Lawgnome

I recently watched part 3 of Frontline’s report called News War on PBS and it was incredibly interesting and relevant to our study of censorship issues. (Here is the link to the intro of that episode, http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/newswar/view/16.html The entire series can be seen on-line at pbs.org).

Advertiser Control:

One point of part  3 of the series was that when television news began it did not exist to make the government or advertisers happy but to tell a story that sometimes wasn’t popular. When the networks realized that the news had the potential to draw serious ad dollars everything seemed to change. Many of the magazine news shows have changed their standards to appeal to advertiser’s demographic. Shows such as Dateline, 20/20, and Primetime have changed in character so much that they are barely recognizable and the content is a blatant attempt to snare CSI-type viewers. An executive from ABC was asked if they had lowered the standards of news shows to satisfy advertisers and he answered no. Putting a classic television spin on things, he said that they have not lowered their standards, they have broadened them to appeal to more people. While his diction and syntax were careful not to give away the truth, his eyes told a different story. We are for sale.

Government Control:

Many of the journalists interviewed spoke of a White House that puts constraint what questions can be asked by the press. If a journalist tells a story the White House doesn’t want told, the President has said that they have “blood on their hands”. In undergrad, I took a course called The History of the Holocaust and I learned about the utilization of yellow journalism (propaganda or biased opinions disguised as facts) by Adolf Hitler. He began to publish this yellow journalism as a way to manipulate people’s opinions under the guise of legitimate news. I am not comparing Bush to Hitler because that would be crazy even for an absolute liberal like me, but I am saying that when you attempt to control the freedom of the media and the public’s access to relevant news dangerous results are possible. Like Fox News.

I am not against the networks making money but when it comes to our news it needs to be absolutely fearless and not dummied down, or sold, or controlled by intimidating methods of the government. The remedy Frontline suggested for people who want news that is unbridled can be found in citizen media. Citizen media has turned ordinary people with a blog and a camera into journalists. The trend is criticized by journalism purists like Nicholas Lemann who writes for The New Yorker. He compares citizen journalists to the pamphleteering of Colonial times only faster moving. http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/060807fa_fact1. Lemann does not completely discredit this new form of journalism he also does not think it will replace traditional journalism anytime soon.

I know one thing is certain, we are at a crossroad between the way we grew up getting information and a quest for something more honest and accessible.

This post was a class assignment and the reading materials can be found at Professor Randazza’s site. See the link on the right… 

While I agree with one of my classmates that a celebrity’s name is an important marketing tool often times pursuing a suit against a cyber squatter can actually draw attention to their site. A few years after PETA v. Doughney, PETA decided to employ the same method used by Doughney when they launched a site called ringlingbrothers.com to draw attention to alleged animal cruelty in the circus. (See http://unquietmind.com/petaparody.html ). PETA was quoted in one article as being gleeful at all the publicity caused by Ringling’s complaints about the site in the media. (See http://www.techweb.com/wire/story/TWB19980424S0023). Professor Randazza stated in class that as attorneys one of out jobs is to reign in clients who are fighting on a principle that, in the end may not matter.
Take the Julia Roberts case where Russell Boyd is a creep who snatches up domain names and tries to sell them on ebay. Had Julia Roberts not taken Boyd to court what would have become of the domain name? 1) It may have been bought by someone who hates Julia Roberts and wants to critique her or malign her good name 2) it could have been turned into an unauthorized fan site or 3) Roberts could have had a representative buy it for the asking price. Though the law was on her side there could have been solutions that could have occurred out of court and would have brought less attention to the celebrity. It is possible that these types of cases are brought to send a message that certain celebrities are off limits.
I also came across an interesting article about cyber squatting double standards ( http://unquietmind.com/cybersquat.html) about how companies are launching preemptive strikes by snatching up domain names. For instance Febreze bought febrezekillspets.com. OK…what do they know that we don’t?

Who says that going to church is boring? Maybe theyshould call it Ass Wednesday. The priests would not mind…I hope the JC in the back of the classroom doesn’t strike me down for this post:

Explicit Recordings Disrupt Mass

AP

SANTA FE, N.M. (Feb. 22) – Three CD players hidden under a cathedral’s pews blared sexually explicit language in the middle of an Ash Wednesday Mass, leading a bomb squad to detonate two of the devices.

Authorities determined the music players were not dangerous and kept the third one to check it for clues, said police Capt. Gary Johnson.

