A CBS spokesperson rushed to the defense of the network’s censorship apparatus, giving statements to industry trade publications like Variety and Deadline, claiming that CBS Studios had actually financed and secretly produced the public-access episode in collaboration with Monroe Community Media. “As is our regular practice, we send copyright notices to unauthorized websites that post copyrighted content from CBS and our network/studio talent,” the spokesperson asserted, insisting the copyright enforcement was simply routine intellectual-property protection.
But that explanation raised more questions than it answered. Nothing in the broadcast identified CBS or Paramount as producers. There was no corporate copyright message at the end of the hour; instead, an independent, Chicago-based studio was listed as the production company. Colbert also spent much of the episode openly mocking Paramount and CBS in ways that strongly suggested they were not exactly thrilled with the project. So viewers were understandably skeptical that the corporation had lovingly funded an anti-corporate guerrilla comedy special only to immediately suppress its circulation online.
After a backlash erupted, CBS quickly retreated, announcing it would “waive further enforcement” pending additional review.
False copyright notices should be instant major fucking fines all the way up to complete dissolution of the compay.
We are going on thirty years of this DMCA shit and all it’s ever been used for is a back door for corporations to silence critics.
That’s not true, corporations have also used it to steal from legitimate rightsholders
Had me in the first half.
rightsholders
How do you shold a right?
Gently then vigorously
Carefully, with a firm and steady grip
No no, it’s “right shoulders.” Corporations support illegitimate shoulders.
Same as a colds houlder
Judges should be required to neuter the prosecution when they are clearly using the expense of the legal system to strongarm someone.
Not…like…literally neuter. I mean if the defense is financially limited and could only afford a single lawyer and a couple paralegals, then the prosecution should be limited to the same resources. Maybe by reviewing billed hours or something. Idk.
Otherwise the prosecution is just a big bully.
I’d be OK with literal neutering in this case.
i vote for literal and metaphorical neutering
In these cases it’d probably have to be the defense that’s neutered. Usually the way it works is a corporation uses something they may or may not have the rights to use in a video they post to youtube or similar, then the original gets copyright striked because the content id recognizes it from the corporate media it’s there to protect. The original rightsholder can try to contact support (if there even is any) but they usually will just say get fucked. At that point you’d have to sue google/the infringing corpo which would probably cost more than they’d make anyways
legitimate rightsholders
Oxymoron. There is no such thing.
Agreeing with you would mean not believing that AI is stealing from artists. Just saying.
(I think a lot is wrong with copyrights and especially patents, and am all for breaking them in some circumstances, but not totally abolishing them.)
Agreeing with you would mean not believing that AI is stealing from artists.
Right. How could it be when no theft has occurred?
It isn’t stealing anything from anyone and artists have been making art long before the concept of property was even invented.
If you need a reason to justify the trendy “AI bad” narrative, there are plenty of others to choose from that aren’t total bullshit.
I find that to be a consistent and respectable opinion.
Whilst capitalism exists, there is
Key word: legitimate
At minimum, you should lose the right to make a claim again for a fixed period of time, which increases exponentially for each additional false claim.
Surelly if you’re knowingly sending a false copyright notice that’s the Crime of Fraud and thus the actual people doing it and those ordering are Criminally Responsible for those action?!
Wouldn’t sending takedown notices for material whose copyright is not yours be the Criminal Fraud?
Yes it’s fraud and no, nobody has ever cared about that or we wouldn’t be having this shit in the first olave
Yes. It is fraud. Large corporations with teams of lawyers often don’t seem too worried about commiting crimes.
I’m really enjoying this. 💜
YouTube: FULL SHOW: After “Late Show” ends, Stephen Colbert hosts Monroe public access show
I have watched more episodes of Only in Monroe than I have Colbert on CBS.
CBS can go fuck itself. BOYCOTT Skydance/Paramount.
Friendly reminder that boycotts are about financially hurting the target. There are ways to enjoy the entertainment you like without funding the bastards 🏴☠️🏴☠️🏴☠️
You arrrrr correct.
There are also ways to hurt them more financially than just boycotting. Boycott companies who advertise with them too!
Boycott as a protest measure is most effective if it is applied closest to the source of contention. A drop in subscriptions, viewers and other typical KPI is much more visible to the direct target. If they look at their charts and see a dip, they’ll look for events and changes they made shortly before.
A company that advertises with them likely also advertises with others so the cause of “suddenly people hate us” being “someone else is something” is harder to identify. Odds are, your message would be diluted to the point of being illegible.
Of course, like all protests, they heavily depend on participation, whichever option you go for.
It’s not a crime if you do it while you are naked. [hotwires Lamborghini in the buff]
oh man. I practically can’t commit a crime then.
Way ahead of ya.
And do not watch the show that replaced Colbert, nor any of its guests. Make it career poison to be on that show. Do not even mention the name, it’s just “The shitty show that replaced Colbert.”
Theres a show? I kind of assumed they’d reolace it with dick pill infomercials.
I mean not entirely wrong about the replacement lmao. Obligatory FUCK CBS.
Anti-corporate guerilla you say?
The spirit of Harambe lives.
On Friday, the president posted an artificial intelligence-generated video from the official White House account featuring Trump grabbing Colbert from his late-show set and throwing him into a large dumpster while dancing to the Village People’s “Y.M.C.A.”
“Colbert is finally finished at CBS. Amazing that he lasted so long! No talent, no ratings, no life. He was like a dead person,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “You could take any person off of the street and they would be better than this total jerk. Thank goodness he’s finally gone!”
I know I should be used to this sort of thing by now, but reality is so weird.
This isn’t weird. Its corruption. This isn’t base reality, this is imposed reality by insane people with too much power.
If he had no talent and no ratings … Why do you care?
Because he’s a malignant narcissist. In his head he’s the center of the world and nothing else matters. And being a TV personality himself, ratings are the ultimate expression of that, because if eyes are on him instead of anyone else, then it justifies his own narcissism in a feedback loop. Anything that threatens that is a threat that he’s psychologically incapable of accepting, and he gets engaged. How he’s got dementia and is untouchable, so the filter is long gone, so he lashes out publicly about it. He cares because he has to, because cognitive substance is unbearable, and the reality of someone being popular who also challenges his delusions is something he literally cannot stand. Trump is a maladaptive excuse of a human being and he can’t ever admit to being anything but the best, most important person in the world, and being president of the US is the ultimate concrete expression of that in his head.
Yes I agree with you. I was pointing out the hypocrisy in his statement.
That statement from trump screams “projection.” The weird line about “he’s like a dead person” is Trump facing his own impending mortality.
You’re mistaking Trumpland for reality. Unfortunately they overlap, so while you and I live in reality and Trump lives in Trumpland, what happens in Trumpland it directly infects reality. I meant to say effects reality but to be honest, I think “infects” is a better word.
I’m not sure if you understood what I meant. I’m not saying I agree with what Trump wrote, or that his opinions are somehow shaping my reality. I am saying that the objective reality of a United States President, one of the most powerful people on the planet, taking the time to write insecure and childish social media posts directed at a television show host is weird.
Reports of Bari Weiss being big mad about the jokes made at her expense are very satisfying to me
I was watching it when the take down took affect, and still haven’t watched like last 15 or so minutes. Since i couldnt find it.
Here’s Stephen’s channel, it’s the only video, lol.
