CBS Reporter Posts YouTube Video Of Grammys… Only To Have CBS Send Takedown Notice
from the left-hand,-right-hand dept
Adam Singer has the news of how a reporter for CBS News, reporting on the Grammys, posted a YouTube clip to a story he had written… except soon after it was posted, CBS issued a DMCA takedown on the video, leading to this bizarre situation, put into image form by someone at Reddit (of course):
Both reports claim that this is CBS filing copyright claims against itself, though that’s not really accurate. It’s CBS filing a YouTube takedown (or doing a content ID match, more likely) and not realizing that its own reporters were making use of the YouTube video. The real question is why CBS wouldn’t make legit clips available as easily as the YouTube clips were available. As it stands now, the video embed has been pulled down, and the reporter apologizes that no clips are available. That scenario seems even more ridiculous than the original takedown. This is the
same company, and he can’t get a legit clip to put with the story?
Filed Under: copyright, dmca, grammys, takedown
Companies: cbs
Comments on “CBS Reporter Posts YouTube Video Of Grammys… Only To Have CBS Send Takedown Notice”
LOL
Even authorized content is unauthorized.
Re: LOL
I had to make a Demotivational Poster out of this:
http://cheezburger.com/View/4466221824
How Big Media Really Works
“The real question is why CBS wouldn’t make legit clips available as easily as the YouTube clips were available.”
Because they air the show ONCE, and if you werent there on that day at that time, fuck the viewer.
This is how these big media companies think: We will give you what WE decide, WHEN we decide, HOW we decide, and we will sue into oblivion anyone who deviates from this. Forget social norms, forget sharing of culture, forget even that this airs on FREE OVER THE AIR TV – the big media corp wont ever re-air or provide the program in ANY form EVER after ONE airing. Forget all that, because if the public wants it, fuck them, they can watch it on that one specific Sunday in February and if they miss it too bad boo hoo. Big media doesnt CARE what YOU (the public, the consumer) wants. They only care about what THEY want. They are the single most short-sighted, anti-consumer industry in existence.
Lawyers
This is why you never, ever let lawyers act autonomously. They will screw everyone including their employer.
Re: Lawyers
Why not everyone just fire the lawyers altogether. It’ll save everyone, including the employers, tons of money.
Re: Re: Lawyers
I’m still awaiting Heinlein’s prophesied “The Day They Hung the Lawyers”
Wouldn’t help anyone if CBS published their own video, it’s restricted geographically, so no one outside of US could see it anyway.
The reporter was most probably aware of that and chose a non-restricted youtube video to get around that. Too bad he didn’t succeed.
🙂
Re: Re:
Y’know, that’s a good point. If you’re a reporter your desire is (or should be) to get the news out there. That flies in the face of the way copyrights are used to monetize that news (especially in the Anglosphere.)
CBS invented the fail horn
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U43Ate3Itjs
Let’s see. I bought a TV and an Antenna andf picked up the Grammies on that TV using my antenna. Total cost? Not much and the Grammies cost nothing. So what’s the big deal, I already saw it for free. In my mind once you give something away it is given and no longer costs or infringes. I don’t think the networks even know what the laws are. Stupid people. You protect something you gave away. I guess their Lawyers had a slow day or needed to justify the expense account by actually doing some work, misguided or not.
Re: Re:
Anything broadcasted over public airwaves should be free for others to freely record, copy, and redistribute. Otherwise, the government shouldn’t grant monopoly power on broadcasting spectra use. Monopolized content on monopolized spectra displaces free content. The corporations shouldn’t have it both ways, a monopoly on both spectra and content is wrong.
Actually, it would appear that the reporter trying to use the clip is a bit of a freetard, taking a shortcut trying to use youtube video instead of taking a few minutes to requisition the video through CBS’s internal systems.
It’s worse that this dumbass is in the CBS news department. It suggests he has no clue how to work inside his own company.
Re: Re:
This is fairly common. As mentioned on reddit, it’s easier to google your company’s logo than to route through HR to get to the logo.
Re: Re:
Ignorant AND angry much?
Re: Re:
Actually, it would appear that the reporter trying to use the clip is a bit of a freetard, taking a shortcut trying to use youtube video instead of taking a few minutes to requisition the video through CBS’s internal systems.
So that brings up the question of why is an external provider much more efficient than an internal system. And why is CBS using such an inefficient system when there is a better alternative? Why is CBS wasting resources first by having their own system, and then wasting more resources in the effort to stop their content appearing on the better system?
If you owned shares of CBS’s parent company, wouldn’t you want to know why?
Re: Re: Re:
You make the (false) assumption that youtube is a “better system”. Far from it. It is unreliable. People remove videos, they change them, they stick stupid ads on top of them. Certainly not a better system.
CBS more than likely has the tape online and ready to go, already used in a news story somewhere. But instead of asking and waiting to 15 minutes it might take to get an answer, he short cut the system, only to discover people cleaning up behind him, making him (and his bosses) look like dumbasses.
If I owned shares in CBS’s parent company, I would wonder why they hired freetards to work in news.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
You’re adorable!
Re: Re: Re: Re:
They wouldn’t look so stupid if these freetards stopped trying to exercise their free monopoly privileges in exchange for nothing.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
So then why not put up their own video, which they apparently have readily available at a moment’s notice, after taking down the first one and circumventing this problem altogether?
And why are other people’s assumptions “false” and yours are “more than likely”?
Re: Re: Re: Re:
LOL fifteen minutes? CBS issued a takedown on thier own content posted by thier own employee mostly for their benefit (greater access for viewers) and you’re making the assumtion that this company would take only fifteen minutes to make a decision on this. And if we’re going to be making assumtions even if youtube is “unreliaable” just having the option increases the chance of people watching it (along side broadcasting and using whatever other means they choose). Also your are slightly incorrect people do not remove videos from youtube the community flags them if deemed inappropriate then mods review and then make the decision to remove or not.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
“If I owned shares in CBS’s parent company, I would wonder why they hired freetards to work in news.”
Because all the anal retentive tools are copyright lawyers?
Re: Re:
CBS and the government complex are the only freetards, getting free monopoly privileges over spectra to then monopolize the content and exploit it for personal gain.
Re: Re: Re:
(exploit their wrongful monopoly power over the spectra for personal gain).
CBS's right hand doesn't know what it's left hand is doing...
PHAIL.
Takedown
An agent provocateur? How outrageous is that?
A big company
Sounds logical that someone in one division of a company can call up another and request a clip. On the other hand, it’s possible that these are two divisions that don’t really talk and have different legal teams.
It is pretty funny though.
Since contentID can remove anything automagically, I believe this is a miscommunication between the CBS employee with the other department, still pretty funny.
The left hand doesn’t know what the right hand is doing.
Clearly CBS has some issues that they need to address there, now the people needing education on how to use the technologies they asked for are the very people who asked for them.
They probably will need to create a whole division just for dealing with this stuff since Youtube is just one of several video websites and anyone who can post something online will need to fill forms and forms showing what they will do and where they will post so the filters don’t eat their cookies.
It just gets expensive over time LoL
The guy who is responsible for authorizing those things will get some calls and become very popular now.
Happened to me too!
I googled for the video recently to show someone who hadn’t seen it. The top result might have been that CBS page, but whichever it was I also received the CBS copyright image. So I went back to my search results and chose the auto-tuned remix of the reporter video. If there is a hell, I’ll be going there, cause that was hilarious. Felt really bad for the reporter afterwords though.