The CD players, duct-taped to the bottoms of the pews, were set to turn on in the middle of noon Mass on Wednesday at the Roman Catholic Cathedral Basilica of St. Francis of Assisi.

The recordings, made on store-bought blank discs, featured people using foul language and “pornographic messages,” Johnson said. He would not elaborate because of the ongoing investigation.

Church staff members took the CD players to the basement and called police, who sent the bomb squad, Johnson said.

The bomb squad blew up two players outside and kept the third one to test for fingerprints or DNA and trace its components, he said.

Ash Wednesday is the first day of Lent, which marks a 40-day period of fasting and penitence before Easter.

I know we are beyond parody in our class studies but I thought this was funny. The March of the Penguins has been parodied in the animated Farce of the Penguins. The official movie site is http://www.farceofthepenguins.com/ . Click on “Posse” to see who does the voice overs and there is a feature where you can make your own trailer.

All assignments referenced on this blog can be found in full at  http://entlaw.wordpress.com/ and are part of the Entertainment Law class at Barry University School of Law in Orlando, Florida.

Mashups. What do you think? How do they fit with the rules we have learned so far?

My response:

 I have to agree with Stephen. Mash ups are not created by an “artist” in my opinion. Maybe I should change my view of what an artist is. To have the technology and time to take two different songs and change various aspects of them to create a new work is innovative but not creative. The Beyonce mash up is better than the original because the original seems boring now. The mash up may effect the market for the original work under prong four of the fair use test because the mash up is edgier than the original and possible may confuse a purchaser. Beyonce created her songs to sound a certain way and this bastardizes her original intentions. I enjoyed the mash ups but I still do not feel they are fair use of the original.

I understand the concept of “promote the progress” but what is progress? Is it coming out with something new even if is the result of the efforts of two other artists? I think many people look at music in a different way than they do other forms of artistic expression. This could be because it is audible and not a visual medium. People would be outraged if I were to cut a Georgia O’Keeffe down the middle and then did the same with a Renoir, taped them together and called it my own “original art work”. Different from the original, to be sure, but is it art? Is it progress or is it the lack of an original idea? Shana Carson

Take a look at the following pages:

1. Crappy Childrens’ Art Work 1
2. Crappy Childrens’ Art Work 2

Spot the obvious issues and post a blog comment (on this particular post) articulating the issues, any possible infringement factors, and any possible defenses. You don’t need to write a full on paper on this. I am looking for no more than 750 words, and you can probably get it done in less than that.

My Response:

Disclaimer: Never took copyrights…That being said the works of “art” by the children are a fixed tangible medium, and able to be perceived by others(most likely their doting parents), and is original. The work is copyrightable under these guidelines so I would next look at whether there is fair use of these works. 1) The use does not appear to be commercial because the website lacks ads and is opinion/informational in nature. 2) the nature of the work is original art. 3) The whole of the work was used. 4) the use on the site of the works has no effect on their value, nor does it damage the potential marketability of the work in the future. Under the fair use factors the use of the work would be fair. If I was attorney for Maddox I would assert a defense that the purpose of the use of the work is for criticism and commentary on the art.
Shana Carson

The main idea of my blog will be to discuss topics from my Entertainment Law class. But I will also “critique” celebrity riders, because let’s face it they are funny as hell. That being said, Elton John evidently likes his nuts unsalted…I may also invite some of my friends who are artists to post how they feel about their work with regards to copyrights.

 The portions of my blog that “critiques” riders is meant to be http://maddox.xmission.com/ (Crappy Children’s Art) meets http://www.thesmokinggun.com/backstagetour/index.html The Smoking Gun’s Backstage.

First up…Clay Aiken. This rider is from 2004 before he was the megastar he is today. http://www.thesmokinggun.com/backstagetour/clay/clay1.html

How can I not? It is almost too easy. First off his list of foods he wants in his dressing room reads like a grocery list from a trailer park. White Wonder bread, grape jelly, Doritos, etc. And his dinners have annoying theme nights: American night, Mexican night, and on Sundays he wants a full turkey dinner with all the fixings. Why doesn’t his tour manager just add “Like Grandma used to make”??? Time to grow-up Clay, this is not summer camp and theme nights aren’t cute. But let’s get serious. Clay is allergic to nuts, mushrooms, coffee, mint, chocolate and shellfish. A life without coffee and chocolate would be hell; it would be like…being Clay Aiken.