Newer posts are loading.
You are at the newest post.
Click here to check if anything new just came in.

July 01 2011

Die Rückkehr der Jedi-Ritter

Der gesamte YouTube-Kanal von Greenpeace wurde kurzfristig gelöscht und das YouTube-Konto der Umweltschutzorganisation gekündigt. Hintergrund ist, dass Greenpeace in einem Video eine Star-Wars-Parodie dazu nutzt, den Autokonzern VW zu kritisieren. VW hat sich nach Ansicht von Greenpeace der dunklen Seite der Macht zugewandt, was Greenpeace in einem an Star Wars angelehnten Video-Spot filmisch darstellt. Das zu Google gehörende Videoportal YouTube reagierte schnell und forsch und hat neben dem Video gleich den gesamten Greenpeace-Kanal geschlossen. Erwirkt wurde die Löschung offenbar von Lucasfilm Ltd., der Produktionsfirma von Star Wars.

Eine einstweilige Verfügung oder sonstige gerichtliche Entscheidung gegen Greenpeace scheint bislang allerdings nicht zu existieren, denn die Kampagnenwebsite von Greenpeace ist nach wie vor online und auf dem Portal Vimeo ist das Video ebenfalls abrufbar.

Vermutlich hat sich Lucasfilm gegenüber Google/YouTube auf den amerikanischen Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA) und das dort geregelte “Notice And Take Down” Verfahren berufen. Danach erlangt ein Hoster eine Haftungsfreistellung, sofern er, auf eine Mitteilung des Rechteinhabers über eine (angebliche) Rechtsverletzung hin, das beanstandete Material zügig vom Netz nimmt. Es erscheint naheliegend, dass Lucasfilm eine entsprechende Aufforderung an YouTube geschickt hatte.

Unklar ist allerdings, worauf sich der Vorwurf der Urheberrechtsverletzung genau stützt. Die an Stars Wars angelehnte filmische Parodie erhält keine erkennbare Urheberrechtsverletzung. Gemutmaßt wurde allerdings, Lucasfilm würde sich an der Verwendung der Musik aus den Star Wars Filmen stören.

Ob provoziert oder unerwartet, die Geschichte wirkt wie ein cleverer Schachzug.  Die Krieger des Regenbogens haben sich in Jedi-Ritter verwandelt.;-)

Man kann natürlich auch wieder einmal auf Mrs. Streisand verweisen.

Update:
Der Film ist mittlerweile auch bei Vimeo gelöscht. Dort kann man folgendes lesen:

Sorry, “VW: The Dark Side” was deleted at 12:10:45 Fri Jul 1, 2011. Vimeo has removed or disabled access to the following material as a result of a third-party notification by Lucasfilm Ltd. claiming that this material is infringing: VW: The Dark Side.

Damit erhärtet sich meine Vermutung, dass ein Notice-And-Take-Down-Verlangen nach dem DMCA gestellt worden ist.

April 16 2011

Re:view – iRights.info auf der re:publica XI

In den letzten drei Tagen fand in Berlin mit der re:publica XI die größte deutschsprachige Konferenz zu Blogs, sozialen Medien und vielen gesellschaftlichen Fragen rund um die Digitalisierung statt. Wir haben nun einen kleinen Re:view der Beteiligung von iRights.info zusammengestellt. Unser herzlicher Dank gilt Markus Beckedahl, Johnny Häusler und dem gesamten Team das die re:publica XI organisiert und betreut hat, insbesondere auch denen, die nicht im Rampenlicht standen, gleichzeitig aber das Rückgrat dieser Veranstaltung gebildet haben.

Um es gleich vorneweg zu sagen, wir sind sehr zufrieden mit dem Verlauf, der Vielzahl von spannenden Gesprächen, der Entwicklung neuer Ideen und dem Beginn neuer Kooperationen für und mit iRights.info. Die Redakteure von iRights.info waren zudem vielfach gefragte Interviewpartner von Print-, Audio und TV-Medien.

