I had no idea this was originally posted here. A freind of mine sent it to me; I just assumed he had typed it. Rest assured I will be posting an apology later in the day. Once again; I am sorry. I know it comes across as bush league, but I really didn't know.
-Rush of 6DB
The content isn't from here, it's from The MZone... just so you get the attribution right.
And your response to this is exactly infinitely better than Cowherd's.
Well, if we weren't sure Cowherd was a talentless hack, here's some confirmation.
Why is it so difficult to admit being wrong? Cowherd's arrogance is what makes this all the more infuriating.
Oh sure, take a shot at listeners. Act like you're the big boy on ESPN Radio. Next, he'll probably brag about how many affiliates carry his show (none of which are in metro Detroit, by the way).
Huzah to honesty.
The thing that comes to mind quickest was Peter Gammonds snafu last year when he failed to cite a Los Angeles Times article in one of his pieces. Not only did he write an apology on ESPN's website, he went on Baseball Tonight and issued a public apology specifically naming the source he missed.
Then again, that's Gammonds. And then there's Cowherd. The "he" should be pronounced as an "a".
Bush league.
Should have read "knowingly" steal. The fact that Cowherd won't acknowledge the error at this point is the big deal now, and what bloggers are leaping on as we speak.
Don't give the gnat army an easy target.
And yes, the Dune reference almost puts you into Aspberger's Syndrome territory. A few Orson Scott Card mentions could send you completely off the precipice of [wink/nudge] dorkdom and full on into "smells like pee, lives with mother" geekdom.
thought yall ight like this
let me be more clear: here is the apology from 6db
-Rush 6 Degrees of Bowden
Why don't they just sue? ESPN makes a profit off of their radio show with its content, and if this content is stolen, the owner of the copyright is entitled to some money.
I was listening to Cowherd when he read the stuff. He attributed to the Internet. Case closed.
If it's copyrighted material, that's one thing. But anyone who puts something out on the net, especially in a blog, has made it public domain.
Now, stealing from one blog site and posting to another, might be an unofficial faux pas. But that's a matter to be decided among y'all.
Cowherd's medium is the radio. Not all radio listeners have access to the Internet. I don't see who's being harmed or slighted.
Plus, in the context he presented it, it was parody. That gives you a license to steal without attribution.
Much ado about nothing, imo.
However, I luvvved the Dune reference.
Brian, you are the Kwisach Haderach of blogs. You are everywhere at once. You go to that place where lessers fear to go.
"If it's copyrighted material, that's one thing. But anyone who puts something out on the net, especially in a blog, has made it public domain...
...the context he presented it, it was parody. That gives you a license to steal without attribution."
This isn't true. At all. There are two kinds of copyrighted works, registered and unregistered. All it takes to be an unregistered copyrighted work is (1) a modicum of creativity, in (2) a fixed and tangible medium. The internet has been proven as such about a trillion times over. And, yes, you can sue for such.
Further, a parody does not, per se, make the copyrighted material unprotectible. It is a factor to be considered. But, generally, when the parody is being used for profit (say, as in a radio broadcast), it is not "fair use" and will be considered an actionable violation.
The End.
Unfortunately any recovery on such a suit would require far more money and effort than it warrants. What would M Zone's damages be? Financially, we're talking pennies. Yes, had M Zone been cited, it would've been a windfall in terms of traffic. But its not as if ESPN is printing up shirts and selling hats with their material. Had M Zone been financially disadvantaged or ESPN had some financial gain, then we'd be talking law suit and I would've faxed them my resume and a retainer agreement. But neither of them were.
So all that's really obtainable is a cup of hot fat and the head of alfredo garcia. The best to hope for at this point appears to be an apology. But I'll let Kyle chime in if he thinks otherwise.
It's like bar review all over again....
makeitstopmakeitstopmakeitstop....
Dave, you're absolutely right. I never said it was a FEASIBLE action, just that it was one.
I only chimed in because I hate reading blatantly incorrect statements of the law being pawned off as fact.
I'm not a lawyer. But, um ... don't you have to defend your copyright, especially if, as you argue, it's an unofficial one?
Has the blog issued a cease and desist order? Ever? Made any previous attempts to protect its material?
None that I can see.
Your argument is one for moot court or a bar full of new lawyers. A true hypothetical.
But in the real world, and with this specific instance, the blogger wouldn't even make it into court at this point.
I've looked at the web site where this originated. There is nothing to indicate the material on either a general or a specific basis is copyrighted in any form or that the author has ever tried to copyright it.
A filing wouldn't be worth the cost of the ink to print it.
Also, Cowherd wasn't "parodying" the work he stole. He was stealing a work OF parody. There's a big difference.
