Let's Go Crazy Over the DMCA

First, watch this video:

Now, ask yourself, did that just make you want to buy music from Prince less? Specifically, the track "Let's Go Crazy?"

That's just one of the peripheral questions afoot in a legal case between a mom who took a video of her kid and innocently posted it on YouTube and Universal Music. And, no, the big label isn't suing the mom. It's the other way around. Yesterday, a judge considered Universal's attempt to get the potentially precedent setting case dismissed.

The EFF is driving the case for Stephanie Lenz and claims that Universal shouldn't have forced YouTube to takedown the video on copyright claims because the use of the Prince track was protected by fair use. EFF says:

"The lawsuit asks for a declaratory judgment that Lenz's home video does not infringe any Universal copyright, as well as damages and injunctive relief restraining Universal from bringing further copyright claims in connection with the video."

Wired's Threat Level blog notes:

Universal did not challenge Stephanie Lenz's assertion that the video was a "fair use" of Prince's song. After being taken down for six weeks, the video went back online last year, having now generated about half a million hits.

The courthouse dispute on Friday centered on a rarely used clause in the DMCA -- originally approved by Congress in 1998 -- allowing victims of meritless takedown notices to seek damages in a bid to deter such notices and breaches of First Amendment speech.

Universal argues that they or other copyright holders are not liable for damages when somebody asserts fair use to reverse a takedown notice.

Comments

[turultan]

It is clear Universal has a right to raise a lawsuit against Mrs. Stephanie Lenz.
It is completly within the right of the company to ask Mrs. Lenz to remove the video.
Universal clearly represents Mr. Prince and his monetary interests, and the company is contractually obligated to threatan Mrs. Lenz. The video was not about the toddler, but about promoting a music clip, that was not her property. The music is the property of Mr. Prince, who could sue Universal if the company did not take action against Mrs. Lenz and the toddler (when he turns 18). The other toddlers appearing in the video are assisting in the making of the video - clearly they could be implicated in the suit - and increases the possibility of the suit being financially viable. One must not take all of this lightly. Law is law and it is must be enforced. It is the foundation of society - or else there will be chaos.

JUST JOKING!
(you thought I was serious? :)))

It's incredible what bull shit you can come up with when you try to put yourself in the shoes of an attorney. To think like them is just plain crazy. It's all intellectual mode without heart. So here is what I think (and feel). Read below.

WHAT IS HAPPENING

The recording industry is in self-destruct mode! Good for them, good for us. It's all about committing business model suicide. Let them do it. Let them sue everybody, and when there is nobody left to sue, they can look around and survey the damage. By then the rest of use will still be listening to our favorite music, as most normal musicians and actors and writers and artists, etc.. , will be living in some other business model we are all willing to support. So I say to Universal and the rest of them: KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK!

With regards from Budapest.

(I wrote this last part after seeing the video and before writting the legal stuff at top).

turultan at gmail dot com

[MBT Shoes]

It's so nice to have you do all of the research for us. It makes our decision making so much easier!! Thanks.