Thursday, October 27, 2011

Occupy Google

Link to this post:

Should Google be considered a "private corporation"
without any public service obligations?
(First Amendment free speech, Fourth Amendment privacy)

Or should Google be considered
chartered by the People's Government, nationalized
and thus compelled by duty
to uphold and protect
the First and Fourth Amendment rights of all persons?
Or else, be dismantled like a malfunctioning machine?

We should discuss this.

Did you know that any persons who use any copyrighted material,
*anywhere in their Youtube channel*
become limited to 15m videos?

This burdens producers like me who make liberal use of
Fair Use of material in Public Access TV shows.

So, here's the story...
I made a video about the media.

The topic is property and class
and the Access to the Commons
inc. the Public Parks and the Airwaves.

My video is quite relevant to the Occupy Everything movement.

Google refuses to publish it on Youtube,
because of a copyright claim.

In the video I discuss these topics.


Google refuses to post it on their Youtube service.

Do you find this interesting?

You can watch the video here:

I must admit to be a little afraid of the
power of Google corporation.

Google has become a thing of
Orwellian power and pervasiveness.

Google is Bigger than NBC, CBS, ABC, and Time Warner
and knows more about you.

I don't know about you,
but I am addicted and attached(*) to many Google products, it seems.
Blogger, Search, Youtube, Gmail.... wow, great stuff.

(* Buddhism informs me to be cautions of
all forms of attachments, so I should
be practicing mindfulness here :)

Just getting disconnected from the Google Cloud
would seem to be a great insult.

I think,
Might Google disconnect me,
banish me from the Cloud,

if I say something critical about them?
Maybe I should "be happy with what Google provides me!"
Don't ask questions, don't raise a fuss...

Or worse!
Bush-era whistle blower Scott Ritter was just jailed
for a made up crime. A crime of speech.
There was no actual victim.
It was a "sting" event, staged by the police.

A sting (entrapment) is where the cops create the scene of the crime
then the mark grabs the bait like a trout on a fly.

(Ritter is accused of having a sex-chat
with a cop pretending to be an underage girl)

Actual jail time, for a made-up crime!
A crime of speech!!

Remember, Ritter is a major whistleblower
about the Bush lies after 9-11 which took
the nation into an unholy and unjust war of aggression
against a sovereign people of a foreign nation.

So basically, these days,
they can just make stuff up about you,
invent a fake crime, and put anyone in jail.
Over your (or my) internet speech.

And you think this only happens in China?

So back to the story about my video ....

In this video, I talk about copyright vs. the First Amendment.
I talk about Google and DMCA violations and Fair Use.
They are using International Copyright law as a justification.

I talk about propaganda and censorship.
I talk about Corporate Personhood
vs. Democracy and Informed Consent...
...with our Media System as a nexus to all of this.

I call out the fraud of "Public" Broadcasting
(should be called "Educational Broadcasting"),
and that the airwaves are part of our collective Commons
which we all have a right to have access to.

And Google is censoring this,
as I liberally use culturally-relevant artistic material
in my Public Access shows under Fair Use 17 USC 107.

I talk about censorship and Google,
then I am censored by Google.


What's the worse that could happen
if I speak out about this?
Google cancels my account?
I know could still be happy and free!

We all could get along without it? Yes.

Google is provides great services,
but at what cost?
We lived happy before Google came along!

Still it seems we should ask:
Shouldn't we place public service obligations
upon Google Inc.?
To serve the public interest
and to protect our established rights?

Or does Google (like any corporation)
enjoy Unchallenged Free Reign
and Totally Criminal and Civil Immunity
in the Information Kingdom?

According the common jurisprudence of our time,
under "well settled law",
that Google is a "private corporation"
and thus not subject to First Amendment Claims.

Google is not a Common Carrier
and thus has no obligation to give service to anyone.

Very often, in the Terms of Use Agreement of internet services
like Google and Facebook,
the service itself is not defined.

Also, there is no "earnest" paid by the customer.
The service is free.
If you paid, then they would be obligated to perform.

We must ask,
who are the paying clients
which Google must perform for?

This means there is essentially,
there is no contract now
between Google users to the corporation.

Their service is basically completely at-will.
They can terminate your account at any time,
without cause, or under a legally dubious
copyright claim.

Do you think this is correct
under the First Amendment?

They have no duty to deliver any message
or provide any level of Quality of Service
or Customer Service.

While YOUR actions are monitored online,
and subject to civil charges (copyright violations,
libel, slander, defamation) and criminal charges
(stalking, identity theft, terrorism, conspiracy, etc.)

This means Google can legally,

a) censor speech at will,

b) issue paid propaganda at will
(e.g., corporate or capitalist PR, advertising, military-fascist)

c) sell or release your info to "data mining" or spook agencies

What do you think about this?

Here is my complaint to Google:


I have a Blip.TV Pro account, and am trying to syndicate content to Youtube.

The video is posted here:

I want to upload to Youtube because the player is better for embedding and sharing.

I then get 3x DMCA violations, like this one:

"Your video, The Problem with the Media, may have content that is owned or licensed by NATOarts.No action is required on your part; however, if you are interested in learning how this affects your video, please visit the Content ID Matches section of your account for more information."

Then the video is taken down because it is "too long":

This is bogus, because I commonly upload videos much longer, e.g., this one
which is 2 hours:

This video has information critical to people understand our media problem today.

YOUTUBE / GOOGLE: Please allow me to post this video.
Any copyrighted material is excerpted under FAIR USE 17 USC § 10

(Part of the ShaleShockMedia collective)

Someone replied named PeggyK:

That does not appear to be a DMCA violation. It appears to be a Content ID match. You can dispute it.

You may also want to contact NATOarts to make sure that they accept your dispute.

But as long as there are any world-wide content ID matches on your channel, you won't be able to upload videos longer than 15 minutes.

Note: there is no way to dispute this,
or the process is made very difficult
because they have not even told me what copyrighted material
I am accused of publishing.

I think my next step,
besides blogging
is to inform the Attorneys General
of my state (NY) and Google's HQ (California)

No comments: