« District Attorneys Talking Justice Online | Main | Amanda Marcotte's Take On The Blog Scandal »

CapitolLink: Pelosi The Pirate?

Yesterday's news: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi launched a blog. Today's news: The House Republican Study Committee is accusing the California Democrat of illegally pilfering video content from C-Span and using it on that blog for partisan purposes.

"Though we applaud the Speaker's effort to adapt to new technology," the RSC said in a release, "the blog violated copyright and trademark law on the very first day. As of noon today, the Speaker had posted at least 16 videos that are copyrighted C-Span material from the House floor. The RSC spoke with C-Span today, [which] confirmed that these videos violate C-Span copyright/trademark of the House proceedings."

The release also said the video is being used in a partisan way because Pelosi's blog only "shows Democrat after Democrat offering their views of the non-binding Democrat resolution on the reinforcement and realignment of American troops in Iraq."

Calls to Pelosi's office and to C-Span have not yet been returned.

UPDATE: Glenn Reynolds of Instapundit said the RSC's charge sounds "bogus." "[T]he floor coverage is called public domain by C-Span itself," he wrote. "And even if this charge is somehow true, as I doubt, this is awfully small potatoes. If this is the most the RSC can find to complain about, then Pelosi must be doing a pretty good job."

Brendan Daly a spokesman for Pelosi's office also called the RSC accusation bogus and noted that the group has now retracted the statement after hearing from another official at C-Span. "They're 0-for-2 now," Daly said of Republicans who last week complained about Pelosi's access to military aircraft for travel between her San Francisco district and Washington. "The plane story was completely bogus and this is, too."

Daly added via e-mail: "Our legal counsel and C-Span’s legal counsel have each independently determined that C-Span video posted on the Speaker's blog is in the public domain and does not violate copyright law."

The RSC's retraction blamed the controversy on conflicting statements from C-Span. The committee first contacted Barry Katz, the manager of C-Span video assets, which the RSC said was "the employee identified as being directly responsible for answering questions to Congress about the use of C-Span material."

Bruce Collins, the corporate vice president and general counsel of C-Span, later called the RSC to say the information provided by the C-Span employee to the RSC was incorrect. "Given this contradictory information," a release said, "the RSC wanted to be the first set the record straight and withdraw the information included in the release."

UPDATE: Andrew Noyes, one of our senior writers at National Journal's Technology Daily, also covered the story at our blog, Tech Daily Dose. His story includes a response from a C-Span spokeswoman and commentary from observers on the complicated nature of intellectual property law.

Posted by Danny | 11:05 PM

Comments

The RSC is right that this is a misuse of the footage, but they've gotten the reasons wrong. It's public domain footage, but House Rules which authorize the cameras (which are owned by the House) prohibit using the footage for "political purposes."

I discuss in detail at Stubborn Facts.

PatHMV | 02.15.07 04:20 PM

Nice retraction.

Now how about an apology?

And that goes for the RSC, too. When you make a charge that turns out to be false, you ought to say "I'm sorry."

Mark Kleiman | 02.15.07 04:25 PM

As my colleague Pat over at Stubbron Facts notes, House Rules prohibit the use of C-Span copyrighted material for political purposes. Pelosi's usage may not violate copyright, but it sure violates the House Rules she's supposed to be in charge of enforcing.

I guess the rules are only for the other guys.

Tully | 02.15.07 04:57 PM

"When you make a charge that turns out to be false, you ought to say "I'm sorry.""

Kleiman's right. But does the "reality based community" to which he belongs follow that policy regarding its own baseless charges? Will he insist that it do so, even if that costs him friends? Because that's the only way change is made.

Like most political partisans, Kleinman's mainly focused on injuries (real or imagined) suffered by his side (though apparently less rabidly so than some others). For example, from his blog:

"Kudos to Glenn for calling a foul on his own side. Here's hoping that he'll take another look at the air-travel pseudo-scandal and note how fraudulent that one was, too."

Actually, Mark, Reynolds is already in agreement with you. What she did was bad form, and that's all he ever actually accused her of.

Mister Snitch! | 02.15.07 05:33 PM

Sort of like the apology that Newt got after the Democrat headhunters unfairly savaged him over bogus ethics charges? How about Billy Dale?

John | 02.15.07 05:49 PM

No, Mr. Snitch. Pelosi did nothing, and has nothing to apologize for. The Clerk of the House, a Newt Gingrich appointee, asked the military for what the Clerk thought was the appropriate level of security. So to say that "what she did" was "bad form" is to say the thing that is not.

As to "baseless" ethics charges against Newt Gingrich, I'd be surprised and delighted to learn that there was anything Gingrich wasn't guilty of. But I suppose it's possible. Was he, or was he not, accepting sexual favors from a lobbyist who had business before the House?

As far as I know, I never wrote about Gingrich's problems. Show me something I said that was false, and I'll happily take it back. But I don't hold myself responsible for anything any liberal blogger ever said.

I repeat: I'm still waiting for an apology frm the RSC, and from this blog, for making and transmitting false charges.

Mark Kleiman | 02.15.07 08:55 PM

Kleiman's own blog says that what Pelosi did was bad form:

Nancy Pelosi's handling of the military-aircraft question has been thoroughly irresponsible.

Incredibly, HERE he claims 'she has nothing to apologize for'. He can criticize her, but apparently no one else can. (Anyone doing so owes him, of course, An Apology.)

"Show me something I said that was false, and I'll happily take it back." says Kleiman. But we already know that's not true, because he can't show any grace at all in this instance. The RNC's quick clarification of the record JUST WAS NOT GOOD ENOUGH for Kleiman. The fact that the accusation was not created from whole cloth, but came about because CSPAN misspoke to the RNC JUST DOES NOT MATTER. The fact that Pelosi actually DID bend CSPAN's rules JUST DOES NOT MATTER. The fact that Reynolds accused her of nothing more than bad form, just like Kleiman did, DOES NOT MATTER. Where, oh where, is this guy's Apology (one each, from all named parties, thank you)?

He's so terribly desperate for one that I'm thinking very few people, ever, have cared very much to acknowledge this guy. He not only wants to hear that he is right, but that he is extraordinarily and uniquely right. But what he NEEDS to hear is that, well, such extreme apologies are almost unheard of in (you should excuse the expression) reality.

Kleiman apparently feels he is not only 'entitled to his own facts', but also entitled to ignore facts he does not care for.

Just a tiresome, impotent leftist blowhard living in his own bubble who can't be seriously engaged or taken seriously. Sadly, no one is surprised.

Well, fella, it's been real, but this is where I exit the train. Take the satisfaction (and let's face it, you won't be able to leave it alone) in having the last word.

Mister Snitch! | 02.15.07 10:52 PM

Post a Comment