Patterico's Pontifications

5/23/2014

From the Songhai “Sunny” Armstead Files: Supporter of Race-Obsessed Judicial Candidate Uses Copyright Thuggery to Get the Evidence Removed

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:18 am

Remember Songhai “Sunny” Armstead? She is the judicial candidate who told a local black congregation to vote for her because she is black. Not only that, she suggested that people who aren’t black don’t care about people who are:

There are 15 open seats right now. I am the only African American running. There’s only one Chicana running. Can you guess who else is running? Are there people who care about the people in this room? Probably not. I can’t speak before them, but probably not.

In the post I did about Armstead’s disgusting views, I linked the full video of her remarks. When you click on the YouTube URL for that video now, you see this:

Screen Shot 2014-05-22 at 8.12.35 AM

Looks like I got someone’s attention, huh?

So who is Gail Copeland, the person who filed the copyright claim? Well, for one thing, she appears to be a supporter of Armstead’s. (Surprise!) This screenshot shows that Copeland has “liked” Armstead’s Facebook page for her campaign:

Screen Shot 2014-05-22 at 8.14.55 AM

Copeland also does not appear to be the owner of the copyright in the question. She has her own YouTube channel:

Screen Shot 2014-05-22 at 8.21.13 AM

The channel is bursting with videos from City of Refuge, the church where Armstead made her race-obsessed speech. Each of Copeland’s videos bears a “fair use” notice, suggesting that she may not be the actual owner of the copyright. For example, here is Copeland’s video from the service where Armstead spoke:

Screen Shot 2014-05-22 at 8.20.53 AM

Let’s take a closer look at that notice:

Screen Shot 2014-05-22 at 8.28.20 AM

To file a DMCA takedown, Copeland would have to be the copyright owner. If Copeland is the copyright owner, why would she feel the need to append a “fair use” notice to her own work? (By the way, a “fair use” notice is not necessary for a work to qualify as fair use.) Also interesting is the fact that the copyright notice on the video itself says the copyright is owned by NoelJones.org, not Gail Copeland:

Screen Shot 2014-05-23 at 8.58.37 AM

In any event, my video falls squarely within the fair use sections of the Copyright Act. It is political commentary relating to an upcoming election. I have added a title which appears at the top of the video, characterizing Armstead’s comments, thus transforming the work. I uploaded the video to embed it in a post commenting on Armstead’s habit of asking for votes due to the color of her skin. My use of the video to make a political point about Armstead, a candidate for judge, is classic fair use.

Since my video is fair use, I have filed a counternotice to the DMCA claim. But of course, YouTube takes ten business days to put a video back up — meaning that the video will be down through the June 3 election.

My original post now substitutes Copeland’s version of the video, which bears the innocuous title “COR 4-27-14 For Such A Time As This 4.” I prefer my original title: “Judicial candidate: Vote for Me Because I’m Black.” But Gail Copeland’s misuse of copyright laws to squelch political speech, combined with YouTube’s reflexive obeisance to any takedown request, even from non-copyright owners, means that my preferred version of the video, bearing my preferred caption, cannot be published.

What can be done about Gail Copeland her brand of copyright thuggery? Well, the best thing to do is rely on the Army of Davids. Yesterday, a fella calling himself John Doe uploaded an edited version of the video to YouTube.

Don’t bother clicking the link. Gail Copeland works fast. She has already filed a DMCA request on that video as well, and had it taken down.

But if enough of you download her version of the video and transform it — whether simply, by adding an appropriate caption, or ideally in a richer fashion, interspersing your commentary between Armstead’s remarks — free speech will win out over thuggery.

But you have to actually take action for this plan to work. Download the video [but see UPDATE below] and use it to make your own video featuring your own protected free speech. If you can’t upload the video, spread the word. Tell your friends about this post. Send around the link to my original post.

Free speech is not “free.” It takes work and action. Are you willing to take the time to promote it here?

