[openhouseproject] interesting c-span copyright discussion
Matt Stoller
Matt
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/2/15/144955/943
Time to end C-SPAN's monopoly
by kos
Thu Feb 15, 2007 at 03:29:24 PM EST
Pelosi began a blog, The Gavel, which features a great deal of YouTube clips of chamber proceedings.
Crazy Republicans, hating the fact that more people can use these clips to get a look at what's happening in Congress, are crying foul. This press release was blasted to the media a short while ago:
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: Brad Dayspring (202) 225-3484
February 15, 2007
Speaker Pelosi's New Blog Violates C-SPAN Copyright/Trademark of House Proceedings
Will the Speaker bring the gavel down on "the Gavel Blog?"As you may have heard, Speaker Nancy Pelosi launched a new blog entitled "The Gavel." Though we applaud the Speaker's effort to adapt to new technology, the blog violated copyright and trademark law on the very first day.
Not once, not twice, but 16 times?
As of noon today, the Speaker had posted at least 16 videos that are copyrighted
C-SPAN material from the House floor. The RSC spoke with C-SPAN today, who confirmed that these videos violate C-SPAN copyright/trademark of the House proceedings.Using C-Span for partisan purposes?
In addition to using pirated material, Speaker Pelosi also has used the pirated C-SPAN footage for partisan purposes. The collection of C-SPAN footage used in her "first official blog" is an example and the other pirated C-SPAN trademarked material shows Democrat after Democrat offering their views of the non-binding Democrat resolution on the reinforcement and realignment of American troops in Iraq.
So, what does Speaker Pelosi believe the role of C-SPAN is?
"One of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's first decisions was to deny a request by C-SPAN to be permitted to cover the House floor proceedings with its own cameras. Last month, Pelosi sent a letter to C-SPAN Chairman and CEO Brian Lamb saying she believed "the dignity and decorum" of the House "are best preserved by maintaining the current system of televised proceedings."
(CQ Weekly, January 15, 2007, Page 169)
Is the dignity and decorum of the House preserved by pirating copyrighted C-SPAN material for political purposes?
If not, will the Speaker bring the gavel down on "the Gavel Blog?"
###
Brad Dayspring
Communications Director
Republican Study Committee
(202) 225-3484
AIM: BDDACE2
www.house.gov/hensarling/rsc
This is idiotic on so many levels, though we shouldn't expect anything less from the morons at the Republican Study Committee (the far right wing of the party). First of all, the clips are clearly Fair Use. Second of all, why is the RSC so afraid of further dissemination of chamber proceedings? They shouldn't just be applauding Pelosi's use of new technologies like YouTube to deliver governmental proceedings to more people, but they should be adopting the tactics themselves (Fox News can't cover all their crazy rants). Third of all, if opposing the surge in Iraq is "partisan", it looks like 60 percent or so of the country is now Democratic. They may want to rethink that framing.
But aside from the wingnut idiocy, it does highlight something that Pelosi can fix -- the ridiculous notion that our government's proceedings can't be spread far and wide without running afoul of copyright laws.
That's got to end, and she can do so.
Either force chamber proceedings taped by C-SPAN to be public domain, or kick them out of the chamber and install government-owned cameras to cover the proceedings. By being public domain, C-SPAN could still air them on their channels without holding an undemocratic stranglehold on the information.
David All
Obviously, the rhetoric on both sides is a little over-the-top. But, that’s a different discussion.
Can someone ask Kos to remove the contact information (AIM) for the press secretary?
RSC has sent out this release:
UPDATE: C-SPAN Copyright/Trademark of House Proceedings
Earlier
today, the Republican Study Committee (RSC) released a document about the
Speaker's use of copyrighted/trademarked C-SPAN material on a Congressional
website. The document was based upon a conversation that RSC staff had
with Barry Katz, the Manager of C-SPAN Video Assets (and the employee
identified as being directly responsible for answering questions to Congress
about the use of C-SPAN material).
Bruce Collins, the Corporate
Vice President and General Counsel of
C-SPAN, called post release and said that the information provided by the
C-SPAN employee to the RSC was incorrect.
Given this contradictory information, the RSC wanted to be the first to set the
record straight and withdraw the information included in the release.
###
________________________________________
David All
The David All Group
409 6th St NE
Washington, DC 20002
________________________________________
Check out our CNN debut:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=efp2hxAOlBA&feature=PlayList&p=338C76BAA7445699&index=1
________________________________________
Confidential, unpublished property of The
David All Group, LLC.
Do not duplicate or distribute.
Use and distribution limited solely to authorized personnel.
©Copyright 2007 The David All Group, LLC
aphid
employees, and have been for 18+ years. The cameras are remote
controlled by gov't employees 3 floors down. The proceeding footage
is mixed and sent along with a closed caption stream (provided by the
National Captions Institute) to the press gallery. There, C-SPAN and
every other credentialed media organization has access to the feed.
C-SPAN is simply the only one to air them in their entirety.
To clarify: C-SPAN owns no copyright on floor proceedings because
government works are not subject to copyright.
Committee hearings are a whole different story because of more
relaxed rules that allow credentialed broadcasters to bring their own
cameras into the committee hearing rooms. For more on this, see:
http://metavid.ucsc.edu/blog/2006/12/26/congressional-camera-
controversy.
peace,
a