* You may have noticed that the online version of a Republican TV ad has been taken down by YouTube. The video uses footage of Rep. John Bradley (D-Marion) seconding the nomination of Michael Madigan for another term as House Speaker. If you saw it yesterday, you know it’s brutal.
YouTube explains that it removed the video “due to a copyright claim by Advanced Digital Media, Inc.,” the company which owns BlueRoomStream.com. The company sells its video to TV stations, etc., but it also has some other strict rules…
Programming produced on www.blueroomstream.com cannot be used for political, campaign or commercial purposes without permission. Any re-editing, re-broadcast, or re-use without permission is strictly prohibited.
Tony Yuscius at BlueRoomStream.com told me yesterday that a video snippet of Rep. Bradley testifying in a committee hearing is actually theirs.
* After YouTube removed the video, Yuscius received this e-mail yesterday from the Illinois Rebuild Project, which is sort of the social media arm of the GOP’s paid media this cycle…
Today you submitted a youtube takedown request for our campaign video, hosted on youtube - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CwuSyDLnp-g.
The video in question contains no video footage sourced from Advanced Digital Media. All video content contained was sourced from either the Office of the Clerk of the Illinois House of Representatives or the following Youtube video - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bq52iD96Vos - which was not posted by Advanced Digital Media and contains no notifications that it is your copyrighted work. In addition, the roughly four seconds of silent video footage would be allowable under the doctrine of fair use even if it were your copyrighted work.
We request that you retract your takedown request with all haste.
That claimed source video has now also been taken down by YouTube after a copyright claim was filed by Advanced Digital Media.
Oops.
* Tony’s e-mailed response to me…
At this point the illegally obtained video has been removed from YouTube. I intend to pursue legal options and strongly protect our copyrighted content. The e-mail received states the video with Rep. Bradley’s audio came from the House Clerk’s office. Perhaps Mr. Brown may want to comment on that?
* Madigan spokesman Steve Brown’s response…
Our lawyers are pursuing the use of the material
* From the General Assembly’s website…
This live session video/audio broadcast is the property of the Illinois General Assembly. Any use of this broadcast without the prior written consent of the Illinois General Assembly is prohibited.
- Anon - Thursday, Oct 20, 16 @ 10:27 am:
Madigan and the Youtube he controls!
- so... - Thursday, Oct 20, 16 @ 10:28 am:
Best of luck, Steve, in getting the commercial taken down. Maybe ask Kasper to explain the doctrine of fair use to you.
- Saluki - Thursday, Oct 20, 16 @ 10:31 am:
Bradley has got problems.
- Ron Burgundy - Thursday, Oct 20, 16 @ 10:33 am:
Now they can recut the ad blowing up the text of the juiciest quotes.
- Team Sleep - Thursday, Oct 20, 16 @ 10:33 am:
The commercial has already aired and sites like Cap Fax (duh) have already posted about it. The damage has been done.
- so... - Thursday, Oct 20, 16 @ 10:33 am:
Also, from the State Records Act:
Pursuant to the fundamental philosophy of the American constitutional form of government, it is declared to be the public policy of the State of Illinois (i) that government records are a form of property whose ownership lies with the citizens and with the State of Illinois; (ii) that those records are to be created, maintained, and administered in support of the rights of those citizens and the operation of the State; (iii) that those records are, with very few exemptions, to be available for the use, benefit, and information of the citizens
- phocion - Thursday, Oct 20, 16 @ 10:52 am:
How is it that the Bost “Let my people go” rant was used in a campaign and is still available on YouTube?
- A guy - Thursday, Oct 20, 16 @ 10:52 am:
I’m willing to bet a re-cut is on the way too. It may suggest that the video that belongs to the General Assembly, paid for with dollars from the public, is not usable for public consumption.
Well worded, it could be stronger and more indicting than the first one. Let’s see what they do.
- Ron Burgundy - Thursday, Oct 20, 16 @ 10:55 am:
The other thing a recut would let them do is to hire a voiceover actor with any voice style they want.
- A guy - Thursday, Oct 20, 16 @ 10:56 am:
Ron B, indeed it would.
- Big Muddy - Thursday, Oct 20, 16 @ 11:08 am:
=This live session video/audio broadcast is the property of the Illinois General Assembly. Any use of this broadcast without the prior written consent of the Illinois General Assembly is prohibited.=
SHOULD READ:
This live session video/audio broadcast is the property of the residents of the State of Illinois. Any use of this broadcast should be encouraged as this is our government and we have a right to know what they are up to.
- Dashcam - Thursday, Oct 20, 16 @ 11:08 am:
I hope they get it taken down. Who would ever agree to praise the Speaker if they knew it would become public?
- Ron Burgundy - Thursday, Oct 20, 16 @ 11:16 am:
I get the requiring permission at least to prevent commercial use of the footage. I can’t count the number of times businesses and individuals think they can misappropriate the state seal, for example, either because they don’t know any better or intentionally to fool the public that they are a state agency or employee. I’m sure SOS has a giant pile of cease and desists on that.
- Team Sleep - Thursday, Oct 20, 16 @ 11:16 am:
Dashcam - that’s an interesting point. Sometimes the speeches officials and candidates make almost seem like they forget the speeches are being broadcast and/or taped. Bost may have done his rant on purpose but sometimes the footage seems damning enough (i.e. people like HRC or John Kerry voicing support for the Iraq War) and makes you wonder what the heck they were thinking at the time of the speech. I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with the speeches, but it really makes me question the thought process of both the official/candidate and his or her staff.
- Big Muddy - Thursday, Oct 20, 16 @ 11:22 am:
=I hope they get it taken down. Who would ever agree to praise the Speaker if they knew it would become public?=
That is exhibit A as to why the GA should not have media oversight of any/all of it’s proceedings, deliberations or floor debates. The Speaker hides the actual workings of government from the people by limiting and controlling access.
- m - Thursday, Oct 20, 16 @ 11:26 am:
Any video from the House’s cameras is indeed public property. Might take a FOIA to get it, but it is available to everyone.
- hisgirlfriday - Thursday, Oct 20, 16 @ 11:36 am:
@m - Just because the footage is available via FOIA doesn’t mean it can be re-purposed for political ads.
- LizPhairTax - Thursday, Oct 20, 16 @ 11:45 am:
@phocian
My guess from my recollection of the bost video and the angle from which it was shot is that it came from a news camera in the gallery rather than from the ILGA.
- John Rawls - Thursday, Oct 20, 16 @ 11:46 am:
The voters absolutely have a right to know what John Bradley has publicly said about Mike Madigan.
- Nick - Thursday, Oct 20, 16 @ 12:26 pm:
I would just like to second what ===Big Muddy - Thursday, Oct 20, 16 @ 11:08 am=== said. Seems ridiculous that our tax dollars pay for the creation of these videos, but we can’t use them.
- Altgelds Ghost - Thursday, Oct 20, 16 @ 12:43 pm:
It is never good for a candidate when the election is turned over to the lawyers. If Bradley’s lawyers are successful in getting the video removed from the ad, think about the next ad where Bradley’s words supporting Madigan are used but the viewers are informed that Madigan and the Judges he elects are keeping the video from being seen, IMHO this is a devastating development for Bradley
- Michelle Flaherty - Thursday, Oct 20, 16 @ 12:49 pm:
Nice to see the House Republicans return to their roots in the political use of state materials and resources.
Some days it’s almost like Tristano and Danials never left.
- Grand Avenue - Thursday, Oct 20, 16 @ 1:18 pm:
I don’t see how it’s not fair use - do campaigns get clearance from TV stations before they use 1-second snippets like a reporter reading “Pat Quinn wants to raise the income tax” etc? Maybe campaigns pay for something similar to ASCAP to use that footage, but if they do, it’s news to me.
- Ahoy! - Thursday, Oct 20, 16 @ 1:41 pm:
I think the Republican’s can use this to their advantage, it’s almost like a gift to them. “The video John Bradley and Mike Madigan don’t want you to see.” And using their power over the general assembly from allowing voters to see the footage of John Bradley nominating Million Dollar Mike and rigging the election…
I’m licking my chops if I”m running that campaign.
- phocion - Thursday, Oct 20, 16 @ 2:29 pm:
Nice try protecting your side’s double standard, Liz. But, no. The Bost tape was House GA and somehow it was made widely public. I agree with many of those commenting here. The more Bradley and Madigan fight the release, the more free publicity this will get. Please, hire lawyers to tell the public they have no right to see a recording of what a legislator said to the General Assembly.