Since I did not post the video I cannot protest for counter-infringement.
On this video, veteran TV weather presenter Peter Byrne had a "rant" about what he considered lurid journalistic exaggerations regarding the threat posed by Tropical Cyclone Ului. Unfortunately, the lurid exaggerations eventually proved to be true - TC Ului struck the Australian coast a week later. In hindsight, the video does not show WIN News at its best, and at worst might fuel thoughts of litigation from those lulled into a sense of complacency. WIN News can hardly claim concerns about copyright infringement when they have not tried to have many other videos of their newscasts similarly removed. WIN News' representations to YouTube about copyright infringement are thus likely false.
By acceding to WIN News request, YouTube is practicing a form of censorship! Erase the immediate past before anyone notices!
The bastards!
[UPDATE]: Meanwhile, I get no love from the Folks Who Keep An Eye On YouTube:
Newboss:
If WIN filed under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, YouTube was obliged to remove the video -- the footage does belong to WIN, so there's a prima facie case to answer, and the video must be disabled until either WIN retracts their claim, or a court finds in favour of the uploader. Whether WIN had ulterior motives in filing the complaint is irrelevant: they had a right to file the complaint, it actually is copyright infringement unless and until it is found to be "fair use" or "fair dealing", and YouTube would have been breaking the law if they hadn't disabled it.
The uploader is free to defend himself by filing a counter claim if he so wishes.
Videodave2:
>WIN News can hardly claim concerns about copyright infringement when they have not tried to have many other videos of their newscasts similarly removed.
Totally irrelevant, if it is theirs, they get to decide.
No comments:
Post a Comment