Facebook SHUTS US DOWN, CNN Files FRAUDULENT Claim

[rsacamano]

[jberryhill]

1. Maybe someone will do something about constantly spamming DU with clickbait videos

I don't know how many people have been roped into watching this guy whine, through his use of misleading (and copyrighted) still images from other news programs as bait to click on what turns out to be yet another nasal monologue.

This guy is clearly ignorant. If he believes a fraudulent copyright claim was made against him, he can file an action and win big bucks, incidentally. However, based on what I've seen of the way he runs his channel over the years, this was a no-brainer that eventually came his way.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

3. +1,000,000. n/t

[marble falls]

20. I agree totally. Its not that I hate Pakman, its that I get tricked into clicking a video not ....

knowing its a Pakman vid. And frankly he's not my cup o' tea.

You got it right its click bait.

[jberryhill]

2. This crap that Pakman pulls is simply not legal

"Fair use" does not extend to his use of copyright images as the "cover image" for his videos:

I could go on, but I'm glad that someone finally caught up to his bait and switch tactic of using those stills to make people believe his videos are something other than his own monologues.

There's a reason he appropriates other people's work as clickbait for his own. He can make videos without misusing other people's work for his own commercial gain.

[Merlot]

4. How are "his own monologues" any different than

Seth Myers, Rachel Maddow, Sean Hannity, etc? All the talking heads are doing their own monologues.

Not sure what the beef is with Packman, I like that he doesn't scream or do comedy.

[jberryhill]

5. There is nothing wrong with him doing his own monologues

Take a look at the post to which you are replying.

Take a look at the still image that Pakman uses as the cover image (or whatever you call it) for his YouTube videos.

Whose images are those?

Here, let me see if I can make this simple for you.

Take a look at this:

Don't play the video, just take a look at that picture.

Pakman has taken someone else's photograph of Coulter, modified that photograph, and used it to promote his own video.

Does Pakman own the rights to do that? Did he purchase the rights to do that? Or is he ripping off someone else's rights to promote his stuff?

If you picked the last one, give yourself a prize.

I don't give a shit what his opinions are, or if I agree with him. He is not entitled to steal from other people for his own gain. There is a narrow "fair use" exemption in copyright law, but it does not extend to the way that Pakman uses other people's stuff without compensation for his own commercial gain.

Pakman is a thief. And a whiny one at that. He does not have the right to steal from other people for his own gain.

[Merlot]

6. Golly, gee I never thought if it like that. You've shown me the light.

Nothing like a good dose of whiny self-righteous mansplaining to clear the air!

Being literate, I am able to read the headline on the video card and decide if I want to click based on what I've read. The image doesn't matter to me.

Worrying about anyone using a fair use image while facebook is ok with running political ads that are lies and planning its' own currency is kinda like worrying if the violins are out of tune on the deck of the titanic.

[jberryhill]

7. Mainsplaining?

As if anyone knows the gender of an anonymous internet poster named "Merlot". Yah, right.

I'm not "worried" about anything. I do happen to have more than 20 years experience in intellectual property law, and I guess that doesn't matter more than what's between my legs when it comes to a discussion of copyright law.

It is not "fair use" to make a derivative work and use it as a cover photo for your videos, and whattaboutism is a silly defense. I don't even use Facebook and don't have an account there. I never have. That's how I address their ridiculous notions of what is "okay". If you want to provide your eyeballs to them so they can make money, that's on you.

But it should come as no surprise to him that his constant misuse of other people's content was going to be a problem, and the fact that Facebook is a tool for disinformation doesn't mean it is okay.

Putting it another way, why cry about being demonetized on a platform that is "ok with running political ads that are lies"? If someone wants to play in the sewer, they are probably going to get shit on them.

Your question was how are DP's monologues any different from someone else's. I apologize for believing you asked me a question for the purpose of eliciting an answer.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

11. Mansplaining? Are explanations to be tempered in some way by rule/custom if recipient MIGHT be femal

... if the recipient MIGHT be female?

