YouTube yanked Mitt Romney’s new web video, featuring audio of President Obama singing a few lines from Al Green’s, “Let’s Stay Together,” yesterday. The video was taken down by YouTube via a copyright claim of BMG Rights Management.

The Daily Caller reported:

According to a release, the video, titled, “Political Payoffs and Middle Class Layoffs,” used news reports to demonstrate that “[i]nstead of working to restore [our] economic security, President Obama is too busy rewarding his biggest donors.”

Perhaps ironically, BMG and Crown/Random House (which published both of Obama’s books, his campaign plan, and Michelle Obama’s new book) are — despite Obama’s concerns about “outsourcing” — all owned by German conglomerate Bertlesmann AG, which bills itself as “the world’s most international media company.”

So it is interesting that the company that pulled down Romney’s web ad shares a German parent company with Obama’s publisher.

According to their Wikipedia entry, “During World War II, Bertelsmann was the biggest single producer of Nazi propaganda.”

However, since You Tube is owned by Google, here comes the left wingnut double standard–

You Tube left up videos of Obama singing the same Al Green song.
Here
Here
Here
Here and
Here.

Double standard anyone?
Hat Tip Mad Hatter

 

 

Disable Refresh for 30 Days

Cookies and JavaScript must be enabled for your setting to be saved.

1 2

`
  1. Isn’t everything seen on news programs in the public domain?

  2. You’re not shocked over this, are you?

    Since when has ‘fairness’ been a factor in any political campaign, much less Obungholes?

    Bunghole and Mooch are going to LIE, DISTORT and STEAL as much as they can before January rolls around. AND, if he gets re-elected, they’ll do it all over again for another 4 years.

    Who wants to watch these two grifters trash America for 4 more years?

  3. The MSM is history.

    The new media is the wave.

  4. “I’m so in love with you” the words Obama “sang” is not long enough of a segment of the song to be considered a copy right infringement.

  5. Flintstone, the segment Romney sang was not long enough to be copyright infringement either.

  6. OT h/t Drudge

    http://www.wokv.com/news/news/local/flash-mob-overruns-northwest-jax-walmart/nPwh8/

    300 youths, sharing a common trait which the coward media are afraid to mention, because the media are cowards.

  7. #6

    I was unaware Romney sang anything other than God Bless America. So I thought it was just his use of Obama in his ad.

    Either way, it’s a double standard based on nothing more than their “hidden” single standard.

  8. I’m not going to get too excited over this. EVERY copyright owner is free to license his song to whomever he wants. For example, a copyright owner could decide to license his song for a videotape of, say, Cindy Lauper performing the song, but not for the video of Madonna making fun of Cindy Lauper performing the song.

    This is no different. BMG is within its rights as copyright owner to allow Obama’s video to stay up, but to ask YouTube to take down Romney’s. (Of course, BMG’s conduct exposes it as an Obama crony, and justifies my never buying any BMG products again.)

    YouTube’s behavior is a different story, however. In particular, even when a copyright owner like BMG asks YouTube to take down a particular video of its copyrighted song, YouTube is FIRST supposed to determine if that video makes a “fair use” of the song. If YouTube believes it IS a “fair use,” then it’s NOT supposed to take down the video, regardless of the copyright owner’s objection.

    Here, Romney’s use of the video of Obama singing the Al Green song is CLEARLY a “fair use” of the song. YouTube was therefore required to keep Romney’s video UP on its site. The fact that YouTube took Romney’s video down anyway is just further proof that YouTube and its owner (Google) are COMPLETELY in the tank for Obama. It’s a key reason I hate Google.

  9. Rolf Schmidt-Holtz, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, and Member of the Board, Bertelsmann AG CEO

    This guy is the reason for this. But my question is apparently free speech on the net is free for whom this guy chooses.

    Watch, Holtz what else he could do and Romney does have many of his campaign ads on the net. Will more be pulled?

  10. A while ago on The Daily Caller (I think) they had a poll on how much do you trust Google. That question was between two other questions related to trust. Most people said they didn’t trust what they see or read very much but surprisingly the majority said they trusted Google!
    Clearly they do not know of the lefts connection to Google and so connected to YouTube.

  11. It’s not YouTube it’s Al Green. He owns the song. He would have to complain about Obama’s videos but apparently it’s okay if Obama uses his song but it’s not okay for Romney. It’s similar to trespassing.

  12. ++

    simple solution..

    get Rushbo (oh, the irony) to do a “remix” of the ad.. :D

    ==

  13. They just have to prop up their little puppet.

  14. Sorry, I like Romney, but I like ownership rights too. If you own the rights, you get to say who can use it. If you own YouTube, you get to say who’s video stays and who’s goes.

    Just don’t pretend to be neutral; that makes you a hack.



1 2


`

© Copyright 2014, TheGatewayPundit.com. All rights reserved. B
Privacy Policy | Terms and Conditions