UPDATE: It’s worse than I thought. Copeland’s version actually scrubs Armstead’s most blatant racist remarks from her speech.

I will have much more about this.

41 Responses to “From the Songhai “Sunny” Armstead Files: Supporter of Race-Obsessed Judicial Candidate Uses Copyright Thuggery to Get the Evidence Removed”

  1. This type of thuggery requires a push back. I’ve downloaded the video and will edit it accordingly, re-upload it to my youtube channel, and post the link here in the comments.

    In case anyone else is having problems downloading the video you can use http://keepvid.com

    Sean (69ccc8)

  2. if copyright law couldn’t be bent by the obamasluts at google to squelch freedom and advance fascism google would’ve had it changed many moons ago

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  3. It is like they don’t want people to hear her words.

    JD (9f0beb)

  4. You are spot on, JD. Have we finally found a lefty who embarrasses easy?

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  5. I think it’s that they’re trying to stop people going to polls determined to vote for someone other than Songhai “Sunny” Armstead , and especially they’re hoping to prevent this getting into media of higher circulation, or going viral.

    Sammy Finkelman (42d229)

  6. Modified and uploaded: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RWbq2YEH5fs

    Sean (69ccc8)

  7. Also, I don’t have any problem with sending the video I modified to anyone else that wants to upload it to their channel. Just contact me through my YouTube page.

    Sean (69ccc8)

  8. Nicely done, Sean.

    creeper (e40824)

  9. But that’s not at all racist – will be a response she will likely give if challenged about the video. Blacks asking blacks to vote for them is not racist according to the supporters of the racist philosophy of FUBU. Requests for votes are only racist when a white person asks another white person for their vote. This woman is clearly not qualified for a position that requires unbiased and fair judgement – like a judgeship. However, she’s running for office in the land of Polosi and Feinstein where the voters are insane enough to vote for those two – they’ll vote for this political horror as well.

    Bob (5a8aa3)

  10. So why did they ‘dowdify’ it, if it’s all on the level

    narciso (3fec35)

  11. YouTube was taken over by hippies a few years ago. They ban anything that portrays liberals in a bad light. You know, videos that tell the truth?

    CrustyB (69f730)

  12. Thank you creeper.

    Sean (69ccc8)

  13. this sounds like an awful lot of w*rk…

    can’t we all just get along?

    8-)

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  14. Patterico, I hope you pursue the DMCA counter-notice, even past the election date. The DMCA prescribes serious penalties for issuing false takedown notices, which were supposed to deter abuse, but they are so rarely enforced that their deterrent effect is negligible. The more people pursue DMCA abusers, the more likely that others will be deterred from abusing it in the first place.

    Milhouse (50cb78)

  15. Comment by Sean (69ccc8) — 5/23/2014 @ 8:55 am

    Excellent work, Sean! I was momentarily fooled when you included the “scrubbed” notice in the beginning.

    felipe (098e97)

  16. Use Dropbox instead. Gail can’t revoke that. So what I did was took Sean’s link and made a public link. Downside? 20GB limit per day.
    https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/28341263/Songhai.mp4

    Karadion (a65f4d)

  17. the other downside is the fascist whore can’t see how many hits you get

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  18. “How do I download this?” you may ask…

    Well, it depends. If you have Firefox installed, and if you’re using it now, then the most you have to do is get a suitable add-on for FF which allows you to save YouTube videos. There are a number of them out there but I can specifically recommend
    either of
    “Download Youtube videos as MP4″
    or
    “One-Click Video Download”

    If you’re using Chrome, well, you’re SOL for this activity, since Google owns YouTube. And Google owns Chrome. So there are no add-ons for Chrome which do this. In this case, install FFox.

    If you’re using IE, well, you’re on your own. Because the real question, if you’re using IE is… “WTF? Why?” ;-)

    “Seems like a lot of work”

    Well, if this was the ONLY time you would ever do this, then yes, it would be. But the fact is, you should have the capacity to save stuff off YouTube readily available, just because stuff like this happens, and should not. Google does not make any effort to verify such claims ahead of time, it doesn’t even try. So, in may cases, a takedown may occur which is nothing more than a-priori censorship, as the poster may not have the resources to challenge the take down action, or, even more likely, the determination to do so.