"I've looked at the web site where this originated. There is nothing to indicate the material on either a general or a specific basis is copyrighted in any form or that the author has ever tried to copyright it."
There doesn't have to be an indication, nor does the author have to "try" to copyright it. It IS copyrighted, even though it is, as was said earlier, unregistered.
"A filing wouldn't be worth the cost of the ink to print it."
True, as we've all been saying. But NOT because it WASN'T copyrighted.
It is my understanding that with an unregistered copyright, the best you can do is seek an injunction to stop the person from using your unregistered copyrighted material?
Is this not correct?
To seek damages, you'd have to prove lost damage and lost revenues and most likely need to have a registered copyright.
As with regard to the parody issue, you're right. My bad. Cowherd is protected from being sued by Vince Young and the NFL, not from the originator of the material.
Apparently my readers consist entirely of engineers, lawyers, and military history buffs.
...eh, it could be worse.
jwgonzo,
You're getting closer, but still not quite there. Because it's a parody is only one factor to be considered in Cowherd (or MZone's) protection from suit by the NFL, et. al. Commercial use is the predominant identifier.
Further, with an unregistered copyright you can get ALL SORTS of damages. The only kind you cannot seek are statutory damages as covered by the Copyright Act.
But, that's beside the point. I know I'm a lawyer, and Dave's a lawyer, and it sounds like Jack's a lawyer too. We're just trying to correct your incorrect assertions of law. Because, you've been off on pretty much everything.
Brian -- maybe some of us are engineers AND lawyers.
God, that reads even worse than it sounds.
CPZ and MM, I know you're laughing if you're reading this.
Well, gee, thanky kindly, Ben.
Yes, I shot from the hip on the parody issue.
But otherwise, I'll stick to what I know to be true. There's legal theory and reality.
You're telling me I don't know theory. Fine.
There's nothing actionable there. Doesn't mean you can bill hours or charge a court filing fee, which I suspect you'd glady do.
... make that *can't" bill hour or charge a court filing fee.
I guess it was naive of me to think you'd appreciate being corrected.
Congratulations on your cheapshot. Unfortunately for you, it doesn't make your wrong answers (including this last one) any more right.
In other news:
Michigan won last night.
Yea and stuff! Woo!
(Homer honking horn, flashing headlights) N-I-T! N-I-T! N-I-T!
Dave, did you actually see the game? I liked the boxscore, but that only tells you so much.
You wanna know something really sad? I check the price of flight to NY today. *sigh* Guilty.
Sorry you were offended. I thought I detected a flippant tone on your part that went beyond mere correction. You used a phrase that my son and daughter in law (both trial lawyers) tend to use and perhaps I overreacted.
Plus, you had reduced me to using the old lawyers strategy (though I am not one):
If you have the facts on your side, argue the facts; if you have the law on your side, argue the law; if you have neither the facts nor the law on your side, then shout a lot and pound the table
Nice! A quote from The West Wing, is it?
Sorry for the flippancy (if that's a word), it was unintentional.
Ben,
The funniest part is that I started laughing when I saw Brian's post about lawyers and engineers reading the site. Then I saw your response... glad you called yourself out.
We playing some chandelier tomorrow night?
And again, I apologize too.
My new response is ... we don't get French benefits?
MDM - That's the plan, buddy! What's all this I'm reading about a whiteboard and rules? Are they that hard to remember?
And, yes, I knew you two (if CPZ is out there) would be entertained by that.
JW - I love that commercial!
Yeah, he should be fired. But you guys are acting like he pissed in your girl's mouth. It was not even funny.
It seems mostly like pointless legal bickering unrelated to Cowherd, actually.
Can we just get the sandworm to eat Cowherd and end the debate once and for all?
And SurNation, if I heard my work being read on the radio, and I weren't credited for it, I'd be sore about it too. The copyright argument may be (literally) academic, but it still hits close to home.
First, don't treat me like I am stupid just because I am brown.
Here's my take.
Everytime you talk and say something someone else created do you credit them, no. He should not have acted like a jerk and stole it. But than you have MZone going off on him before he can acknowlege them, they piss him off and he attacks. I know when I am wrong and people attack me right away, I don't care if I am wrong, I will defend myself.
Cowherd is a fucking piece of shit. There's no way around that.
On MZone he replied to an emailer saying that "we don't troll message boards all day unlike..um...you." As if sports talk radio is somehow on a higher plane of discourse than message boards. Nevermind that message boards and blogs regularly break things days ahead of radio now.
Yeah...he needs to get fired.
Do not treat me stupid because I am from brown pride.
Do you credit everyone when you use something they created. He screwed up and should have given them credit. However, when they don't give him a chance and attack him right away he got defensive. So would I if people attack even if I am wrong.