Wir waren an zahlreichen Veranstaltungen beteiligt. iRights.info-Redakteur Till Kreutzer konnte mit seinem Vortrag “Wir sind der Urheber! Geistiges Eigentum vs. Kreativität 2.0” im Friedrichstadtpalast ca 1.000 Zuhörer begeistern. Der Vortrag kann bei YouTube nochmal angesehen werden. Die Reaktionen vor Ort und auf Twitter zeigten eine große Zustimmung. Auch die Tagesschau wie auch weitere Presseorgane haben dabei über Kreutzer und iRights.info berichtet.

re:publica 2011, Tagesschau from Jan Doetz on Vimeo.

iRights.info-Redakteur Matthias Spielkamp diskutierte unter anderem mit dem Bundesbeauftragten für Datenschutz und Informationsfreiheit Peter Schaar das Thema “Fünf Jahre Informationsfreiheit – der verweigerte Zugang zu Behördendaten“. Nach der Veranstaltung stellte Spielkamp fest: “Das bemerkenswerteste an der Diskussion war, dass nun auch der
Bundesdatenschutzbeauftragte Peter Schaar zum ersten Mal öffentlich die Idee aufgegriffen hat, Informationsfreiheit ins Grundgesetz aufzunehmen.”

iRights.info-Redakteurin Valie Djordjevic widmete sich zusammen mit Katrin Rönicke, Teresa Bücker, Anne Roth und Diana McCarty in der Veranstaltung “Cyberfeministinnen und Girls on Web – ein Generationengespräch” dem neuen Feminismus im Netz. In einer weiteren Veranstaltung diskutierte iRights.info-Redakteur Till Kreutzer zusammen mit Andrea Götzke, Wolfgang Senges und Hendrik Menzl über “Music! Painting the day after revolution“.

Zudem präsentierten die iRights.info-Redakteure Philipp Otto und Till Kreutzer zusammen mit Max Senges, Jeanette Hoffmann und Paul Klimpel in der Veranstaltung “Zukunft des Urheberrechts im Jahr 2035” das Konzept und den Abschlußbericht der 3. Initiative des von Google Deutschland initiierten Internet & Gesellschaft Co:llaboratory (CoLab) zur Zukunft des Urheberrecht in der Informationsgesellschaft. Im CoLab wurden dabei unter anderem “Leitlinien für Regelungssysteme für kreative informationelle Güter” im fiktiven Jahr 2035 entwickelt.

Während der re:publica XI wurde auch die Gründung des Vereins “Digitale Gesellschaft” bekannt gegeben, die Website gelauncht und über die Idee wie auch die ersten Ziele informiert. Die Initiatoren wollen nach dem Vorbild von Greenpeace einerseits “eine Kampagneninfrastruktur aufbauen (…), die Durchführung von Kampagnen ermöglichen” und andererseits eine “wirksame Interessenvertretung für digitale Bürger- und Verbraucherrechte” etablieren. Für die Interessen und Belange von netzpolitischen Themen und Fragestellungen in Deutschland stellt diese Initiative mit Sicherheit eine wichtige Bereicherung dar – vor allem weil gerade die klassische Elite des Landes nach wie vor mit Unverständnis auf die digitale Revolution reagiert, wie Matthias Spielkamp im Hintergrundartikel Netzpioniere – Die digitale Revolution ist nicht aufzuhalten der Stuttgarter Zeitung zur re:publica feststellte.

Das Fazit der iRights.info-Redaktion zur diesjährigen re:publica XI ist durchweg positiv. Ein kleiner Wermutstropfen war der teilweise schwankende Netzzugang, doch können wir da locker drüber hinweg sehen. Wie sich auch in den vergangenen Jahren bereits angedeutet hat, wird das Thema Urheberrecht wie auch weitere rechtliche Fragestellungen im Kontext von digitalen Nutzungs- und Beteiligungsformen immer wichtiger. Die Reaktionen auf unsere Veranstaltungen haben uns sehr gefreut und wir versprechen, die ganzen neuen Ideen und Anfragen zeitnah weiter zu entwickeln und zu bearbeiten, die vielen neuen Kontakte zu vertiefen. Wer über aktuelle Projekte und Informationen von iRights.info auf dem Laufenden bleiben will, dem sei dieses Blog, unsere Website mit vielen ausführlichen Informationen, unser Twitter-Account wie auch unser Facebook-Profil empfohlen.

July 02 2010

Can Tate afford BP?

The oil company might give generously to arts organisations, but Tate and other museums must live up to their ethical commitments. It's time to ditch this tainted sponsor

Jonathan Jones has some simple words of advice for national artistic institutions currently feeling the financial squeeze: "If they can get money from Satan himself, they should take it." The phrase is deliberately provocative, but succeeds in reaching the heart of the debate over BP's sponsorship of the arts. The argument is straightforward enough – it's time to batten down the hatches and ignore the storm of protest, because without organisations such as BP the arts might simply cease to exist.