    Smock Puppet, "Si tacuisses, philosophus mansisses." (225d0d)

  19. “How do I download this?” you may ask…

    Well, it depends. If you have Firefox installed, and if you’re using it now, then the most you have to do is get a suitable add-on for FF which allows you to save YouTube videos. There are a number of them out there but I can specifically recommend
    either of
    “Download Youtube videos as MP4″
    or
    “One-Click Video Download”

    If you’re using Chrome, well, you’re SOL for this activity, since Google owns YouTube. And Google owns Chrome. So there are no add-ons for Chrome which do this. In this case, install FFox.

    If you’re using IE, well, you’re on your own. Because the real question, if you’re using IE is… “WTF? Why?” ;-)

    “Seems like a lot of work”

    Well, if this was the ONLY time you would ever do this, then yes, it would be. But the fact is, you should have the capacity to save stuff off YouTube readily available, just because stuff like this happens, and should not. Google does not make any effort to verify such claims ahead of time, it doesn’t even try. So, in may cases, a takedown may occur which is nothing more than a-priori censorship, as the poster may not have the resources to challenge the take down action, or, even more likely, the determination to do so.

    So I would always have the capacity available, simply for the reason that you don’t want to allow people to censor others.

    Smock Puppet, "Si tacuisses, philosophus mansisses." (225d0d)

  20. the upside is you *can* still see Robin Thicke, who is smoover than you are, perform “rollacaoasta” with our friend Estelle

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KV8dJIglTyI&feature=kp

    but you can’t see it if you don’t click

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  21. don’t believe me don’t click

    you will see i speak troof

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  22. I didn’t even know who Robin Thicke was until Hannah Montana dry-humped him, happyfeet. Please don’t be offended if I watch a Detective Dee movie with Andy Lau instead. Did you know that “long wang” in Chinese means “sea dragon”? Me neither.

    nk (dbc370)

  23. Just got a notice from YouTube that Ms. Copland has subscribed to my YouTube channel. Interesting to see how long before she complains to YouTube about the Fair Use of her Fair Use video.

    Sean (69ccc8)

  24. Why can’t you bring a civil lawsuit against her for violating your civil rights?

    Break her financially, that will be a lesson to others who would attempt to abuse the DMCA.

    Hell, let her shut me up, then help me bring the suit.

    Smock Puppet, "Si tacuisses, philosophus mansisses." (225d0d)

  25. i watched the sea dragon thing a couple weeks ago

    it had some moments but

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  26. but i knew that i was out of luck

    the day

    the music died

    not unlike lucille ball and kurt cobain

    happyfeet (8ce051)

  27. UPDATE: It’s worse than I thought. Copeland’s version actually scrubs Armstead’s most blatant racist remarks from her speech.

    I will have much more about this.

    Patterico (227090)

  28. I suppose if she is so Afro-centric the concern is that she will smash whites and Hispanics harder to make up for her view of systemic inequality. However, I don’t get the sense that this is what this woman is about that. Here is what I think she is saying. There are people on the bench today who look at black males with no empathy – who fail to see them as souls worth saving through alternative punishments to incarceration. She wants to tell other blacks that she will have that empathy.

    Your obsession over this point makes me feel somewhat this is a partisan campaign tactic to support your friend. Don’t get me wrong -it’s genius and fair game in the arena of politics and your viewpoints are reasonable in my mind. However, I don’t think she’s quite the race obsessed nut job you make her out to be. Notice that she also talks about the mentally ill. She does so in a race neutral way.

    Scippio Americanas (2b4575)

  29. Okay – I just realized that I may have only seen the scrubbed diversion. Can you show the completely unedited clip of her? That could change my opinion.

