[Infowarrior] - YouTube ‹ Censored?

[Richard Forno]

YouTube‹Censored?
http://www.redherring.com/Article.aspx?a=20872&hed=YouTube%e2%80%94Censored%
3f

Offending Paula Abdul clips are abruptly taken down.
January 22, 2007

By Sunshine Mugrabi

 

Following a week¹s worth of controversy about her behavior, Fox Broadcasting
ordered clips of Paula Abdul swaying, appearing intoxicated, and answering
questions on TV news programs in a nonsensical way taken down from YouTube
this week.

 

The move raises questions about where the line should be drawn between
copyright infringement and outright censorship. It also shows how quickly an
embarrassing piece of footage can become a viral sensation now that videos
can be easily uploaded to the web.

 

³What Fox runs the risk of is using copyright law as a form of censorship,²
said Van Baker, an analyst at Gartner Media Service.

 

Ms. Abdul, a judge on the wildly popular show American Idol on Fox, whose
parent is News Corp., has insisted she doesn¹t drink or take drugs. Last
week, she told Jay Leno on The Tonight Show that her inability to answer
questions during news interviews on several Fox affiliate stations was the
result of a mix-up in satellite feeds.


"Well, there was a mistake. Alabama was in my ear and so was Seattle at the
same time," said Ms. Abdul.

 

However, such damage control hasn¹t stopped bloggers, TV pundits, and others
from speculating that Ms. Abdul¹s behavior is veering out of control.
Meanwhile, the video of her appearance on the Seattle Fox affiliate
attracted many viewings on YouTube before being pulled. (A new version has
since been uploaded.)

 

YouTube did not immediately return a request for comment. Fox Broadcasting
declined to be interviewed for this article.

 

Any violation of what is known as the Digital Millennium Copyright Act
(DMCA) is grounds for removal of videos on YouTube, a division of Mountain
View, California-based search giant Google. However, there are also ³fair
use² laws that allow some content‹such as short clips or satirical
depictions of celebrities‹to be aired online.

 

Aggressive Takedowns

³Some people would say this is an overly aggressive use of the takedown
procedure [allowed in the DMCA],² said James Nguyen, an attorney who
specializes in entertainment and copyright law at the Los Angeles-based law
firm Foley & Lardner. ³They¹re within their rights Š but most of the major
TV networks don¹t ask you to take down their other clips.²

 

This is not the first time that the DMCA has been invoked to prevent
embarrassing or unpleasant videos from being shown online. Mr. Nguyen also
cited a recent incident in which a video of Second Life avatar Anshe Chung
being a victim of a ³griefing attack² was pulled from YouTube following a
request.

 

In that situation, the avatar of Ms. Chung‹whose real life name is Ailin
Graef‹was bombarded with pornographic imagery while being interviewed in
CNET¹s Second Life Theater. Originally, Ms. Graef argued that this was a
copyright violation because she owns her avatar, according to a CNET
News.com article on the subject. The video was unavailable on YouTube for a
period of time, but was later restored.

 
Another unintended consequence of this move could be that it extends the
kerfuffle over Ms. Abdul¹s behavior rather than quelling it. Mr. Nguyen
called this the ³Barbra Streisand effect,² referring to that actress¹s
insistence that paparazzi photos of her mansion not be used. Perhaps it will
become known as the Idol effect.