4 Comments

Summary:

The funniest thing on YouTube right now isn’t the latest installment from Smosh, but the meta-ironic actions of a certain litigious content megalopoly in issuing takedown notices for content it doesn’t even have a clear claim to own. Christopher Knight produced some humorously campy commercials for […]

The funniest thing on YouTube right now isn’t the latest installment from Smosh, but the meta-ironic actions of a certain litigious content megalopoly in issuing takedown notices for content it doesn’t even have a clear claim to own.

Christopher Knight produced some humorously campy commercials for a local political campaign, and posted them to YouTube. Then he saw his commercials appear in VH1’s Web Junk without being contacted. When he then put up the clip of the show featuring his commercial, Viacom issued a DMCA takedown request, which YouTube promptly complied with.

Ah, the tangled web woven by derivative content! Does LucasFilm have a claim on the commercial because Knight used an image of the Death Star blowing a one room schoolhouse to smithereens? One could argue that it falls under parody. Does Knight have a claim on Viacom for using his material without permission? Viacom, by providing commentary about the clip, could claim fair use.

Chances are, the minions Viacom pays to keep YouTube scrubbed of their content probably found the clip after searching “VH1″ or “WebJunk” and issuing a takedown without much thought. Viacom, after all, did no due diligence to discover the source (for instance, by contacting Knight through YouTube), so why should its police? Now, Knight could also have a claim for wrongful takedown, as he posted the clip alongside his own notes on YouTube.

Viacom, of course, can always throw lawyers at the problem. Last time they got caught being heavy handed with the nastygrams, they got away with admitting wrongdoing. Knight, on the other, is only getting the (sometimes good, mostly bad) advice from commenters on his blog — I’d recommend simply mailing a counter-notification form to YouTube, and maybe the clip will magically reappear. Then the ball is in Viacom’s court to open itself up to liability for issuing (yet another) improper takedown request.

The point here is that the rhetoric from content providers doesn’t jive with the reality of the creative process. No art or entertainment exists in a vacuum, especially once it’s been digitized and distributed on a network. It is simply impossible to impose the sort of granularity of ownership rights in the modern age that current regulations demand. Okay, maybe I’m a nerd for finding this drama far more entertaining than either the original clip or the VH1 show. But c’mon, it’s hilarious, no? Good times.

  1. Hi Jackson – Great post! I guess I am a nerd too….

    This is just as much YouTube’s fault as Viacom’s. Just because you get a takedown request, doesn’t mean you have to take it down – the requestor must prove their claim.

    Share
  2. Viacom are going to get their arses sued one of these days for a frivolous takedown notice as specified in the Copyright Act and DCMA .

    http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode17/usc_sec_17_00000512—-000-.html

    (f) Misrepresentations.— Any person who knowingly materially misrepresents under this section—
    (1) that material or activity is infringing, or
    (2) that material or activity was removed or disabled by mistake or misidentification,
    shall be liable for any damages, including costs and attorneys’ fees, incurred by the alleged infringer, by any copyright owner or copyright owner’s authorized licensee, or by a service provider, who is injured by such misrepresentation, as the result of the service provider relying upon such misrepresentation in removing or disabling access to the material or activity claimed to be infringing, or in replacing the removed material or ceasing to disable access to it.

    Share
  3. Not a nerd, a legal and rights junkie. This case or one as complex has got to be taken to court. What is the cost of the google adword for “Digiital Rights Representation?”
    Imagine the late night ads on TV, right after the auto accident attorney comes a guy,
    “Made a video? Had your video appropriated by a giant company?
    Call I 800 IP Rights.

    Had your content taken down by giant, rich companies who won’t give you your rights?
    Video chasing attornies are standing by.
    Call 1 800 IP Rights.
    Or email we.sue.4U@IPrights.tv

    Share
  4. [...] and Emilio Estevez in the school library and blocked the fire exits. Viacom also solves problems by force, and spends much of its time running after high schoolers, almost obsessively. Heck, even [...]

    Share

Comments have been disabled for this post