|
Share this page
Quick links
Add feed 
|
|
The Persuader
My personal blog, started in 2006. No paid or guest posts, no link sales.
Posts tagged ‘copyright law’
23.08.2022
This is too good. Now, Hearst Communications, Inc. was sensible enough to realize that what I raised was real, and a senior VP put me on to a colleague dealing with Hearst Magazines International. Nothing yet, but I wrote a release, sent it to a few colleagues, and published it on Lucire describing what had happened. As it’s going in to Lucire, unlike Google, I’m really careful about libel.
Just now, Red Points Solution SL has been by and issued another notice. They canât deal with the negative publicity so they play the only card they know how: issuing another DMCA notice to Google and leaving Hearst SL wide open to a penalty of perjury.
I mean, I’ve seen stupid (like that time a former disgruntled staffer wrote an anonymous note to people who knew me but hand-addressed the envelope), but this is like walking into a trap (that I didn’t even realize I had set!).
Now, what if word got out even more widely that Red Points Solution SL is shutting down free speech? Time to send the release more widely?
If only I had more timeâbut this might be tomorrowâs free-time project.
Tags: 2022, copyright, copyright law, DMCA, free press, free speech, Hearst, JY&A Media, law, Lucire, media, press freedom, Spain, technology
Posted in internet, media, publishing, technology | No Comments »
21.08.2022
I suppose it’s positive that Google has finally responded to our first counter-notification against Hearst SL’s and Red Points Solution SL’s fraudulent DMCA notice. Hey, Google, why don’t you begin by asking your complainants for proof before presuming an innocent party guilty? Then used your milliards of dollars and high-tech to see that our work is original? Would have saved us a lot of time.
You’ll soon see the other two counter-notices I filed on the first issue alone while I waited and waited and waited for you to respond. Failing to do that first step has cost us all time. And you knew of this problem back in the second half of the 2010s, if not before.
This system is really broken.
Oh well, another two weeks of libel by Google on the first issue alone. Everyone: use Mojeek.
Tags: 2022, copyright, copyright law, DMCA, fraud, Google, Hearst, publishing, Spain, technology, USA
Posted in internet, media, publishing, technology, USA | No Comments »
20.08.2022
Yesterday morning, we received a second notice with two more URLsâone with wholly our own contentâfrom Hearst SL and its contractor, Red Points Solution SL.
Iâve done a bit more digging and itâs usually fraudsters who engage in this behaviour. You can read more about them in Techdirt, Mashable and Search Engine Land.
With their millions of dollars, I guess these two Spanish companies are now in the same game of fraud.
And Google believes them, even though Mashable wrote about these techniques in 2018.
If itâs that easy to manipulate Google, then itâs finished as a credible search engine.
Meanwhile, Red Points Solution and Hearst SL open themselves up to charges of perjury. Not too smart there.
Three firms with millions, even milliards, of dollars who donât like the independents, and one firm now falsely claiming ownership of work from us, French Sole, BFA.com, and LâOrĂ©al. With LâOrĂ©al, why would you involve your own advertiser? Does Hearst SL want to slit its own wrists as a company?
Tags: 2022, copyright, copyright law, fraud, free press, Google, Hearst, JY&A Media, law, licensing, Lucire, LâOrĂ©al, media, press freedom, publishing, Spain
Posted in internet, media, New Zealand, publishing, technology, USA | No Comments »
19.08.2022
Still nothing from the Spanish outpost of Hearst or from Red Points Solution SL on their false accusation against Lucire, so tonight I contacted one of the Hearst VPs in New Yorkâas they’ll more likely understand where we’re coming from. Whenever there’s been a copyright matter, Americans tend to respond quickly, faster than Europeans or the Britishâexcept for Big Tech, natch. Those folks you need to threaten. It’s frustrating to continue seeing a DMCA notice when we do a site: search on Google, one that isn’t warranted. I’ve found a senior enough VPâI’ve been around long enough to know who’s whoâwho I think would get it.
Further investigation shows Red Points being named as defendant in quite a few casesâand they’re just the ones that the search engines have picked up. Who knows how many others aren’t put online or are worthy enough of being reported on?