Responding to Jones yesterday, the artist John Jordan suggested one problem with this approach: that art risks selling its soul. BP's money is tainted, and it is hard to see how the company's reputation won't have a long-term impact on those who accept it. The spill in the Gulf of Mexico is the environmental scandal of the decade, but it won't be the last. And as BP strives to extract the last drops of oil from ever more remote regions of the planet, a whole new kind of reputational risk begins to emerge. Shocking images of oil-soaked pelicans will not be around for ever, but the consequences of climate change will be with us for the rest of the century.

Tate director Nicholas Serota needs to consider this risk carefully. Does his institution want to be associated with one of the world's biggest single sources of pollution? One that has actively lobbied to undermine clean energy, pouring huge sums into industry groups that campaign to lower carbon taxes and weaken climate legislation? BP's alternative energy business is a plaything of former boss Lord Browne that has been consigned to the corporate rubbish tip. For these reasons and others, BP is certain to remain the focus of environmental resistance and public anger for years to come. Similarly, those who choose to lend the company an air of acceptability by receiving corporate sponsorship will continue to be seen as legitimate targets for protest around the world. This movement is still in its infancy, but will only gather in strength.

The second problem simply concerns credibility. The Tate website proudly proclaims its ethical policy, announcing that it will not accept funds from a donor who has "acted, or is believed to have acted, illegally in the acquisition of funds". As lawmakers on Capitol Hill put the final touches to a series of massive lawsuits, and criminal prosecutions loom on the horizon, it is hard to find a single individual who claims that BP has acted in compliance with the law. Far more compelling, though, is the Tate's stated ambition to demonstrate "leadership in response to climate change". If ever there were a moment to show such leadership, this is surely it. Tate has a unique opportunity to demonstrate that one of the UK's most progressive institutions is prepared to take meaningful steps to show its opposition to carbon-intensive industry. Currently, it refuses to even acknowledge BP's record as an issue, relying instead on bland statements that mention only the longevity of BP's financial support. There is clearly a disconnect, and behind closed doors there must be real uneasiness in the boardroom – not to mention the membership.

The issue here is not sponsorship per se, but choices. Over the past few days a number of commentators have pointed out that tobacco companies are now seen as an unacceptable partner for any self-respecting artistic body, but for some reason oil companies are still welcome to the private view. This comes despite human rights abuses, refinery explosions, the destruction of entire ecosystems, and political interference on a historic scale. You have to wonder why. Sure, BP probably offers slightly more money than the other companies vying for the sponsorship deal. They probably don't interfere too much, either (some might say that they know a thing or two about secrecy and discretion). But the fact is that there must be a host of other companies out there who actually fit the existing ethical policy of these organisations, and a relatively small financial hit is surely worth the reputational protection such a deal would provide.

By now you might be asking what all the fuss is about. After all, it's only a small logo on a programme, a discreet thank you at the bottom of the catalogue. Jones says: "I must have seen the BP logo a thousand times on press releases and it never lodged in my mind." But ask any branding expert: it's exactly this kind of subliminal association that gives a brand its identity. Until the Gulf of Mexico disaster, BP's green sunflower was found only in carefully selected locations designed to give the company an air of clean, British authority: Covent Garden, the National Portrait awards, a new exhibition at the Tate. These are some of our best loved pastimes, and for BP this feelgood factor is simply priceless. Their executives do not sponsor the arts as a way of "giving something back", or because they truly believe in opera, or painting, or culture. They simply believe in winning political and cultural aquiescence in the ugly business of oil extraction, and the sponsorship deals allow them to do just that. The millions BP spends on our artistic institutions represents an absolute bargain. Unfortunately, it is the rest of society that is being ripped off.


guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds


June 22 2010

BP's beleaguered Tony Hayward disappears from view

Whether he was really seen on a yacht at Cowes is debated – but there was no sign of him on dry land as oil bosses met at a London congress

After Saturday's ill-advised attendance at a sailing event at Cowes, complete with disputed photographs that may or may not have shown him on board his yacht, Tony Hayward might be excused for resolving to keep his head down.

But the beleaguered BP chief executive's position came under renewed pressure tonight after he failed to show up at a gathering of the oil industry, having also ceded day-to-day control of the Deepwater Horizon disaster.

