If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Huffington Post)   Republicans blocked from using music during rally. Oh wait, it was the Democrats who were blocked from using footage in their ad from the 2002 Olympics   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 60
    More: Amusing, U.S. Olympic Committee, Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, human beings, David Dewhurst, Foster Friess, National Education Association, Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, American Bridge  
•       •       •

1609 clicks; posted to Politics » on 27 Jul 2012 at 10:20 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



60 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-07-27 09:04:33 AM
This is why you get written permission from the copyright holders before you spend a nice wad of cash to produce a commercial.

When the world is filled by strange copyright cases (WWF v WWF), you should have known before you made it.
 
2012-07-27 10:02:48 AM
Copyright law... how does it work?

After a thousand incidents of republicans using music without permission, you'd think the Dems would have learned.
 
2012-07-27 10:03:57 AM
yeah, the IOC doesn't like anyone using any of their stuff. they don't even like things that are SIMILAR. IIRC, they sued Audi because of the interlocking ring logo.
 
2012-07-27 10:25:44 AM
While the concept of that ad is pretty good, it's pretty hard to believe that anyone thought they'd get away with that.
 
2012-07-27 10:25:44 AM

ManateeGag: yeah, the IOC doesn't like anyone using any of their stuff. they don't even like things that are SIMILAR. IIRC, they sued Audi because of the interlocking ring logo.


Is that true? I'm indifferent toward Audi generally, but I hope their attorneys farked the IOC with a rusty discus.

/Too lazy to goog or even type it out all the way.
 
2012-07-27 10:26:40 AM
I saw the name Sandusky!

It all makes sense now.
 
2012-07-27 10:27:30 AM

cman: This is why you get written permission from the copyright holders before you spend a nice wad of cash to produce a commercial.

When the world is filled by strange copyright cases (WWF v WWF), you should have known before you made it.


I don't think they spent very much money. It wasn't broadcast on TV and it was just some old footage that they threw some graphics on top of. I'd bet that cost less than $1000.
 
2012-07-27 10:28:27 AM

theknuckler_33: While the concept of that ad is pretty good, it's pretty hard to believe that anyone thought they'd get away with that.


Although, its getting more people to look at it.
 
2012-07-27 10:28:58 AM

ManateeGag: yeah, the IOC doesn't like anyone using any of their stuff. they don't even like things that are SIMILAR. IIRC, they sued Audi because of the interlocking ring logo.


And the Legend of the Five Rings card game folks.
 
2012-07-27 10:29:24 AM

ManateeGag: yeah, the IOC doesn't like anyone using any of their stuff. they don't even like things that are SIMILAR. IIRC, they sued Audi because of the interlocking ring logo.


I heard on NPR this morning that they threatened to fine a butcher in London for displaying sausages in the Olympic rings logo.

On an unrelated tangent, anyone know how to view the videos at nbcolympics.com full screen without the giant ad at the top that shrinks the video down? I'm trying to be a good consumer and actually subscribed to additional cable channels yesterday in order to do everything legally but they are trying hard to push me back to torrents.
 
2012-07-27 10:30:56 AM

ManateeGag: yeah, the IOC doesn't like anyone using any of their stuff. they don't even like things that are SIMILAR. IIRC, they sued Audi because of the interlocking ring logo.


They sued a gyro place.
 
2012-07-27 10:30:59 AM

NeverDrunk23: theknuckler_33: While the concept of that ad is pretty good, it's pretty hard to believe that anyone thought they'd get away with that.

Although, its getting more people to look at it.


I guess. I don't think this is really that much of a story, but it could be a mark against the democrats for using footage of a non-partisan event in very partisan manner as much as it might score any points against Romney for what was in the ad noone can see now. Which is to say, not that much.
 
2012-07-27 10:32:42 AM
Democrats are snakes in the grass.
 
2012-07-27 10:35:34 AM

sprawl15: ManateeGag: yeah, the IOC doesn't like anyone using any of their stuff. they don't even like things that are SIMILAR. IIRC, they sued Audi because of the interlocking ring logo.