I’d be extremely wary of a company whose technology appears to be very unreliable, if our case is any indication, and exposing their clients to lawsuits. I see from the Google complaint only two sites have fallen foul to their specious claimsâand you have to ask why not every single article written about Valentina Sampaio being named Armani Beautyâs newest ambassador? Were we picked out because they felt we were small enough to be picked on and that we wouldn’t fight back? And why would they risk claiming not only our original content as their client’s, but the work of L’OrĂ©alâa major Hearst advertiserâtoo? It’s potentially destructive for Hearst and harms its relationship with an advertiser.
They’ve picked on the wrong peopleâespecially a magazine that is known to some people inside Hearst.
I was curious to see what part of the Spanish web I had accessed in the last year. Answer: not a lot. More in the last day or so looking up Hearst’s Spanish outpost.
Tags: 2022, copyright, copyright law, DMCA, Google, Hearst, New York, NY, Spain, technology, USA, World Wide Web
Posted in business, internet, media, publishing, technology, USA | No Comments »
18.08.2022
 Yesterday, I returned to find a DMCA claim filed against us by Red Points Solution SL, purporting to act for Harperâs Bazaar España publisher Hearst Magazines SL, falsely accusing us of breaching their copyright with this article. You can read the notice here.
Naturally, I filed a counter-claim because their accusation is baseless.
Our source was PR Newswire, and itâs not uncommon to find stories of interest through that platform. In fact, Armani Beauty was so keen to get this out there on November 3 that we received the release in four languages at 15.28, 15.30, 15.33, 15.36, 15.39, 15.46 and 16.03 UTC.
The quotations and images were supplied by Armani Beauty, which is part of LâOrĂ©al. Iâve worked with people from LâOrĂ©al for over two decades and know their systems well enough, including the money they have for licensing images for press usage.
Lucire has a lot of original articles, but some of our news is release-based, as it is for anyone in our industry.
Our rule is: even when itâs a release, you write it up individually in your own words. You may have something additional to bring to the story. And we arenât a repository of releases.
The only time we would run a release mostly verbatim is if we issued it, something that might happen once every couple of years.
Naturally, Google has so far done nothing and our story remains absent from their index. Big Tech loves big firms like Hearst.
Iâve tagged Harperâs Bazaar España in social media demanding they front up with their evidence. Iâve also messaged Hearstâs Spanish office with the following.
Ladies and Gentlemen:
Yesterday, your firm lobbed a false accusation against us by deceptively claiming your copyright had been breached by one of our articles. I note that you filed this as a DMCA complaint with Google.
We have filed a counter-notice.
We find it appalling that you would claim an original work has breached your copyright.
The imagery and quotations to our articles were sourced from L’OrĂ©al, and we have informed them directly of your deceptive and misleading conduct.
I demand you furnish proof. As you will no doubt fail to, we demand you withdraw the complaint. We reserve the right to pursue our own legal remedies against you.
Yours faithfully,
Jack Yan
Publisher, Lucire
I basically thought they were being dicks and my friend Oliver Woods chimed in on Twitter about it. Oli’s very insightful and objective, and I respect his opinion.
They are being dicks, but there is a strategy behind it. Petty little minds wanting to look good on Google, not liking someone else ahead of them. (Not that I ever looked to see where our story ranked. I mean, seriously?)
It reminds me of a US designerâs rep who emailed me a while back wanting us to remove an article.
I asked: whatâs wrong with it? Did we err in facts? Is it somehow defamatory?
When I probed a bit more deeply, it turned out that they were incensed it came up so highly in a Google image search.
I explained that that wasnât a good enough reason, especially since the story had been provided to us by a PR firm.
They countered by saying that as they had not heard of us, it was highly unlikely that they would have released us that news.
I thought it was a very strange strategy to accuse someone you wanted a favour from of lying.
I still have the email from their PR firm. Call me Lord of the Files.
Iâm not going to reveal the identity of the designer. I asked one of my team to see if he would call me directly instead of having one of his rude staff insult me. He never did call. The image is still there, and I bet theyâre seething each time they see it.
Itâs not even a bad image. It just doesnât happen to be hosted by them.
I donât really know why search engine domination is so important. We all should have a fair crack at it, and let whomever has the most meritorious item on a particular topic come up top.
The American designer, and the Spanish outpost of this American media giant Hearst, are obviously not people who like freedom of the press, freedom of expression, or a meritorious web. American people might like this stuff but a lot of their corporations don’t.