Shares in BP touched a new 13-year low after Hayward delegated a keynote speech to his chief of staff, Steve Westwell. He also cancelled a scheduled appearance at the National Portrait Gallery in London tonight where he was due to open an awards ceremony.

By dodging the World National Oil Companies Congress in London, Hayward avoided coming face-to-face with several Greenpeace protesters.

They guaranteed more bad publicity for BP by briefly halting Westwell's speech to urge an audience of oil experts and energy ministers to break their oil dependency.

"Assembled guests – because BP is incapable of telling you the truth, I'm going to tell you what you need to know," Greenpeace's Emma Gibson said, shortly after Westwell had begun by apologising for Hayward's absence.

"We need to speed up progress and make a push to end the oil age," Gibson added, before she and fellow activist Katie Swan were removed from the stage by security, along with a banner which read "Go Beyond Petroleum".

BP blamed Hayward's no-show on his busy schedule. But the company refused to discuss his whereabouts, which added to speculation that he might already be meeting with the Kremlin to discuss BP's future. Its Russian joint venture, TNK-BP, is responsible for a quarter of its production.

Amid the uncertainty BP shares fell to 328p, virtually half the value when the Deepwater rig caught fire and sank.

Security had appeared tight at The Grange St Paul's hotel today but Greenpeace managed to reach the conference room by the simple, if expensive, tactic of buying tickets, and went ahead with the protest even though Hayward was not present.

"We wanted to use the opportunity to speak to BP and push it to change things. BP shouldn't be drilling in deep water and it shouldn't extract oil from the Canadian tar sands," Swan told the Guardian after she and Gibson were released by hotel security staff.

Swan ,said she was concerned about the environmental and economic damage caused by the spill. "It looks like irreparable damage has been done. People's lives will have been changed forever," she said.

Gibson said BP was in "severe trouble" because it had not listened to activists, and had instead pushed on with increasingly risky projects.

"If they had heeded our advice over many years about the need to deliver genuine renewable energy sources, they would not be facing a $40bn (£24bn) disaster today," Swan said.

Even before the conference began today, the environmental movement was taking the opportunity to lobby Big Oil. About 200 Climate Camp activists marched to the hotel complete with a samba band on Monday night and held a mock trial of the industry for its actions around the world.

Shares in BP ended the day down 4.3% at 334.2p, their lowest close since the crisis began.

Hayward, whose PR gaffes have added to the recent criticism of BP, has now given control of the Gulf clean-up to Bob Dudley, BP's American director. City analysts are speculating over how long Hayward can continue as chief executive. "He will remain at the helm for the near term but ultimately, this fiasco might prove career-shortening for him," a fund manager from one of BP's top 20 investors told Reuters.

Westwell said Hayward was "genuinely sorry" to miss the event, before insisting that BP was committed to fixing the disaster. "When the media have left the Gulf coast, we'll still be there helping the community recover. When the headlines are focused elsewhere, we'll still be cleaning up and dealing with claims for economic losses."

He signed off with a line from Abraham Lincoln which may yet serve as Hayward's epitaph. "I do the very best I know how – the very best I can; and I mean to keep on doing so until the end."

With or without Hayward, BP will remain under the shadow of huge compensation payments and fines – and possible prosecution.

Meanwhile, tonight, the oil companies congress is holding its gala dinner, with the promise of "fine wine, exquisite food and the company of some of the greatest minds in the energy business". For the oil industry, even with a temporary halt on new deepwater drilling, it remains business as usual.

Tony's travels

Where's Hayward been?

The BP chief executive flew to America shortly after the Deepwater Horizon rig exploded on 20 April, with the loss of 11 lives. He returned to the UK for a flying visit in May to celebrate his birthday, and came back to the UK again last week following his savaging by Congress on Thursday. Spending Saturday yachting at Cowes proved the latest in a series of blunders.

Where's he now?

BP refuses to say, arguing that it never reveals its chief executive's location – even when he has abandoned a keynote speech at the last minute.

Where should he be?

In Russia, for a meeting with president Dmitry Medvedev, who has admitted he fears that BP could be destroyed by this crisis.

Reassuring the City about the company's long-term prospects would also be wise, as they face up to a dividend freeze.


guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds


Older posts are this way If this message doesn't go away, click anywhere on the page to continue loading posts.
Could not load more posts
Maybe Soup is currently being updated? I'll try again automatically in a few seconds...
Just a second, loading more posts...
You've reached the end.

Don't be the product, buy the product!

Schweinderl