Slashdot Mirror
Romney Invokes Fair Use In Dispute With NBC Over Campaign Ad
An anonymous reader writes "Mitt Romney's campaign is airing an ad that is basically 30 seconds lifted from an NBC News broadcast and NBC is trying to stop them from using the ad. I found it interesting that the Romney campaign is invoking fair use to defend the ad. Romney adviser Eric Fehrnstrom said 'we believe it falls within fair use. We didn't take the entire broadcast; we just took the first 30 seconds.'"
Please post a link to the video. Thanks.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=_cuNkI7pzLM
I'm sure there are many more, but I didn't want to spend my entire Sunday listing them. The point is: they've been doing this for many, many years.
Those with Flash disabled wanting to download with the Firefox DownloadHelper extension to watch the mp4 in VLC may prefer this format of the URL:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_cuNkI7pzLM
They're required to give equal access to polis. Doesn't mean any ads they run are for free. Parties are supposed to buy airtime just like everybody else.
Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
Yes, if a broadcast network accepts advertising, they're required to sell slots to federal candidates at the lowest rate they offer to any other advertiser, and screen then based only on across-the-board neutral conditions (things like volume of the ad, presence of skimpy clothing, etc., if they apply the same rules to all ads).
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
Networks are not allowed to censor the content of any political ad.
For reference: upcoming abortion video to play during Super Bowl.
It doesn't hurt to be nice.
Although I agree with most of your points, in this case I have to disagree. Fair use comprises these four standards:
1. the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
2. the nature of the copyrighted work;
3. the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
4. the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
1- The ad is not using Brokaw's reputation to sell a candidate, rather (pun intended) it is just repeating some factual reporting he did about another candidate. And I'm pretty sure campaigns are NFP organizations. Nor does the use as far as I can tell change the tone or character of the original work.
2- The nature is news reporting, not some kind of creative work whose value might be diminished by others copying it.
3- This they might be in trouble for, as I doubt the 30 seconds versus a 30 minute program metric will apply. More likely, it will be how much of the story about Gingrich they played. If that was the whole piece, could be problematic. If it is the first 30 seconds of a 6 minute piece, it's probably OK.
4- Same as #2. Brokaw and NBC aren't diminished by simply repeating what they said on a newscast from 15 years ago. It's not like they are selling "Best of the Nighly News" DVD box sets.
I would strongly argue that cartoons of Mohammed to not impinge anybody's freedom of religion.
Freedom of religion doesn't force the world to conform to your views, it only allows you to have them.
I do have numbers; they were easy to get. Support was evenly mixed.
The original sponsor was R. There were 32 cosponsors (including the original sponsor), 16 D and 16 R.
It is true that more republicans withdrew support than dems: 6 R withdrew vs 2 D.
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h112-3261
The character of the use (as in the distinction between unmodified copying and preparation of derived works) is one of the factors which a judge weighs in determining whether something is fair use, but it's not the only one -- and by no means whatsoever are derived works guaranteed to be fair use. It's a fuzzy line, not a solid definition with clear boundaries.
Completely unmodified reuse, but of a short clip only, with zero diminution in commercial value, for educational purposes only, of a work of historic nature (yes, "nature of the copied work" is one of the factors)? Certainly, a reasonable judge could find it to be fair use.
Here's the actual Romney ad -- at least until it gets yanked... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TobmtxHQoZE
The Equal Opportunity clause of the FCC rules for Political *Candidates* is quite clear. Network television may not refuse a political ad from a candidate, nor can they "overcharge".
Support a few technologists in Washington.