First, don't treat me like I am stupid just because I am brown.
Uh... no one called you stupid, nor did anyone even know you were "brown". Is this a put-on? Internet Candid Camera?
Man, don't play I read how you wrote to others on this board then to me. I know what and what not is racism have you taken a look at stormfront.com at least the are proud and know who they are and don't play around.
But what should I expect with what is going on with immgration and the MinuteMen.
Brian,
Long time reader, first time commentor. You know what would be a good idea? If you had a blog about Michigan sports. I like the whole legal stuff (despite the fact that almost everything said above is wrong), but I bet you would get a lot more readers if you talked about stuff like, oh, I don't know, sports. Oh, and I bet if the sports were U of Michigan related, a lot more people would read.
I like to count the drunks in these sort of comment threads.
The action didn't really make me as upset as Colin's reaction to what had happened.
Where an "Oops. We really had no idea, and we're sorry. We'll correct it on tomorrow's show" was proper, we got a "WE WERE SENT IT....WE HAD NO IDEA..BUT THE INCESSANT WHINING...MEANS I WON'T GIVE YOU CREDIT NOW..GET OVER IT CC".
How immature and stupid. And I will say, as a PD of a radio station that airs Colin's show, that I did believe he was above behavior like that.
It's a little late in the day to say this, but I generally agree with Ben, Dave, and Orson.
At a minimum, The M Zone has common law intellectual property rights in what its authors produce and post. Their financial damages, if any, would be too minimal to make it worthwhile for them to consider legal action, though.
The real issue here is Cowherd's reaction. It seems clear that Cowherd got this from an inadvertent intermediary that did not cite the source---an inadvertent intermediary which has had the strength of character to come forward and apologize for his oversight, by the way, and good for him for doing so---and he wasn't trying deliberately to pilfer The M Zone's material.
If it had been me, I would have worded my e-mail to Cowherd differently from the way The M Zone worded theirs. However, Cowherd's all-caps reaction was out of all proportion to the provocation.
It should have been a simple matter of bringing the oversight to Cowherd's attention and having him respond, "My bad. I'll say something on the air tomorrow." That would have solved the problem in precisely the manner that even the most unprofessional local newspaper would have handled it.
Cowherd's insolence and arrogance are the problem. The attitude that he knows he swiped somebody else's work but won't give proper attribution out of sheer spite almost certainly doesn't deserve legal action, but it does deserve public criticism and some form of discipline by his employer.
I generally do not share the wholesale disdain for the mainstream news media that many in the blogosphere possess. Frankly, I don't think any of us are ever going to replace a Jeremy Schaap because we're simply not doing investigative reporting. None of us would or could have broken the Jim Harrick story.
The Colin Cowherds of the world, though, ought to feel a certain discomfort at the expansion of the blogosphere. What can Colin Cowherd do that any number of the blogs with links on Brian's blogroll can't?
Cowherd has an on-air persona (which, apparently, bleeds over into his e-mail), a forum for reaching a widespread audience, and the ability and willingness to offer opinions (informed and otherwise) about sports. That differentiates him from any of us . . . how?
Cowherd and his staff slipped up; that is excusable, however regrettable. What ought to embarrass him and his employer is his childish defensiveness.
Brian's right: Cowherd could have made a friend just by saying, "I got this off of The M Zone" and quoting the URL. Everybody goes home a winner . . . his listeners laugh at what most of them will forget two jokes in is somebody else's material and The M Zone gets, at worst, the psychic income of a broadcast plug and, at best, a serious spike in traffic.
So why did Cowherd react as he did? I think it's because he knows The M Zone (like any number of other blogs) is doing better work than he is, day in and day ou
I knew that one was going to be too long to make the cut. Here's the rest of it:
So why did Cowherd react as he did? I think it's because he knows The M Zone (like any number of other blogs) is doing better work than he is, day in and day out, and, sooner or later, folks are going to realize that.
If I were told that I had to choose between losing my access to the blogosphere and losing my access to sports talk radio, I'd give up sports talk radio and (with apologies to 680 The Fan on-air personality and Bulldog legend Buck Belue) it wouldn't be a tough call. I suspect many of you feel the same way.
The M Zone is iPod and Colin Cowherd is eight-track. This week's Keystone Kops adventure exposed that fact. That's why he reacted as he did . . . and why his on-air persona isn't called "Colin Realmann."
By the way, I loved the "Dune" references. The "M" in "MGoBlog" stands for "Muad'Dib."
Ben,
The white board is definitely a big help as the night progresses... especially with the new rules that make the Gopher drink more when he takes his sweet time finishing the middle cup.
Commenting by HaloScan