    Scippio Americanas (2b4575)

  30. Sean said ,”Just got a notice from YouTube that Ms. Copland has subscribed to my YouTube channel. Interesting to see how long before she complains to YouTube about the Fair Use of her Fair Use video.

    Comment by Sean (69ccc8) — 5/23/2014 @ 11:46 pm

    Can you let everyone know when Gail makes her false claims against your posting?

    Scippio – the full text and video is available on multiple posts here. That you chose to not reference said words surprises nobody.

    JD (6c752f)

  31. Is Copeland a church employee or lay volunteer? Does she post these videos by arrangement with the church? Did she edit or take down these videos after consultation with the campaign? Does this imply coordination between the church and the campaign?

    Kevin M (b357ee)

  32. JD, as of this morning there has been no claim, but I’ll post an update if circumstances change.

    Sean (69ccc8)

  33. Thanks, Sean. Gail is persistent. I would be shocked if she didn’t. How long did it take for her to start following you after you posted that?

    JD (5abd66)

  34. #30, way to go Scippo, you suppose the “concerns” of those (privileged white folks) who don’t share Ms Armstead’s racist prejudices are afraid she’ll peel the blindfold off Lady Justice and tip the scales in favor of “her people.”

    But, you don’t get the sense Armstead means what she said, you presume to think what she meant to say was that today’s judges are overly concerned with applying punishment to law breakers instead of saving the souls of black miscreants, that is of acting like judges instead of preachers. Armstead repeatedly assured her audience she’ll be empathetic, that she’ll look for “alternatives” to incarceration. (Can I get a Hallelujah right about now?)

    Scippo, you accuse Patterico of harboring an “obsession” with exposing Armstead’s racist prejudices and with the underhanded attempts of her supporter, Gail C Copeland, to hide the video taped evidence which is already out on the net. Since proof of Armstead’s prejudice is undeniable, attacking the messengers is one of the few remaining dodges. Consequently, you “feel” (somewhat) like Patterico’s motivation just might be tinged with partisanship.

    Now, you don’t want readers to get you wrong, and you acknowledge Patterico’s points are reasonable, but you “don’t think she’s quite the race obsessed nut job” her own words make her out to be. In her defense you note she talks about the mentally ill in race neutral terms.

    Well, then, according to your way of thinking, if Armstead puts milk in her coffee it’s proof positive it was her evil twin up there on the podium spouting racist bigotry. Now, admittedly, Armstead isn’t in the same league with Reverend Wright, but if she gets on the bench wrapped in black robes and washed in the perverse dogma of “liberation” justice who knows what evil might lurk behind the convenient mask of misplaced empathy?

    ropelight (541807)

  35. Armstead repeatedly assured her audience she’ll be empathetic, that she’ll look for “alternatives” to incarceration.

    That could mean she owns some properties that she rents out to the county for halfway houses, or that her brother has a distributorship for location and alcohol monitors, or that her sister runs a social work agency that subcontracts to the probation department. The prisoner industry is not only in prisons. (And there was this f***er in Texas who was getting a kickback for each kid he sent to private juvenile reform schools.)

    Anyway, a judge is not supposed to make those kinds of promises. The legislature provides the sentencing factors and the judge’s duty is to apply them fairly and wisely.

    nk (dbc370)

  36. JD, about 6 hours after I posted the video. Consider that at the time I was notified the video only had 40 views it’s more likely she’s monitoring Patterico’s site.

    Sean (69ccc8)

  37. You’d almost think she was from Chicago wouldn’t you nk? Definitely got an “it’s our turn” vibe to it. th

    elissa (fb6f94)

  38. DuPage County jail rents out space to the Texas Department of Corrections, too. Or used to.

    It’s pretty clear what this lady is saying: “You ain’t gonna get a fair shake from whitey.”

    nk (dbc370)

  39. The issue is that in judges we want individuals that are FOR the LAW not FOR a GROUP based on SKIN COLOR.

    Sean (69ccc8)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2820 secs.