Which is why Google is terrible because it doesnât allow it. We know through numerous lawsuits it has biases toward its own properties, for a start. Iâve observed them favouring big media brands over independentsâeven when independents break a news story.
Mojeek is just so, so much better. No agenda. Just search the way it was and should have stayed. Thatâs the ânext Googleâ, the one that could save the web, that I had asked for in 2010.
Except it shouldnât be the next Google because we donât want more surveillance and tribalism.
Fair, unbiased search is where Mojeek excels. I really hope it catches on more. God knows the world needs it.
I think the world needs Lucire, too, the title that Harperâs Bazaar Australia named as part of its âA-list of styleâ. The Aussies are just so much nicer.
PS.: Hearst uses a company called Red Points Solution SL to do its supposed copyright infringement detection. Based on this, they must be pretty shit at it. And remember, we don’t even publish in Spanish. Yet.
I see you have falsely accused us of copyright infringement with our article at https://lucire.com/insider/20211103/valentina-sampaio-named-armani-beautys-newest-ambassador/ when we have done nothing of the sort.
We demand that you withdraw your DMCA complaint to Google.
https://lumendatabase.org/notices/28469986#
Our storyâs source is Armani Beauty through PR Newswire, to which we are signed up as a legitimate international media organization. The story is our work, using facts and quotations provided in the release.
PR Newswire provided us with this release on November 3, 2021, at 15.28, 15.30, 15.33, 15.36, 15.39, 15.46 and 16.03.
A counter-notice has been filed.
We require an explanation from you on why you have targeted a legitimate media organization with your deception. Clearly your detection systems are not very good and we would certainly be discouraged from using them.
P.PS.: One more email to Red Points Solution SL on August 19, 21.56 UTC after they doubled-down with another notice removing two URLs from Google. Again, no proof of their original work was provided, and none can be seen in Lumen even when requested. It seems Google will lap anything up if it sees a big company behind it.
I have reached out to you through numerous means but yet to hear back.
I publish Lucire, a magazine with a 25-year history and five editions worldwide. You might even say we’re the sort of business that would need Red Points Solution’s services.
However, we’ve found ourselves at the other end, with legitimate media stories from our website removed from Google with DMCA notices you’ve filed.
Your client is Hearst SL.
If your latest efforts are down to Hearst’s orders, then they are claiming ownership over material that is not theirs.
All our content is original, and where it is not, it is properly licensed.
In the first case:
https://lucire.com/insider/20211103/valentina-sampaio-named-armani-beautys-newest-ambassador/
Your client does not own this material at all. We own the story, and the quotations and images are owned by and licensed to us by L’OrĂ©al. Hearst has no connection to it other than Harper’s Bazaar being mentioned in an editorial fashion.
In the second case:
https://lucire.com/insider/20190905/nicky-hilton-hosts-brunch-to-celebrate-her-collaboration-with-french-sole/
Your client does not own this material at all. We own the story, and the images are owned by and licensed to us by French Sole and BFA.com. Hearst has no connection to it other than Harper’s Bazaar being mentioned in an editorial fashion.
In the third case:
https://lucire.com/insider/page/164/?mobiinsider%2F20120130%2Felizabeth-olsen-models-asos-magazines-cover%2F%3Fwpmp_switcher=mobile
Your client does not own this material at all. In fact, we own this material fully. No Hearst properties are even mentioned.
Counter-notifications have been filed on the basis that it is our original content and that your client has no right to make the claim in the first place.
It would be far easier if you would review your systems as presently they are opening your client and yourselves up to a legal claim âŠ
We think you need to go back to your client and have them show you just how they can legitimately claim ownership of material that is not theirs.
In the meantime, we insist you stop these notices as they are unwarranted and unfounded.
We look forward to hearing from you.
Tags: 2022, copyright, copyright law, deception, DMCA, fashion magazine, freedom of expression, Giorgio Armani, Google, Hearst, Lucire, LâOrĂ©al, Mojeek, press freedoms, publishing, search engines, Spain, Twitter, USA
Posted in business, internet, media, New Zealand, publishing, USA | No Comments »
09.08.2020
I havenât read the full judgement of the Land Rover Defender case, where Jaguar Land Rover sought to protect the shape of the original Defender under trade mark law, to prevent Ineos from proceeding with the Grenadier.
According to Bloomberg, as reported in Automotive News, âThe judge upheld the findings by the IP Office that while differences in design may appear significant to some specialists, they âmay be unimportant, or may not even register, with average consumers.ââ
On the face of it, this would appear to be a reason for upholding JLRâs claimâbut the Indian-owned Midlands car maker seems to have muddled the cause of action it was supposed to have taken.
Iâve already taken issue with its inability to protect the L538 Range Rover Evoque shape in China under that countryâs laws, and while that judgement was eventually overturned in JLRâs favour, the company could have saved itself a great deal of stress had it filed its registration in time. It had been ignorant of Chinese law and wasted time and resources pursuing Ford Motor Company affiliate Landwind for its Range Rover Evoque clone, the X7. I sense Landwind could have afforded the ultimate fine.
Here I think arguing copyright might have been a better method. The Land Rover Station Wagon shape hails from 1949, and with 75 yearsâ protection, the company is covered till 2024. You donât need to show a registration, and the onus of proof, once objective similarity is found, is on the defendant. That test of objective similarity, unlike that in trade mark, is not based on what the average consumer thinks, but on what specialists think. And the scenes Ă faire doctrine has been adopted by precedent in the UK.
Maybe that was the game plan all along: to fail here, and to proceed using copyright later. Iâm sure the plaintiff knows this. Now, armed with the judgementâs findingsâthat the differences are insignificantâ Jaguar Land Rover can pursue a copyright claim using these as evidence.
To me, the Grenadier is sufficiently similar. Some point to the Puch G as another source of inspiration but I canât see it. And since a court has ruled that they canât see it, either, then Jim Ratcliffe and Ineos had better not break out the champagne just yet.
Tags: 2020, car, car design, car industry, copyright, copyright law, Ineos, intellectual property, IP, Jaguar Land Rover, Jim Ratcliffe, Landwind, law, Tata, UK
Posted in business, cars, design, India, UK | No Comments »
13.04.2019
European Unionâwww.europarl.europa.eu/downloadcentre/en/visual-identity, Public Domain; link
Iâm reading more about this EU copyright directive that was voted in last month.
Without doing a full analysis, I can say that we wonât go after anyone who links to our publications.
We presently donât care if you use a brief snippet of our content and link back to the rest. I canât see our position changing on this.
We do care if you take entire chunks (e.g. the text of an entry on Autocade, since they’re only a paragraph long). In some cases we only have the rights to photos appearing on our own site so we may want those removed if they’ve been copied from us.
Over the years Iâve just contacted publishers and asked them politely. Only a tiny handful actually respond; quite a few sites are bot-driven with feedback forms that no one checks. They get DMCAed.
But I donât have a problem with the systems that are in place today.
It seems the EU is going to wind up creating a segregated internet: one where Big Tech and large media corporations can afford to do everything and smaller publishers canât. This is already happening, thanks to Googleâs own actions with favouring mainstream media sources rather than the outlet that had the guts to break the news item. Big companies are flexing their muscles and lawmakers are bending over backwards to serve them ahead of their own citizens. (Incidentally, I canât see the UK doing anything differently here post-Brexit.)
Smaller publications might band together and share among themselves by some sort of informal agreement.
So for us, when it comes to linking and excerpting, keep doing it. Unless something happens that forces me to change my mind, Iâm all for the status quo ante in the EU.
Tags: 2019, Big Tech, copyright, copyright law, EU, fair use, Google, law, media, publishing
Posted in business, internet, media, publishing, technology, UK | No Comments »
11.06.2018
Thatâs it for ânet neutrality in the US. The FCC has changed the rules, so their ISPs can throttle certain sitesâ traffic. They can conceivably charge more for Americans visiting certain websites, too. Itâs not a most pessimistic scenario: ISPs have attempted this behaviour before.
Itâs another step in the corporations controlling the internet there. We already have Google biasing itself toward corporate players when it comes to news: never mind that youâre a plucky independent who broke the story, Google News will send that traffic to corporate media.
The changes in the US will allow ISPs to act like cable providers. I reckon it could give them licence to monitor Americansâ traffic as well, including websites that they mightnât want others to know theyâre watching.
As Sir Tim Berners-Lee, the inventor of the web, puts it: ‘We’re talking about it being just a human right that my ability to communicate with people on the web, to go to websites I want without being spied on is really, really crucial.’