They sued a gyro place.


You do not mess with Reading Terminal Market. There is no better place to "accidentally" lose a bad date.
 
2012-07-27 10:37:29 AM
Most important part of the article:

"After the super PAC's ad was pulled by the IOC, Priorities USA President Bill Burton issued the following statement:

'Once we were assured that Mitt Romney and his allies would be held to the same standard, we were glad to take the ad down from our website. Go Team USA!'

Earlier this month, Restore Our Future announced plans to tout Romney's involvement in the 2002 Winter Olympics vis-a-vis a $7.2 million ad buy across 11 states during the 2012 Olympic Games in London. It remains unclear if the ads conflict with the IOC's guidelines on the use of Olympic footage or symbols, but the Priorities incident is not deterring the super PAC from moving forward with its scheduled advertising.

Restore Our Future spokeswoman Brittany Gross told HuffPost the super PAC has no intention of changing its plans for the London Olympics. The ads will air as planned from July 31 to Aug. 9 in swing states Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Michigan, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin."
 
2012-07-27 10:38:25 AM

karnal: Democrats are snakes in the grass.


They aren't poisonous... stop being a pussy.
 
2012-07-27 10:40:43 AM
Both sides are bad? This changes everything.
 
2012-07-27 10:42:21 AM

p the boiler: Most important part of the article:

"After the super PAC's ad was pulled by the IOC, Priorities USA President Bill Burton issued the following statement:

'Once we were assured that Mitt Romney and his allies would be held to the same standard, we were glad to take the ad down from our website. Go Team USA!'

Earlier this month, Restore Our Future announced plans to tout Romney's involvement in the 2002 Winter Olympics vis-a-vis a $7.2 million ad buy across 11 states during the 2012 Olympic Games in London. It remains unclear if the ads conflict with the IOC's guidelines on the use of Olympic footage or symbols, but the Priorities incident is not deterring the super PAC from moving forward with its scheduled advertising.

Restore Our Future spokeswoman Brittany Gross told HuffPost the super PAC has no intention of changing its plans for the London Olympics. The ads will air as planned from July 31 to Aug. 9 in swing states Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Michigan, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin."


IOKIYAR
 
2012-07-27 10:43:27 AM

theknuckler_33: cman: This is why you get written permission from the copyright holders before you spend a nice wad of cash to produce a commercial.

When the world is filled by strange copyright cases (WWF v WWF), you should have known before you made it.

I don't think they spent very much money. It wasn't broadcast on TV and it was just some old footage that they threw some graphics on top of. I'd bet that cost less than $1000.


Its an issue of resources.

Now, I am not a fan of Obama, but his campaign staff should get a talking to. It wasnt just the money, it was more about time. While the campaign was out there designing an ad that would break copyright rules, they may have lost some valuable time in the production of the commercials.
 
2012-07-27 10:43:46 AM

unlikely: Copyright law... how does it work?

After a thousand incidents of republicans using music without permission, you'd think the Dems would have learned.


Dems are above the law.

Didn't you learn that from Holder yet?
 
2012-07-27 10:44:57 AM

ChimpMitten: anyone know how to view the videos at nbcolympics.com full screen without the giant ad at the top that shrinks the video down?


No idea if it will work for that but I use adblock plus with firefox and never see ads on msnbc or comedy central or Fark for that matter.

Back on topic, sounds like a rookie move as the Olympics are notoriously protective and you never get to use their sh*t for free, just like the Very Impressive Gridiron Contest.
 
2012-07-27 10:46:13 AM

karnal: Democrats are snakes in the grass.


Don't tread on me.
 
2012-07-27 10:46:57 AM
Classy.
 
2012-07-27 10:47:18 AM

cman: theknuckler_33: cman: This is why you get written permission from the copyright holders before you spend a nice wad of cash to produce a commercial.

When the world is filled by strange copyright cases (WWF v WWF), you should have known before you made it.

I don't think they spent very much money. It wasn't broadcast on TV and it was just some old footage that they threw some graphics on top of. I'd bet that cost less than $1000.

