Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Discovery Threatens Fan Site It Also Promotes

Posted by Soulskill on from the in-the-case-of-right-hand-v.-left-hand dept.

An anonymous reader writes "It seems the lawyers and the marketing people at The Discovery Channel don't talk to each other much. The marketing people behind the show 'The Deadliest Catch' have been supporting a fan community called DeadliestCatchTV.com for a while now. They've regularly sent the site info, free clips, previews and information about the show. On top of that, they link to it from the official site, including it in a list of 'fan sites' as a part of the 'Discovery Network,' and even will frame the site with the show's own dashboard for those who click through. Discovery's lawyers, on the other hand, have threatened to sue the site out of existence and have demanded that the owner hand over the domain name — which he is going to do, because he doesn't have the money to fight this. While there may be a trademark issue (which could be easily resolved with a free license), the lawyers are also making the ridiculous argument that posting the videos Discovery sent him to post are copyright infringement. They're also claiming that embedding the official Discovery Channel YouTube videos (which have embedding turned on) is copyright infringement. This is exactly how you turn lots of fans into people who hate your entire channel."

13 of 287 comments (clear)

  1. That show has went downhill anyway by elrous0 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The whole last season was a tour de force of human tragedy, which Discovery happily played to/exploited (even adding in a melodramatic classical score this time around). Aside from the hundred or so tribute episodes to Phil Harris, it seemed like everyone in the fleet was intentionally playing to the cameras this time out even more than usual (with Edgar threatening to leave and fighting with Sig, Jake Harris's sudden "addiction" problems, etc.). Granted, the show will never be as good as the first season (before Alaska changed the rules and made the crab fishing a lot less exciting/dangerous), but this one seemed like a swan song more than any other season in the past.

    Everyone involved in the show has always been about the money. The Hanson brothers in particular will do about anything for a buck, and have been known for trading on their fame by lending their names to some pretty sleazy ventures. But this season the cynicism (in particular the playing to the cameras) really showed in some nasty ways. This time the captains even whored themselves for Geico commercials that ran during the show. And the producers' constant cutaways to a tired-looking Phil Harris was particularly shameless (they all but put up "He's about to die" subtitles).

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    1. Re:That show has went downhill anyway by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 5, Funny

      Duh.

      What else do you do during Shark Week.

      --
      Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
    2. Re:That show has went downhill anyway by dkh2 · · Score: 5, Funny

      ROFL. The dyslexic part of my brain took over for a second there and I read that as

      The novelization of the Deadliest Crotch?

      --
      My office has been taken over by iPod people.
  2. Bureaucracy at its finest by Local+ID10T · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Each department is doing it's job well. Upper management is responsible for overseeing and coordinating departments into a cohesive whole.

    Guess who failed?

    --
    "You want to know how to help your kids? Leave them the fuck alone." -George Carlin
    1. Re:Bureaucracy at its finest by jvkjvk · · Score: 5, Insightful

      have to wonder, did the Marketing Department have the right to "give away" copyrighted material for use on a non-Discovery Channel site? I bet they didn't.

      That doesn't matter. The fact is that they are the same company, and the Company Iteslf does indeed have this right. And they exercised it. Now, it would be an entirely different matter if the company in question did not hold the copyright, but they do!

      In hindsight, the fan site owner should have verified the legality of the clips/info he was sent - it sounds dumb, but ultimately he is responsible for the information on his site

      I am sick and tired of people promoting corporate irresponsibility while at the same time screaming about personal responsibility and your post certainly smacks of that. The only reason to jerrymander a company like that is to avoid responsibility and I think they do a plenty good job of that already. In fact, the premise of your post basically signifies how complete the brainwashing has been.

      The fact is that the corporation is responsible for disseminating this to that site. NO, not, oh the "Marketing" department or any other sub group. The corporation itself. If they hold the copyrights then it is certainly legal to give out clips, knowing that they will be futher distributed, and they did.

      Regards.

  3. Contact the EFF by The_mad_linguist · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Isn't this the type of thing that the EFF is for?

    Seems like setting a precedent for "if you send somebody your copyrighted material, you can't be sued" would be useful, especially with respect to RIAA honeypots.

  4. Before handing over the domain by gilesjuk · · Score: 5, Funny

    Can't he just fill the site with porn and get the site blocked by most internet nanny software?

  5. Look, ma! No legs! by Renraku · · Score: 5, Informative

    A judge with a brain won't let it fly that one side of the company supports the site and the other side of the company wants to sue it out of existence. They SHOULD find that once Discovery started 'supporting' the website, they gave it 'permission' for it to exist and didn't have a problem with it until they decided to sue. A company, in the eyes of the law, is one entity.

    --
    Job? I don't have time to get a job! Who will sit around and bitch about being broke and unemployed then?
    1. Re:Look, ma! No legs! by hibiki_r · · Score: 5, Insightful

      For that to matter you'd need a court system in which facing a copyright infringement suit without spending tens of thousands in legal representation is doable.

    2. Re:Look, ma! No legs! by DutchSter · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Too bad it will never see a judge because the owner of the site in question decided to acquiesce Discovery's C&D rather than go to court. I'm sure there will be posters who will bemoan the fact that he's "taking it in the ass" or "abandoning the principle of the matter" or other such nonsense. I never begrudge anybody for making a legal decision based on their own situation. Lawyers aren't cheap, and at the end of the day I can't think of any hobbies I have where I'd be willing to front thousands of dollars I don't have and years of stress just to make a point when the end result will be either:
      1. I win, and now have the right to continue to maintain a fan site for a show that's either now out of existence (by the time the case is concluded) or that I absolutely despise after what the company put me through.
      2. I lose, and go bankrupt.

      I think the owner is doing the best thing he can here - he's giving in without spending a cent but he's generating a lot of negative publicity in the process.

      As an aside someone should report all of Discovery's Youtube videos because they are not adhering to Youtube's terms of use.

  6. This is just early promo by oldspewey · · Score: 5, Funny

    Relax folks, this is all just promotional groundwork for Discovery Channel's next big reality TV show, in which a few thousand lawyers will be released onto a remote, arctic island with no survival gear beyond an iPhone, some designer shoes, and a briefcase full of legal documents and moist towelettes.

    The project has tentatively been titled "If you live, you get to sue our asses for putting you there."

    --
    If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?
  7. It doesn't cost much to defend yourself. by tomhudson · · Score: 5, Interesting

    And contrary to popular belief, you don't need a lawyer to be successful at it (remember, I've sued the government - and won).

    This is just another case of "lawyers don't know their job" - the majority of lawyers are incompetent. Law school doesn't even teach them how to handle a court case (read any big-name lawyer's bio and they'll tell you as much).

    Find a similar motion on the net, admit you own the aforenamed website and deny every other claim. Then the ball is in their court. They can do NOTHING without your cooperation. They will lose the domain name resolution process because you can show that the past history - otherwise they'd have used it

    And they'll lose in court. And have to pay.

    Let them sue. You'll enjoy making (greater) fools of them.

  8. Discovery Channel by DaMattster · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The Discovery Channel has really disappointed me. It used to be that they put out good, educational television shows. Now, they've added all kinds of extra drama to shows to supposedly make them more interesting but in reality they have a dumbed down appearance. Now, they also have gone the reality tv route. I fail to see how Deadliest Catch really teaches us anything - it is really only drama. I remember when TLC and DSC really had good educational shows that could captivate thinking audiences without all the bleeped out cursing and melodramatic garbage. It would seem that the last of the truly informative and educational shows are on PBS.