Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by bad_alloc | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

bad_alloc

I found these videos that can be viewed in Germany:

1) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4GlYh58cxKY (Interview with German translation)

2) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4x38jkFlPeg (Interview in English)

Do they work for anybody else?

View on HN

Nope - doesn't work for me in the U.S.

Can you download it and torrent it?

https://archive.org/details/snowden_interview_en

I must say I'm becoming increasingly disappointed about archive.orgs lax copyright policies. Becoming a treasure trove of pirated material really eats its legitimacy in my eyes.

Nutrality and obstaining from censorship gives it legitimacy, in my eyes.

To each their own, I suppose.

If Snowden didn't want limitations on distribution of his interview then he should have mandated the release to public domain as a condition for the interview. Instead he chose to give the interview to a entity willing to retain and reserve all rights, resulting limited exposure. You are free to disagree with that choice, but that does not give you right to overrule it.

edit: I might add that we already have The Piratebay as a place to rebel against the copyright system. I just feel that The Internet Archive is too valuable (as an archive of public-domain material) to be dragged down to that fight. I don't feel like it is too much to ask to keep the two segregated.

I think Snowden is probably being advised by lawyers to limit his communications to "official" journalist outlets, for his own protection. It's unfortunate, but in many countries journalists have more protections than regular citizens.

I guess they follow the usual DMCA dance, the data is uploaded by users after all.

The only thing I wonder is if they actually delete such files or hide them with a "first published on 2014-01-26, author John Doe" marker to unlock once copyright expired.

It might be easier to get hold of certain artefacts now than in 135 years (or whenever recently obtained copyrights actually will expire).

It's better for the NSA to collect all your data now than when you've set us up the bomb.

I love the irony in this flawed line of thinking here.

I see a huge difference between historians and spooks.

For one, few historians run torture camps and assassination units.

This is historically important material produced by a wholly owned subsidiary of a license-funded public broadcaster for a license-funded public broadcasting group. Of anything to complain about "lax copyright policies" and "becoming a treasure trove of pirated material" over, this would seem a particularly bad choice.

I sadly realize that this is a bad place to complain. But honestly I've encountered a significant amount of works of dubious copyright status (or clearly blatant copyright infringement) in the past months (and years), and this case kinda broke the proverbial camels back.

I probably should pick up blogging so that I could discuss these kinds of issues in a more neutral context, but so far HN feels more natural outlet for me.

Why this case in particular?

I'm having trouble if the ARD (or parts of it) starts dicking around with copyright restrictions. They receive a huge amount of funding from mandatory payments of all German households (you can try to avoid that if you're a poor student or poor, period, but usually you're (supposed to be) paying - by law).

It's really close to a tax to pay for their content, their infrastructure. Which makes sense in a way for me, I do want broadcasters that don't need to rely on 'what the masses want' alone to pick their content, ending with Big Brother and brainless idiotic stuff everywhere.

But there's power and there's responsibility. If you take money from ~every~ citizen/household, then you better release that stuff with a decent license.

But the content is freely viewable in Germany, isn't it? Imho that would easily cover their mandate to the people (who are financing them)

For a number of days. I wonder when they will go un-publish this one.

Most things disappear from their websites after 7 days, which is a "compromise" they worked out with the private media corporations.

You can't really fault them for following the restrictions set by past deals

Well, even in Germany they failed by

- not showing this prominently enough

- not providing the original version without a lot of prodding

As for the rest of the comment: I don't know. The content's created. Why not set it free? I expect that for me/for locals, but I fail to see why you'd want to use geolocation to exclude others. Ever. The only cost at this point is bandwidth and by offering the content with a liberal license you could expect decent mirrors.

For anyone that can host it, here's how to get the mp4.

From: http://www.liveleak.com/ll_embed?f=e2ce8368acfc

Length: 85151797 (81M) [video/mp4]

Right-Click & Save As... http://edge.liveleak.com/80281E/ll_a_s/2014/Jan/27/LiveLeak-...

"Anti-hotlink protection: The hash code for the file you tried to view has expired."

Thanks, though, got it downloaded.

magnet:?xt=urn:btih:da801929f47900e5d64d20601c5f00001f26bd57&dn=Snowden%5FInterview.mp4

thanks the magnet. How did you download the video? I tried videograbber, flash video downloader, and download helper. All of them refused to work.

Just viewed the source and found the URL to the .mp4, grabbed it w/ curl and threw it into Transmission.

"Blocked in your country" (UK)

This is why it's time for a post-Google internet. No matter what you say about copyright, crucial videos like these are of high public interest and must be available to all individuals. Sadly the state of our current internet allows powerful interests to arbitrarily censor content, justifying their actions with copyright, or worse - 'protecting' children.

I don't understand your point. It says "The uploader has not made this video available in your country" for me, so it looks like ARD did that on purpose. They could have hosted that on any server and blocked you by IP address.

We have Fair Use in the US, which is the protection you seem to be grasping for, and while the concept is weaker in the EU, even with stronger protections it makes no logical sense to depend on the person who wants to (over) enforce their copyright to distribute their works freely under fair use. Even without any copyright at all, you still wouldn't be able to force them to distribute to everyone. You might as well mail them and ask for a copy, and, when they turn you down, call for a post-Postal-Service world.

You can, however, look to others to distribute the work, and as others have said below, the interview is available online[1]. If you think fair use in this case is important and someone tries to get the interview taken down from the Internet Archive, I suggest donating to hopefully get some good precedent behind them.

[1] https://archive.org/details/snowden_interview_en

Not in Russia

Reply on news.ycombinator.com