The Guardian doesn’t like being parodied or critiqued in any way, so they threaten those who dare to do so, using the law as a weapon. Big Bullies!
Posted on January 6, 2014by Anthony Watts
From the “things that make me laugh” department.
It seems the Guardian took exception to my use of this image (I suppose they haven’t found this one from Josh yet). I provide this exchange for a model by which others might refute such claims. This essay is also satire, just so you know. Email addresses and phone numbers are redacted as a courtesy and the exchange is ordered chronologically.
From: Helen Wilson Sent: Monday, January 06, 2014 3:45 AM To: awatts@xxxx.xxxSubject: Copyright Infringement
To whom it may concern
I am writing from the Guardian Syndication Department as it has been brought to our attention that you are displaying, without authorisation, the following image which is the copyright of the Guardian:
As this image is copyright of Guardian News & Media Ltd, you will need to remove the image from your website with immediate effect.
Please be mindful of the fact that if you wish to reproduce content, in full or in part, from whatever source, you need to secure the prior, written approval of the copyright owner, their publisher, or their agent. Failure to do so may involve legal action.
Best regards,
Helen
Helen Wilson
Content Sales Manager Syndication Guardian News & Media Ltd Kings Place, 90 York Way, London, N1 9GU
================================================================
On 6 January 2014 16:18, Anthony <awatts@xxxx.xxx> wrote: Dear Ms, Wilson,
Thank you for your letter. It falls under fair use, because it is used for satire and criticism. From Wikipedia:
Fair use is a limitation and exception to the exclusive right granted by copyright law to the author of a creative work. In United States copyright law, fair use is a doctrine that permits limited use of copyrighted material without acquiring permission from the rights holders. Examples of fair use include commentary, search engines, criticism, parody, news reporting, research, teaching, library archiving and scholarship. It provides for the legal, unlicensed citation or incorporation of copyrighted material in another author’s work under a four-factor balancing test.
The article it is used with covers all three of the bolded items. Especially criticism, since Guardian reporters are part of the expedition under issue.
Further, the image is present on the Twitter feed of your reporter, and the feed header makes no claim of copyright. see: https://twitter.com/alokjha
The original source of the image: https://twitter.com/GdnAntarctica/status/412977161323036672 also has no Guardian copyright statement.
Given that the image is used under fair use practice, and that no copyright is claimed by the Guardian at publication, I see no legal reason to remove it.
Regards, Anthony Watts WUWT cc: LS
===============================================================
Dear Anthony Watts,
I have noted your response and will update our records accordingly.
Kind regards,
Helen
Helen Wilson
Content Sales Manager Syndication Guardian News & Media Ltd Kings Place, 90 York Way, London, N1 9GU
~~~
The Guardian has itself become part of the news since their climate-alarmist reporters are present. This foolish expedition which was hoping to find polar bears gasping their last on a slither of ice during Summer in the Antarctica have been trapped by ice. It certainly warrants some satire – at the very least. So what’s their problem? They participated in a trip that was a total fisasco, they’ve got egg on their face, and since they obviously can’t bear being laughed, they must stifle these voice(s) of satire by threatening a lawsuit?
heh
PS: I blogged the fascinating article in question [the thin-skinned guardian newspaper] a few days ago - from the wattsupwiththat.com site – one of my favorite sites:
Guardian Newspaper Threatens American Blogger With Lawsuit meanwhile American IceBreaker Ship en Route to Save Guardian Reporters.
