[A2k] Slashdot | YouTube Yanks Free Tibet Video After IOC Pressure

[Gwen Hinze]

FYI here's out thoughts on using improper copyright claims to silence
online political expression:
<http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/08/olympic-committee-takedown-
shows-risks-ill-timed-t>
Olympic Committee Takedown Shows Risks of Ill-Timed Take-Downs

Deeplink by Corynne McSherry
It=92s never OK to use improper copyright claims to take down
legitimate, non-infringing content, but such takedowns are
particularly galling when they are timed to directly interfere with
the impact of a political message. That=92s what happened this week to
the Free Tibet movement, and the situation illustrates the risks of a
=93shoot first, ask questions later=94 approach to copyright policing.

The 2008 Olympic Games have been marked by controversy relating to
the human rights record of its host, China. Two days ago, the
International Olympic Committee (IOC) added to the debate by
demanding that YouTube block a video of a protest by Students For A
Free Tibet. The demand appeared to be based on a bogus copyright
infringement claim: the protesters had projected various images on
the wall of the Chinese consulate in New York, and the video of the
protest was titled =93Beijing Olympics Opening Ceremony.=94

This is not the first time the IOC has used an intellectual property
claim to stomp on speech. Nor is it the first time a content owner
has caught a dolphin in its DMCA takedown driftnet. But the political
and time-sensitive nature of this video made this =93mistake=94
particularly appalling.

The blogosphere reacted with outrage, and rightly so. EFF made some
inquiries of our own (we understand YouTube did so as well) and the
IOC ultimately withdrew the complaint. That is a good thing. But this
takedown highlights a larger problem. It takes just seconds to have a
video taken down, but over two weeks to get a video put back up. And
YouTube=92s hair-trigger content verification program has made takedown
even easier and faster=97content owners can rapidly create lists of
videos for takedown, and then send a takedown demand with a couple of
additional clicks.

If IOC had not withdrawn its notice, here=92s what would have happened
in this case: the protesters=92 DMCA counter-notice would have started
the clock running and, if the IOC didn=92t sue within 10-14 days=97which
of course it wouldn=92t have, because it didn=92t have a claim=97the video
would be restored. But that wouldn=92t happen until after the 2008
games were over, and the delay would inevitably lessen the video=92s
political impact. As political organizers of all stripes know, timing
is everything.

The DMCA was not designed to help content owners silence legitimate
speech, even temporarily. But that=92s exactly what happens when
content owners don=92t bother to form a good faith belief that the
material they target is actually infringing. Shame on the IOC for
failing to meet its minimal obligations.



--

On Aug 12, 2008, at 8:53 AM, James Love wrote:

> http://news.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=3D08/08/12/1127220
>
> "The International Olympic Committee filed a copyright infringement
> claim yesterday against YouTube for hosting video of a Free Tibet
> protest at the Chinese Consulate in Manhattan Thursday night. The
> video
> depicts demonstrators conducting a candlelight vigil and projecting a
> protest video onto the consulate building; the projection features
> recent footage of Tibetan monks being arrested and riffs on the
> Olympic
> logo of the five interlocking rings, turning them into handcuffs.
> YouTube dutifully yanked the video. . .
>
> _______________________________________________
> A2k mailing list
> A2k@lists.essential.org
> http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/a2k

--
Gwen Hinze
International Policy Director
Electronic Frontier Foundation
email:gwen@eff.org
Tel.: + 1 415 436 9333 x110

Please support EFF - Working to protect your digital rights and
freedom of speech since 1990