|
July 21, 2010
In protest, I quote your words!
I just learned that Clayton Cramer has been sued for quoting from and commenting on a newspaper article headlined "Slain store clerk, 77, mourned." I found the article here and as I am assuming it is the same article, I will exercise my Fair Use rights under the First Amendment, and reprint it here simply as a comment on the slimy tactics of those who would use the copyright laws in such an underhanded manner. What follow are the magic words of a news story that the authors are claiming belong exclusively to them, and which they say I cannot quote! Quote them I will, not because I am especially interested in the story, but because I believe our freedom depends on it: [Text and discussion follow as an extended entry, for the convenience of interested readers, as well as those who don't want to scroll past a long passage -- the merits of which I am not interested per se.] He was known as "Bill" to his friends, but to his wife, he was always "Chilly Willy."I have reprinted the entire article verbatim simply as an act of protest against the tactics of the copyright pigs who have sued Clayton Cramer. Yes, they have. Complaint here in pdf. Sure, I could pause after each paragraph, and add some commentary, but why I should have to bother? Especially when I am only reprinting this out of principle. This is free speech. I can quote anyone I want. So go ahead and sue me, assholes! Once again, these people are using the copyright laws to defeat free speech. The best defense is a good offense. MORE: I should point out that I did not bother reading the above story in full, because the merits of what it says are not the point. My sole purpose here is to protest the idea that honestly quoting the properly-attributed words of someone else might ever be forbidden in a supposedly free country. This utterly flies in the face of the First Amendment. AND MORE: Clayton Cramer points out that the entity filing the lawsuits has sued 69 people, in such a frivolous manner that it really ought to be considered abuse of process: It turns out that this law firm has filed DOZENS of lawsuits, overwhelmingly against blogs and similar small scale operations across the country. By filing in federal court, where the diversity suit requirement is a $75,000 controversy, they are effectively threatening little people without resources with bankruptcy--in the hopes of getting a settlement of a few thousand dollars. It appears that this is the Review-Journal's new business model, since they haven't figured out the newspaper thing very well. Some interesting materials in the Las Vegas Sun about this atUh, yes it obviously is. I also think they are acting in conspiracy to deprive citizens of their constitutionally protected right of free speech. UPDATE: I can't think of a better motivation, because it doesn't seem to be money. Glenn also links Ron Coleman's interview about copyright law, which touches on the subject of fair use. While the idea that I might not be allowed to quote something accurately -- with proper attribution -- is bad enough, what really fries me is not being able to quote something in protest. That's like Michael Savage claiming it was copyright infringement for his critics to quote him! Or Che Guevara's family maintaining that there is no right to ridicule the famous Korda image because they hold the "copyright" to it. Sorry, but I think the reproduction of text and images for purposes of ridicule and protest is fully protected by the First Amendment, and if copyright law says otherwise, then the law is an ass! I hope the "Righthaven" people get their comeuppance. posted by Eric on 07.21.10 at 11:09 PM
Comments
Let me add that the RJ seems to be a failing paper. Expect more of this as the paper business goes down. M. Simon · July 22, 2010 10:04 AM Streisand could not be reached for comment. Anon · July 22, 2010 05:00 PM Post a comment
You may use basic HTML for formatting.
|
|
July 2010
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
July 2010
June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 AB 1634 MBAPBSAAGOP Skepticism See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
Videophobia. Brain disease? Or rational fear?
How many more growing menaces do we need? Like A Rolling Stone - Raw Obama Turns On Key Voting Bloc Burglar? Or underground bartender? It's The Carbon Footprint What California most needs right now -- a defrocking campaign! In protest, I quote your words! Where's The Party, Man? The Problem Is Self Induced
Links
Site Credits
|
|
I have to applaud your courage. And thank you for standing up to the bullies.