Its an issue of resources.

Now, I am not a fan of Obama, but his campaign staff should get a talking to. It wasnt just the money, it was more about time. While the campaign was out there designing an ad that would break copyright rules, they may have lost some valuable time in the production of the commercials.


The ad was produced by a super PAC, Priorities USA, not the Obama campaign.
 
2012-07-27 10:48:37 AM

tenpoundsofcheese: unlikely: Copyright law... how does it work?

After a thousand incidents of republicans using music without permission, you'd think the Dems would have learned.

Dems are above the law.

Didn't you learn that from Holder yet?


Alberto Gonzalez forgot about Holder.
And Scooter Libby just doesn't care.
 
2012-07-27 10:50:10 AM
When the collection is finally unveiled next month, the public should not expect any major insights into the presumptive GOP presidential nominee's leadership of the Games, archivists say. Instead of executive office memoranda, budgets, and correspondence, the 1,100 cartons of records contain only previously published brochures, manuals, and some general guidance on how to run an Olympics.
 
2012-07-27 10:50:54 AM
Not sure whether I should care. Now, it's funny when Reps use music at their rallies and the musician tells them to not do that (ESPECIALLY when it's "Born in the USA"). Hell, I'd laugh if it happened to a Dem, but this is the IOC. They do this shiat all the time. It's like seeing a news story with the headline "Man Steps In Wad of Gum".
 
2012-07-27 10:52:07 AM

dinch: Not sure whether I should care. Now, it's funny when Reps use music at their rallies and the musician tells them to not do that (ESPECIALLY when it's "Born in the USA"). Hell, I'd laugh if it happened to a Dem, but this is the IOC. They do this shiat all the time. It's like seeing a news story with the headline "Man Steps In Wad of Gum".


you see liberals bad and furthermore comma
 
2012-07-27 10:52:50 AM

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: When the collection is finally unveiled next month, the public should not expect any major insights into the presumptive GOP presidential nominee's leadership of the Games, archivists say. Instead of executive office memoranda, budgets, and correspondence, the 1,100 cartons of records contain only previously published brochures, manuals, and some general guidance on how to run an Olympics.


The real trick is getting all the trees to just the right height.
 
2012-07-27 10:52:56 AM
This is a clever way around the Olympic Committee.
Link
 
2012-07-27 10:53:21 AM
img156.imageshack.us

The IOC doesn't like it when others use Olympic footage without their permission. In other news, water is wet.
 
2012-07-27 10:55:29 AM
Unless the ad was *really* long, I think this would constitute fair use.

It's just not politically smart to argue with the IOC about it right before an election.
 
2012-07-27 10:56:08 AM

salvador.hardin: This is a clever way around the Olympic Committee.
Link


Oh my God was that ad so hokey.
 
2012-07-27 10:57:27 AM
So basically, Romney can use the Olympics in a political manner, no problem, but some democratic supporting PAC cannot?
 
2012-07-27 10:59:26 AM

Jackson Herring: dinch: Not sure whether I should care. Now, it's funny when Reps use music at their rallies and the musician tells them to not do that (ESPECIALLY when it's "Born in the USA"). Hell, I'd laugh if it happened to a Dem, but this is the IOC. They do this shiat all the time. It's like seeing a news story with the headline "Man Steps In Wad of Gum".

you see liberals bad and furthermore comma


edge.ebaumsworld.com
 
2012-07-27 11:04:32 AM

cman: theknuckler_33: cman: This is why you get written permission from the copyright holders before you spend a nice wad of cash to produce a commercial.

When the world is filled by strange copyright cases (WWF v WWF), you should have known before you made it.

I don't think they spent very much money. It wasn't broadcast on TV and it was just some old footage that they threw some graphics on top of. I'd bet that cost less than $1000.

Its an issue of resources.

Now, I am not a fan of Obama, but his campaign staff should get a talking to. It wasnt just the money, it was more about time. While the campaign was out there designing an ad that would break copyright rules, they may have lost some valuable time in the production of the commercials.


