Copyright As Censorship: Comic Artist Uses DMCA To Censor Critical Blogs
from the because-isn't-that-what-copyright-is-for? dept
Another in our series on copyright being used for censorship. Pointed out by Kevin Carson, comic artist Randy Queen, the author of Darkchylde has apparently filed a bunch of DMCA takedown notices against posts on the Escher Girls Tumblr page — which “archives and showcases the prevalence of certain ways women are depicted” in various pop media, including comics. It appears that Queen did not like being criticized in this manner.
So yesterday I found out that Randy Queen (artist of DarkChylde) filed a bunch of DMCA takedown notices to Tumblr to remove posts of his covers on this blog (the entire posts, not just the images). I?ve also gotten messages from other users that he?s had their stuff removed too (redraws, etc that have been featured here). Non-critical Tumblr posts of his art/covers and those praising his work appear to be unaffected.
The folks behind Escher Girls apparently aren’t inclined to fight it (and even say they don’t wish to pick a fight with Queen), but are just informing people of what’s going on. Still it is troubling. It’s worrisome that Queen appears to be abusing the DMCA in this manner. It’s unfortunate that Tumblr just gave in. It’s disappointing that Escher Girls apparently isn’t even going to file a counternotice.
The end result is the same again: copyright is being used for censorship of criticism, rather than as an incentive for creativity.
Filed Under: censorship, copyright, criticism, dmca, randy queen
Comments on “Copyright As Censorship: Comic Artist Uses DMCA To Censor Critical Blogs”
copyright is being used for censorship of criticism, rather than as an incentive for creativity
But just think of how many artists don’t want to put their work out there because they fear criticism! If nobody can be critical of art, there could be so much more!
Re: Re:
Negative criticism is costing content creators quadrillions of copyright dollars per second!
Once again, I’d like to posit the theory that copyright used in this way constitutes a First Amendment violation (since the government grants copyright, natch).
If a bad review is censored then shouldn’t a good review get censored?
Remember that time when someone issued a takedown notice for one of Techdirt’s posts? Why didn’t you fight that one, Mike? I guess it’s just “unfortunate” that you didn’t file suit to go after the abuser. All bark and no bite, I suppose.
Re: Re:
[CITATION NEEDED]
Why fight it?
Those URLs are enough of a critique of Randy Queen’s “art.”
Sauce for the goose...
Perhaps we should help Queen out and send takedown requests for the positive posts on his behalf.
Re: Sauce for the goose...
Don’t be silly – you’d have to represent yourself as the copyright owner, and NO one EVER does that – the consequences are dire!
Re: Re: Sauce for the goose...
Yes, to paraphrase Grandpa Simpson, “you’ll get the frowning of a lifetime!”
Re: Re: Sauce for the goose...
No you wouldn’t, you can simply claim to be the agent of the copyright holder.
vaguness in threats = hallmark of legal thuggery
the artist in question has just recently contacted the EscherGirls blogger and threatened to sue for defamation – because of her (remarkably innocuous) blog post describing the situation.
https://i.imgur.com/DjwCjcy.png
Re: vaguness in threats = hallmark of legal thuggery
Isn’t misuse of DMCA defamation?
Re: Re: vaguness in threats = hallmark of legal thuggery
Not defamation, but perjury which is worse.
Re: vaguness in threats = hallmark of legal thuggery
That letter is pretty interesting in its cluelessness, but this part was the most clueless of all: “my right to protect the perception of my IP as it exists today”.
1) There is no such right in copyright law
2) If perception is his concern, he might start with not abusing the DMCA and then continuing to argue even after they already caved to his bogus filing.
Also,
“no good will come of this”
He’s right. But the bad will fall on him, not anyone else.
Unless eschergirls has changed dramatically in the last few months, the “folks” behind it are one young lady who runs it as a personal hobby blog. It’s a shame she’s being bullied this way, but I can’t blame her at all for not wanting to deal with the legal hassle and risk of fighting back.
This is an outstanding fair use case:
It also sounds like it might be an excellent DMCA 512(f) test case if he used a copyright claim to take down “entire posts, not just the images” — since there’s no way he has any rights to the entire posts.
Re: Re:
Sounds good. After years of litigation you MIGHT get your lawyer-fees back. Well, if he has that much money.
Please note the utter lack of punishment for doing this, all you can sue for is damages and those would be minimal.
here’s one of them:
http://eschergirls.soup.io/since/261944891?mode=own&newer=1
well, he'll be happy to know...
…he’s made *at least* one new enemy today…
what would be the equivalent to a ‘streisand effect’ where you previously didn’t know of a person’s existence, but now that they’ve made themselves obnoxiously known, you decide you hate them ? ? ?
Common sense
If he owns the image, and the site didn’t ask permission to use it, then they have to take it down end of story. I’m getting sick of people pulling the feminism card every time a female blogger oversteps their boundaries. It really makes the geek culture look bad as a whole.
Re: Common sense
Feminism has nothing to do with this.
There is an exception to copyright called fair use, pretty explicitly covering cases of criticism like this.
The correct sequence of events should have been Tumblr rejecting the DMCA claim, but they will never do that because they are too scared. Barring that, the blogger should file a counter-notice, and then Tumblr should re-instate. It looks like the blogger doesn’t want to deal with the fighting and fallout (because she probably doesn’t have a lawyer on retainer…) so she’s just rolling over, which is a shame but totally understandable.
Re: Common sense
Except that you’re an idiot. This is a clear case of fair use, and your trotting out the strawman of feminism fails.
The end result is the same again: copyright is being used for censorship of criticism, rather than as an incentive for creativity.
Damn, someone was killed with a hammer recently. Clearly the hammer industry needs to be abolished, as it’s just being used for bad things.
Re: Re:
It’s ironic that you wrote that because that perfectly describes the DMCA, criminalizing tools because they COULD be used to commit a crime.
Re: Re:
Damn, some industry executive could have been richer than he was recently. Clearly the VCR industry needs to be abolished, as it’s just being used for bad things.
Finally decided to log back in, eh fuckwit?
Re: Re:
The problem isn’t that it’s used for bad things. The problem is that the ‘good parts’ are completely absent, and it only causes bad things.
So yeah, your hammer analogy doesn’t really fly here.