Of course I have a vested interest in a fair and open internet. But everyone should. Without ânet neutrality, innovators will find it harder to get their creations into the public eye. Small businesses, in particular, will be hurt, because we canât pay to be in the âfast laneâ that ISPs will inevitably create for their favoured corporate partners. In the States, minority and rural communities will likely be hurt.
And while some might delight that certain websites pushing political viewpoints at odds with their own could be throttled, they also have to remember that this can happen to websites that share their own views. If it’s an independent site, it’s likely that it will face limits.
The companies that can afford to be in that âfast laneâ have benefited from ânet neutrality themselves, but are now pulling the ladder up so others canât climb it.
Itâs worth remembering that 80 per cent of Americans support ânet neutralityâthey are, like us, a largely fair-minded people. However, the FCC is comprised of unelected officials. Their ârepresentativesâ in the House and Senate are unlikely, according to articles Iâve read, to support their citizensâ will.
Hereâs more on the subject, at Vox.
Since China censors its internet, we now have two of the biggest countries online giving their residents a limited form of access to online resources.
However, China might censor based on politics but its âGreat Wallâ wonât be as quick to block new websites that do some good in the world. Who knew? China might be better for small businesses trying to get a leg up than the United States.
This means that real innovation, creations that can gain some prominence online, could take place outside the US where, hopefully, we wonât be subjected to similar corporate agenda. (Nevertheless, our own history, where left and right backed the controversial s. 92A of the Copyright Act, suggests our lawmakers can be malleable when money talks.)
These innovations mightnât catch the publicâs imagination in quite the same wayâthe US has historically been important for getting them out there. Today, it got harder for those wonderful start-ups that I got to know over the years. Mix that with the USâs determination to put up trade barriers based on false beliefs about trade balances, weâre in for a less progressive (and I mean that in the vernacular, and not the political sense) ride. âThe rest of the worldâ needs to pull together in this new reality and ensure their subjects still have a fair crack at doing well, breaking through certain partiesâ desire to stunt human progress.
Let Sir Tim have the last word, as he makes the case far more succinctly than I did above: ‘When I invented the web, I didnât have to ask anyone for permission, and neither did Americaâs successful internet entrepreneurs when they started their businesses. To reach its full potential, the internet must remain a permissionless space for creativity, innovation and free expression. In todayâs world, companies canât operate without internet, and access to it is controlled by just a few providers. The FCCâs announcements today [in April 2017] suggest they want to step back and allow concentrated market players to pick winners and losers online. Their talk is all about getting more people connected, but what is the point if your ISP only lets you watch the movies they choose, just like the old days of cable?’
Tags: 2017, 2018, censorship, China, copyright, copyright law, corporate abuse, FCC, freedom, Google, innovation, internet, law, New Zealand, politics, power, privacy, Sir Tim Berners-Lee, USA, World Wide Web, ânet neutrality
Posted in business, China, internet, New Zealand, politics, publishing, technology, USA | No Comments »
27.02.2018
I don’t know if Instagram does this on all phones, but when I make multi-photo posts, it often leaves behind a very interesting image. Sometimes, the result is very artistic, such as this one of a LotusâFord Cortina Mk II.
You can see the rear three-quarter shot just peer in through the centre. I’ve a few others on my Tumblr, but this is the best one. Sometimes technology accidentally makes decent art. I’m still claiming copyright given it’s derived directly from my work.
PS., March 3: Here’s a fun one from my visit to Emerson’s Brewery.
Tags: 2018, Aotearoa, art, cars, copyright, copyright law, Ford, Instagram, Lotus, New Zealand, social media, technology, Wellington, Whanganui-a-Tara
Posted in cars, interests, New Zealand, technology, Wellington | 3 Comments »
20.04.2017
That’s a nice conclusion. Since my previous blog post, Dr Libby Weaver’s people got back to me within 24 hours. Although no notes from her seminar were available, we decided that I should get a Dr Libby book, which duly arrived. Here âtis:
Goes to show they were on the ball when the mistake was picked up, a credit was given to me for the photo, and they were prepared to remedy things by posting a book to me. We turned a negative into a positive: a winâwin all round. Sometimes all it takes are two parties prepared to be reasonable and find something mutually agreeable. Certain world leaders would be advised to emulate that.
Tags: 2017, Australia, book, copyright law, Instagram, New Zealand, social media, social networking
Posted in business, internet, marketing, New Zealand, Wellington | No Comments »
|