Except it wasn't his campaign staff, it was a super pac, which he by can have no interaction with without breaking the law.
 
2012-07-27 11:04:43 AM

dinch: comma


I fixed your thing

i.imgur.com
 
2012-07-27 11:06:36 AM

Jackson Herring: dinch: comma

I fixed your thing

[i.imgur.com image 435x304]


checks

No, still looks the same to me.

Oh, you mean the picture. Nevermind
 
2012-07-27 11:10:52 AM
Wait what the hell
 
2012-07-27 11:17:56 AM

Jackson Herring: Wait what the hell


First base!

Don't mind me. I'm at work trying my best not to throw up and am stuck here until some contractors leave. Hell, I don;t even know what I'm saying.
 
2012-07-27 11:20:41 AM
No, I mean the link hadn't refreshed for me and it was just showing your old picture.
 
2012-07-27 11:35:23 AM

Jackson Herring: No, I mean the link hadn't refreshed for me and it was just showing your old picture.


Oh, k. Now can you tell me how to get some low voltage techs to pull their heads out of their asses so I can get the hell outa here?
 
2012-07-27 11:38:55 AM

tenpoundsofcheese: unlikely: Copyright law... how does it work?

After a thousand incidents of republicans using music without permission, you'd think the Dems would have learned.

Dems are above the law.

Didn't you learn that from Holder yet?


Except now that this has happened, I suppose the Dems will move away from it and on to more productive things. One thing they haven't learned from the GOP is how to be afraid of everything, encourage your constiuents to largely live their lives as pussies afraid of everything, and when things don't go your way become the victim party being oppressed because they can't run an ad.
 
2012-07-27 11:41:08 AM

ManateeGag: yeah, the IOC doesn't like anyone using any of their stuff. they don't even like things that are SIMILAR. IIRC, they sued Audi because of the interlocking ring logo.


They also sued the makers of the Legend of the Five Rings card came for the same reason.

/congratulations, subby, you've just shown copyright law applies to both sides
 
2012-07-27 11:48:41 AM

karnal: Democrats are snakes in the grass.


Stop being so clever.
 
2012-07-27 11:48:58 AM
Preemptive move by the dems to ensure that the repubs can't use 2002 olympic footage to bolster their robot candidate. It worked.
 
2012-07-27 12:02:53 PM

Antimatter: So basically, Romney can use the Olympics in a political manner, no problem, but some democratic supporting PAC cannot?


Well, I guess I will never support the Olympic ever again, then.
 
2012-07-27 12:06:41 PM

mallorn: Unless the ad was *really* long, I think this would constitute fair use.

It's just not politically smart to argue with the IOC about it right before an election.


Came here to say this.

It's political speech so it enjoys the highest level of protection. The PAC isn't making money off of it. The clip was no more than a minute out of a 3 hour long opening ceremony (or a week+ of games) so it's a very small percentage of the overall product. Since the 2004 winter games aren't being broadcast anywhere it's not infringing upon their ability to make money off of the footage.

IIRC, there are 4 prongs for the test of fair use, I think it clearly meets at least 3 (depending on how generous you're feeling it may meet all 4). And since fair use is decided on a "balance" of the facts, if it meets 3 prongs it's almost certainly legal. The only quibble might be if the ad gave the impression that the IOC endorsed the message but I think it would be hard to read that into this particular ad.

But yeah, not a good idea to fight with the IOC right before the Olympics start. But they've got it if they need to go back to it.
 
2012-07-27 12:10:30 PM
Good call, IOC. Bad enough there's going to be a f*ckload of political advertising during the games*, we really don't need the games themselves politicized.

*on American TV. The rest of the world doesn't have to put up with this bullsh*t.
 
2012-07-27 12:12:28 PM

Antimatter: So basically, Romney can use the Olympics in a political manner, no problem, but some democratic supporting PAC cannot?


No

Romney's group pulled the ad around the same time the Obama reelection campaign did
 
Displayed 50 of 60 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report