It always makes me laugh when people refer to an “influential” blog in Virginia. People, please. The traffic numbers are pretty small all around, and mostly it’s something of a circle . . erm, mutual admiration society. That isn’t to say there isn’t a lot of smart and worthwhile writing going on, but the term “influential” – even in the loosest sense – just doesn’t apply.
With that introduction, I now direct you to the most influential blogger in Virginia.
John McCain, who has never previously missed a chance to play up the importance of the DMCA’s restrictions on public usage, has suffered a bit at the hands of the DMCA. His ads on YouTube have been the subject of takedown notices from CBS, NBC, and even CBN (the Christian Broadcasting Network). He’s now complaining about this to YouTube, writing a letter (PDF) that includes:
[O]verreaching copyright claims have resulted in the removal of non-infringing campaign videos from YouTube, thus silencing political speech. Numerous times during the course of the campaign, our advertisements or web videos have been the subject of DMCA takedown notices regarding uses that are clearly privileged under the fair use doctrine. The uses at issue have been the inclusion of fewer than ten seconds of footage from news broadcasts in campaign ads or videos, as a basis for commentary on the issues presented in the news reports, or on the reports themselves. These are paradigmatic examples of fair use…
Finally, something the McCain campaign and I agree on, 100%. But oh, wait, there’s more:
[W]e believe that it would consume few resources–and provide enormous benefit–for YouTube to commit to a full legal review of all takedown notices on videos posted from accounts controlled by (at least) political candidates and campaigns.
Ah, that’s more like it – McCain first, country second (perhaps McCain’s only reliable principle?). Fred von Lohmann, an attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, points out:
The obvious problem with this solution? It assumes that YouTube should prioritize the campaigns’ fair use rights, rather than those of the rest of us. That seems precisely backwards, since the most exciting new possibilities on YouTube are for amateur political expression by the voters themselves. After all, the campaigns have no trouble getting the same ads out on television and radio, options not available to most YouTubers.
This isn’t posturing – think about the most effective political videos you’ve seen. Were any of them produced by a campaign? I’ll bet they weren’t. One of the most important political projects to be undertaken in the coming years will be not only to put a halt to – but roll back – IP laws that reach beyond commerce to control political discourse and culture. Think we can count on McCain’s help when the time comes?
I objected to CBS’ taking down a McCain ad from Youtube with a DMCA notice a few weeks ago. And now NBC has taken down an Obama campaign ad:
Obama’s web team whipped up a frenzy this week with an edgy YouTube video imagining a victory by Sen. John McCain. They used archival footage of Tom Brokaw announcing the news, and the video climbed to the top of YouTube — besting celebrities, SNL clips and the Sarah Palin montages that dominate political hits at the web site. But this afternoon, NBC stripped the video off the web by filing a copyright claim with YouTube.
I haven’t seen the ad, so I can’t provide much of an analysis in favor of fair use. That said, my very strong general objection to the ability of a commercial organization to control the message of a political candidate remains. And that objection doesn’t just extend to control over political speech by public figures like Obama and McCain, but to political speech by all of us. Earlier this week, I linked to a video which blamed the CRA (and, of course, Obama) for the current economic situation. One of the commenters complained that it was taken down when he clicked on it, and I found that it had been replaced. I had assumed that the original author had just updated it somewhat, and that was the issue. In fact, it turns out that the first version was knocked down by a DMCA notice, too. Why? The original used music, as described by Larry Lessig:
So, for example. when describing how Fannie and Freddie gave low interest and no interest loans, the music is Dire Straits “Money for Nothing.” And when talking about the speculation, Talking Head’s “Burning down the house.” When talking about the influence of money inside the campaigns, AcDc “Money Talks.” And when talking about how “it ends now” if (as the author but not this author hopes) Obama is defeated, the music is “Survivor – Eye of the Tiger.” In each case, the music amplifies the message in powerfully and socially relevant way.
That’s a much tougher fair use case, and Lessig (who knows a thing or three about fair use) makes a strong argument for constructing a legal framework beyond traditional “fair use” to accomodate things like this. Check it out.
I’m a fan of the Lonely Planet, but I’m always looking for improvements on the usual guidebook model. This has me keeping an eye on the electronic efforts.  Some have worked – I’m a long-term subscriber to Vindigo, which focuses on US cities (not exactly a guidebook replacement, but it’s pretty good). Still looking for something that would let me replace that 4lb Lonely Planet I dragged through India, however. I recently came across this comprehensive review of an effort to do just that by Lonely Planet and Nokia, where (some of) the LP content has been reformatted and made available through the Nokia Maps application.  In the end, it’s more supplement than replacement, but it’s a good start.
The surprise, of course, is that I’m actually getting a Friday Notes out.
First, I apparently screwed up the first video in this post about Idiocracy (yes, I note the irony). Since no one told me about it, that means no one looked at the videos. I blame you. You are hereby sentenced to go watch it.
