners are basically thinking I don't like what this guy wrote or did *whips out takedown hammer"]]> http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130522/00412423167/fair-use-me-not-thee.shtml#c57 Fri, 24 May 2013 15:22:06 PDT http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130522/00412423167/fair-use-me-not-thee.shtml#c57
Now, don't argue that you're acting morally by throwing up a bunch of misleading special cases or pointing to corporate fat cats also stealing when you don't accept the simple fundamentals of copyright being common law.]]> http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130524/00583723201/if-you-thought-copyright-was-mess-earth-what-does-it-look-like-space.shtml#c262 Fri, 24 May 2013 15:21:03 PDT http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130524/00583723201/if-you-thought-copyright-was-mess-earth-what-does-it-look-like-space.shtml#c262 http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130524/10542823205/another-court-tells-prenda-to-pay-up-attorneys-fees.shtml#c100 Fri, 24 May 2013 15:18:08 PDT http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130524/10542823205/another-court-tells-prenda-to-pay-up-attorneys-fees.shtml#c100 http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130522/00412423167/fair-use-me-not-thee.shtml#c37 Fri, 24 May 2013 15:16:38 PDT http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130522/00412423167/fair-use-me-not-thee.shtml#c37
But why should it? They are the alleged infringers, not the service provider. They are not eligible for the DMCA safe harbors in the first place, so issuing a DMCA notice to them wouldn't be proper.

I'd take this as a cease-and-desist notice.]]> http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130523/19133923200/copyright-patent-its-all-same-to-worlds-third-largest-news-agency.shtml#c702 Fri, 24 May 2013 15:14:33 PDT http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130523/19133923200/copyright-patent-its-all-same-to-worlds-third-largest-news-agency.shtml#c702
Your position seems to be that because mistakes get made, we should give up on the ideals altogether... and yet you're the one accusing us of throwing the baby out with the bathwater. I think it's time for you to sit back and think about the side you've taken on this issue.]]> http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130522/00412423167/fair-use-me-not-thee.shtml#c26 Fri, 24 May 2013 15:14:31 PDT http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130522/00412423167/fair-use-me-not-thee.shtml#c26
It might be "interesting" that this happened, but it would be more interesting to find out how. For example, did the person who used Reinhardt's clip also issue the takedown? Or were those different people? If so, are they in the same department? Have they ever even met? Are the working under the same policy? What is the KTVB policy on fair use...by themselves or others? Is this a case of an overzealous summer intern in the legal department of a parent corporation somewhere, or is there some actual hypocrisy at the policy level?

Techdirt writers are not interested in such details, which might be useful in understanding what the real problem is (so it might be fixed). These details might make it harder to demonize organizations who do things like issue takedowns, because they might reveal that this case of egregious institutional hypocrisy was actually more like a run-of-the-mill cock up.

But who has time these days to actually understand a situation before publishing about it? Somebody blogged that a guy associated with Prenda's third cousin drive alone in the carpool lane for a mile last week. Better rewrite that article and add a sentence or two of blistering commentary so we can get it up on the front page.]]> http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130524/10542823205/another-court-tells-prenda-to-pay-up-attorneys-fees.shtml#c87 Fri, 24 May 2013 15:14:22 PDT http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130524/10542823205/another-court-tells-prenda-to-pay-up-attorneys-fees.shtml#c87 http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130523/19133923200/copyright-patent-its-all-same-to-worlds-third-largest-news-agency.shtml#c691 Fri, 24 May 2013 15:14:04 PDT http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130523/19133923200/copyright-patent-its-all-same-to-worlds-third-largest-news-agency.shtml#c691
Lets start with the obvious. This is a news agency. I would be surprised if their entire business model does not revolve around copyright. Even if the writer doesn't know the difference (which I would be skeptical of) their editor should definitely know. News organizations usually do a pretty good job of making sure at least someone covering a topic (the writer or editor) understands the subject. For who ever speculated that the editor was on vacation, I am sure that someone was still supposed to review the article.

Next reason why its a big deal. The difference between patents and copyright (as I am sure most readers that frequent this site can tell you) is a minimum of 50 years. And that is assuming that the copyright holder dies the moment the copyright on the work comes into existence (also that you only look at the current written rules with no adjustments). Remember patents are 20 years, copyright creator life time plus 70 years. So next time you think there is no difference between the two, you should think what it would mean to you if a judge sentenced you to jail for life without prole instead of the 20 years you were supposed to get. I bet that would mean something different to you.

Same here, there is a tremendous time difference between the two. If its too confusing for people to understand the basic differences then I think that is an indication that they obviously need work. Also given that fact that nearly everyone on this planet is impacted on a daily basis by both of these concepts we should all have some understanding of the differences.

Think my statement above is laughable, you can't use the internet, watch tv, or listen to the radio without encountering copyright. And its getting hard to eat without swallowing someones patent. Use a cell phone, you are dealing with both.

So yea, I will repeat it again. It is a big deal. Newspapers have been complaining for years about all of the business that the internet has cost them, well, if they can't even get the basics correct how can we trust that they are reporting on the complicated.]]>