SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
So a professional critic is the last person you’d expect to use copyright to try to squelch someone else’s fair use rights. But that’s exactly what happened last month, when James Grubb, a journalist from VentureBeat, used the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) to censor a critic just for highlighting a few paragraphs of his work on Twitter.
On May 2, VentureBeat’s gaming section published Grubb’s review of a forthcoming video game, Red Dead Redemption II. His opinions on the game weren’t shared by everyone, which is no surprise. Another video game critic, Jake Magee, took a shot at Grubb on Twitter, suggesting he only liked games that contained “progressive political posturing.” Alongside that criticism, Magee posted screenshots from Grubb’s review—his goal was to show his followers the text that, as he saw it, supported his point.
That was apparently too much for Grubb, who promptly sent a DMCA notice to Twitter over the matter. Twitter soon slapped black boxes over the images that Magee had posted. It wasn't until several days later that the boxes were removed and the post was restored.
What justified this copyright takedown, in Grubbs’ view? First, Grubb said that Magee posted his entire article in a screenshot, a post which, in his view, “crosses the line of acceptable fair use.” Grubb also suggested that he wouldn’t have taken legal action if Magee had simply included a link to his article.
[...] Journalists and critics should know the basics of fair use. It’s a right that their work relies on. At the very least, before a professional critic uses the DMCA to have another critic’s material removed, a double-take is needed on fair use.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 10 2018, @10:25AM (1 child)
Which the filer of the DMCA takedown later admitted was an incorrect assertion. Apparently at the time they were too blinded by indignant rage to notice that 30% is not the same as 100%. Either that, or they believe that hyperbole is as good as fact in the eyes of the law.
As an aside, that the article was a review of the game is also an incorrect assertion. I read it, and it's an opinion-piece on what the author thinks the narrative of the game "should" be like. At no point was there even any hint that the author had actually played the game.
(Score: 2) by Fluffeh on Tuesday June 12 2018, @03:50AM
Isn't there things in the DCMA where making false accusations is actually opening them up to punitive punishments? Something about them being made in bad faith and the like? It would seem that he would have little leg left to stand on if it were counter-sued and taken to court no? I always wonder this about the "million URL list" type things that Google and so on get - but the argument there might well be "Sorry, that one URL just got caught up in the rest of the LEGITIMATE list, your Honor...." But this seems to be a single "Take this down!" case which would be much harder to argue if clearly in the wrong - which it seems to be?