~
Do Virginia Republicans do anything but whine about non-existent attacks on them? Del. Bill Carrico was just on WAMU’s Politics Hour going on about how awful it is that the Fourth Circuit said a state employee can’t use his office to lead a mass prayer to Jesus Christ (in particular. Non-denoms are okay). You’d think that the Fourth Circuit was burning Christians at the stake. More about the issue here (with a similarly overwrought tone) and here (which brings it back to reality).
~
A friend turned me on the Fratellis’ Flathead track last week. Because Universal is still afraid of its customers, I can’t embed the video. So check it out. (Warning: this song came to me as a volley in an earworm war.)
~
CycleTo – a well-produced site run by a fellow with a lot of access in the sport – picked up some of my shots from last weekend’s ING Direct Capital Criterium. CycleTo does a lot of original short video interviews (like this recent one with Levi Leipheimer at Worlds in Varese). If you’re into pro cycling, give them a look.
~
Looks like the Associated Press lent the McCain campaign its time machine.
~
You’ve probably recieved one of those fear-mongering “don’t wear buttons to the polls!” email this week. Vivian Paige lays out the law for Virginia residents, and Adam Bonin gives us a national view.
~
Sign war amusement.
~
It’s often easy to assume that all of humanity’s easy problems have been solved. This is a reminder that simple ideas can still make a difference.
~
I somehow missed the recent skirmishes over the role of the US military personnel on American soil. If you find it as interesting as I do, this is as good a place as any to jump in.
~
What are you do this weekend? Depending on the weather, I’ll either be at Bike DC or the Charlottesville Vegetarian Festival.
No, for real. I just said that. The Bush Admin is pushing back against a proposal to make the Department of Justice de facto copyright cops at the beck and call of private industry. Why would the RIAA spend its own money chasing college kids trading songs when they could get the taxpayer to foot the bill?
The government agencies wrote that the proposal “could result in Department of Justice prosecutors serving as pro bono lawyers for private copyright holders regardless of their resources. In effect, taxpayer-supported department lawyers would pursue lawsuits for copyright holders, with monetary recovery going to industry.”
In all, the Bush administration agreed with digital rights groups and others who said the measure goes too far and is a gift to copyright holders who normally use the civil courts to sue copyright infringers.
This is an issue on which you can count on both sides of the aisle to demonstrate some seriously bad judgment (which is probably putting it too kindly). Sen. Leahy, for example, is a very smart fellow, but his record on copyright issues is truly appalling (you can thank him and Orrin Hatch for the DMCA).
The Arlington Sun-Gazette arrived in the mail today, and while it has often disappointed me in the past, it really outdid itself today. 
See, inserted in the middle of the paper was a full color poster and DVD containing “Obsession: Radical Islam’s War Against the West”. This is a hateful bit of propaganda that is popular with the David Horowitz crowd, and its distribution was underwritten by the Clarion Fund (more about this fraud of an operation here). and does its best to drum up the fear, as described by someone who received a copy with his New York Times:
Arriving at the doorstep together, the package was alarming. The film is made to appear as a news-style documentary and includes splashy sell-lines that shout “As seen on CNN and FOX News by more than 20 million viewers worldwide.” Indeed, the incendiary packaging is a reflection of the contents of the film. The “O” in “Obsession” is formed with the Islamic crescent moon and a star, and the closing “N” is tricked up with a silhouette of an automatic rifle. Soft focus-images of Middle Easterners, the World Trade Center, a firefighter on a ladder and the American flag all bathed in golden light.
The movie’s primary aim appears to be to get every viewer to think that Islam’s primary purpose is to ensure that there’s a Muslim dedicated to killing them and their children hiding around every corner. It’s an absolutely execrable effort at hate and fear mongering, and I’m not going to expend any effort in describing in further. You are welcome to check it out for yourself, however, at the movie’s website.
I called the Sun-Gazette’s offices to make sure that they’d sent it, but there was no answer. I left a message and will report back on any response. In the interim, I urge all of my Northern Virginia readers to call the Sun-Gazette at (703) 738-2520 and tell them that hate has no place here, no matter how much money it makes them. Ask for Scott McCaffery, the newspaper’s editor, when you do this. And don’t take the “oh, it’s just an advertisement, we don’t have any control over what we carry” excuse. It’s bullshit. I can think of a half dozen inserts they’d turn down without a thought. They certainly *do* have control over trafficking in hate.
As I was writing this, I discovered that this tripe was distributed with many newspapers (to 28 million homes, it seems). You know who the only paper was to refuse, thus far? The Greensboro News & Record. Putting the rest of them to shame. No excuses for any of them. At all.
Looks like CBS used a DMCA notice to make YouTube pull a (ridiculous, but this is beside the point) McCain ad that used some footage of CBS news personality Katie Couric.
Dangerous stuff, people.
At 8:50pm EDT, the Associated Press has already reported on the delivery of the as-yet undelivered speech by Sarah Palin. Not a preview, but a report:
Palin mocks Obama; McCain claiming nomination
By DAVID ESPO – 42 minutes ago
ST. PAUL, Minn. (AP) — Claiming her historic place on the Republican ticket, vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin mocked Barack Obama’s experience and promise of change Wednesday night and pledged to help John McCain upend the Washington establishment.
You’d think they’d put skills like that to better use, no?
Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén