Monday 4 November 2013

JFK50: An Open Letter to Vimeo


Dear Vimeo,


I'm regret that this circumstance has arisen - at the back of my mind, I suspected that such a decision on your part might be imminent, but considered it a calculated risk worth taking.

In the main, I post both original content short-form documentaries I produce myself, and mirror news and current affairs extracts I feel are important either for their illustrative and educative value to inform current events, or likewise important reportage I feel is being ignored or sidelined by mainstream corporate news source; likewise, I occasionally mirror historically important, rare, or difficult-to-obtain documentaries on specific events that challenge the accepted view of the events themselves or offer a broader or alternative perspective, or valuable additional information.

In all cases, my purpose is primarily educative and intended to create access to a broadly based historical record, both of which fall within the catchment of the Fair Use doctrine, which is one I myself have always tried to personally honour and respect.

At no time was there a profit-motive or any effort to take credit for the work of others.

To date, I have only been flagged for a single previous violation of this, for the documentary A Noble Lie, concerning the Oklahoma City Bombing. 

On that occasion, the content was removed, and at that time, as now, I concur with that decision; the documentary is still a very recent one, and at that time was still (I believe) being shown commercially on the film festival circuit, and as such be in breach of the spirit of the laws governing Fair Use internationally.

That single previous dispute was resolved without further issue.

I have never previously posted a significant portion or excerpt of a dramatic, theatrical feature - for all sorts of reasons, I would normally not consider this in any way or any sense covered by the Fair Use doctrine, since the economics of artist's rights, residuals, etc. can in no way be extended to outweigh these considerations, in the vast majority of most cases.

Yesterday I uploaded a low-resolution copy of the 1973 theatrical feature "Executive Action".

Executive Action is a suppressed film.

Released by Warner Brothers in November 1973, to mark the 10th Anniversary of the Assassination of President John F Kennedy, intense pressure on both the studio, theatre chains, distributors and individual theatre owners, as well as critics ensured that it's entire threatrical run lasts less than a fortnight, and it's eventual release on home video nearly two decades later was low-key and perfunctory.

There was (and is) an  enormous effort by both political and government action, and by large elements within the media corporate power structure to ensure that this film was never seen.

I feel that it should be seen. 

I suspected that uploading this particular film would attract some form of punitive action against my account, or prompt a takedown request for that particular film (which I would have been happy to concede to, as in the previous case, were it to have been put to me), but I felt that it was of sufficent importance to take the risk.

And it was a risk, and not one I took without due consideration - as you are surely aware, takedown enforcement of Copyrighted (or allegedly copyrighted) material on rival hosts like YouTube is  far more militantly enforced - and yet a lower-grade, choppier version of this same feature is available in its entirety on YouTube and a number of other hosts, free of charge, with no copyright attribution whatsoever. 

It seems somewhat disproportionate to me to issue a total suspension of my account, with my entire body of content (and I am a loyal, paying VimeoPlus account holder) for the violation of uploading a single theatrical feature that is freely available elsewhere.

I am very prepared to be reasonable and accept the takedown of the feature, if this is indeed what prompted such sudden, unilateral action on your part, but the timing of the incident does give me cause for concern;

As you may know, this month marks the 50th Anniversary of the Assassination of President John F Kennedy, and a highly sustained campaign of revisionism (long anticipated) in the mass media has begun in earnest.

One of the reasons I began hosting my content on Vimeo was upon discovery, last Martin Luther King Day, that the Open-Source Documentary, Evidence of Revision, concerning the life and death of Dr. King had suddenly become blocked via copyright takedown notices all across YouTube and a number of other hosting sites - these disputes have apparently been resolved, and the videos are now viewable.

But the takedown notices came into effect directly prior to MLK Day and expired shortly afterwards - Evidence of Revision was not accessible to the public on Martin Luther King Day and I found that to be both unacceptable  and a clear abuse of process by those who did not wish the information to be accessible when it was most relevant.

In this case, the takedown for Executive Action was imposed less than 4 weeks prior to the 50th Anniversary of the Assassination.

I understand as a hosting service that you have responsibilities to shareholders, customers and other stakeholders in such matters.

I understand as a for-profit enterprise, all business decisions must ultimately yield to to the bottom line.

I understand that from your perspective, the decision was a business decision and not politically motivated and I also understand that the advice your receive from copyright claimants you must also take at face value as being a good-faith complaint about the claimed infringement of any copyright or artists' rights.

I also understand, from personal experience, unfortunately, that much of the copyright claims made against hosted video content on other sites are politically motivated bad-faith claims and an abuse of process to control access to information and suppress free speech and informed debate.

I would be delighted to discuss this further with you, since I have always felt the values of Vimeo reflect that sense of openness and innovation that embrace all views and encourage personal expression, and to date, I have never felt any reason to doubt that commitment.

I hope we can resolve this matter, and I am prepared to be flexible, provided my personal access to my uploaded content can be at least provisionally reinstated.

I should mention though however, I operate a personal blog linked to a variety of my Vimeo uploads with over 60,000 readers and I am already being approached by people asking to know what has happened to my content so suddenly - I am more than happy to make concessions, but if we are unable to resolve this matter relatively quickly, I will be forced to explain to them what I believe has happened, and why.

Yours faithfully,

Spike1138

Sent from my iPad


To ensure delivery, add no-reply@vimeo.com to your address book.

Vimeo

Dear Spike1138:

Your account has been removed by the Vimeo Staff for violating our Guidelines.

Reason: Uploading videos from TV, Movies, or something you ripped from the Web.

We hope you find a video host more suited to your needs. If you believe this was an error, please reply to this email in a civil manner with your reasoning ("I see other people do it" is not a valid reason).

Vimeo Guidelines

Regards,
Vimeo Staff

No comments:

Post a Comment