Page 2 of 2   <      

Standing Up To Takedown Notices

Discussion Policy
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.

Copyright exemptions for fair use generally depend on whether the allegedly infringing product is "transformative" in nature -- that is, using copyrighted material for some new, creative purpose is considered okay. One such purpose, protected by law, is comment or parody. Still, some say accusations of copyright violations are sometimes just attempts to squash criticism.

Michelle Malkin, a popular blogger, said this was the case when her video criticizing rapper Akon for misogyny was removed from YouTube after a complaint from Universal Music Group.

"It was entirely obvious that trying to wipe off criticism from YouTube is what their claim was all about," Malkin said. She sent YouTube a counternotice; Universal Music backed down, and the video went back up.

Universal Music did not return calls seeking comment on Malkin's video.

A takedown notice issued for a video debunking Uri Geller, a self-described paranormalist, has also provoked censorship claims.

Geller, who has an NBC series beginning next week, became a household name in the 1970s for saying he could bend spoons with his mind. The YouTube video in question features several seconds of footage that Geller's brother-in-law filmed and that Geller says was used without permission. He ardently disputes that his copyright claim is meant to squelch free speech.

"I've been controversial all my life, and more controversy means more publicity for me," Geller said. "They can say whatever they want to about me . . . I just want them to edit out the part of the clip that they stole from us."

Other alleged infringers claim that copyright holders abuse the law because of overly zealous creative control.

Ric Silver, the choreographer of the Electric Slide, says he spent three years contacting 17,000 Web sites about what he says is their "incorrect portrayal" of the famous line dance. Silver also told YouTube to take down a number of videos showing the dance, including one clip of a concert filmed by Kyle Machulis.

Machulis sued Silver for copyright abuse. As part of the settlement, Silver agreed to allow the video to be reposted with a tagline crediting him for the choreography, but he now says he's waiting for paperwork from the Library of Congress that will allow him to open new lawsuits over clips like Machulis's.

"I can't go to every wedding and bar mitzvah in the country, so this is all I can do to make sure people learn it right," Silver said.

YouTube isn't the only hosting site on which copyright law is sometimes allegedly abused. EBay has been the setting of many of these infringement claims, too, but generally over the "first sale doctrine" -- a portion of copyright law regarding legal resale of licensed goods -- rather than fair use.

Take, for example, Karen Dudnikov and Michael Meadors. They run a mom-and-pop eBay store out of rural Colorado, 10 miles from the nearest power line. When they opened, Dudnikov began sewing pillows, potholders and other items out of fabric with licensed images of cartoon characters and other trademarked or copyrighted images. Soon they found their auctions were being taken down because of infringement allegations.

To date they've taken 15 corporate heavyweights to court -- including Disney Enterprises, Major League Baseball and M&M/Mars -- and gotten them all to back down. Facing off against these legal powerhouses, they represented themselves.

"They think we are just some country bumpkins they can push around," Meadors said. "This is our livelihood, and we stick up for ourselves."

Embroiled in their 16th lawsuit over a Betty Boop fabric, the couple has accepted outside legal help for the first time, from Public Citizen. On the fabric, the cartoon character is wearing a dress that closely resembles a design by artist and fashion designer Ert¿. SevenArts, the British company that owns the rights to Ert¿'s designs, told eBay through a U.S. associate to remove the auction for copyright violation.

"One of the most famous Ert¿ designs has been used as a costume on this fabric, and we had to defend it," said Ray Perman, managing director of SevenArts. "We have contracts with various licensees, and we are obliged under the terms of those contracts to do this."


<       2


© 2007 The Washington Post Company