Neither your name nor your profile give any hint that you would this sensitive to criticism or might be female. Note: those two states of being are not correlated unless you make it clear that they are somehow correlated within you.

[marble falls]

21. I think you misread JBerry. You asked for explaination of why using an image taken by someone else,

that implies there's a video involved might be violation of copyright and an exploitation of someone else's work to get one to click onto clickbait. He explained it to you like the lawyer he is would explain it to you.

This has nothing to with Pakman. I think JBerry is as tired of it as a lot of us are.

Why don't JBerry and I have the right to forego another video wrapped by intentionally misleading packaging?

Why doesn't the source of the photograph get to have credit for their work?

Why don't we put Pakman's name on the title of the postngs about his commentary?

[Agenbite of Inwit]

12. How are apples any different from oranges if they both resemble spheres?

Sean Hannity is a neo-fascist performance artist. Seth Meyers is a comedian. Rachel Maddow is a sophisticated journalist and author who probably employs a team of researchers to assist with her crucial contributions to corporate media. What these three figures have in common is that they are all celebrities. David Pakman, the clickbaiter, is not a celebrity. He has nothing in common with the aforementioned figures (although one could accuse him of being as unsophisticated as Sean Hannity, but that is another kettle of fish). DP is a poser, a spammer, and, nay, he is also a moron. (It is not unlikely that DP’s use of the pronoun, “US,” is evidence of self-aggrandizement and that there is no “us,” no “team,” just DP spamming.)

And yes, if one notices the acronym, DP, for David Pakman, is also reminiscent of another acronym associated with pornography, the echo is intentional. This is a crude and deliberate metonymic confusion intended to augment the offensive affect. I hope that this was not overlooked. I’m a woman, by the way, if that is important.

[RandiFan1290]

18. He's liberal and goes after trump

That bothers some people.

[marble falls]

22. Going after Trump bothers no one here legitimately. I just don't think Pakman's commentaries have...

the depth,and I find him annoying.

[Agenbite of Inwit]

8. Don't DP, just don't. Whatever you do, don't DP. Please, God, just don't.

I would visit Democratic Underground with much greater frequency if I didn’t think there was a risk of clicking on one of these unlabeled (and there is a reason for this) DP videos which I find not just repulsive for being transparently intellectually unsophisticated, smarmy, puerile, etc. but because the sound of this twit’s voice actually gives me an anxiety attack. One is never safe clicking on a link at this site because you can never be sure that it’s not another dreadful David Pakman video. Whoever posts this crap, please stop. Don’t. Just don’t.

[jberryhill]

9. It's the only thing this poster does

[Agenbite of Inwit]

10. What's worse,

the spam is probably courtesy of DP himself.

[matt819]

13. Wow, someone really doesn't like David Pakman

I watch his videos now and then. He's no different than any reasonably well-informed podcaster/commenter/columnist. Better than some, not as good as others. So what? That's life.

Bait and switch based on a still photo? Give me a fucking break. That makes no sense, and you're not out any money or much time if you decide that the video doesn't somehow match the one still photo. He whines? Did he kick your dog? Piss on your lawn?

[jberryhill]

14. No, he kicked my lawn and pissed on my dog

[Agenbite of Inwit]

15. My hostility to DP is a symptom of a reservoir of abandonment issues.

David Pakman wouldn't friend me on Facebook and I will never associate with anyone named David again, never.

[jberryhill]

16. I was humiliated by the game of Pac Man many years ago

The incessant eating of dots while being chased by ghosts traumatized me.

[RandiFan1290]

19. Welcome Back to DU!

[mysteryowl]

17. Exactly matt819! Plus, we need every single liberal media person we can get.

There is no place for slamming them. I don't like to see people on DU cutting down our liberal media we have available.

Maybe the ones complaining can do better? Then make your own show!

[marble falls]

23. How about honestly labeling his videos so we can have the option of not being bait and switched ...

then this whole magilla goes away???