Antron OK after round 1 accident

[Percboy]

New info on the lady?
Update: Employer shocked by word of Rice Lake woman's death - WQOW TV: Eau Claire, WI NEWS18 News, Weather, and Sports

 

[jackass]

BTW, I just watched a video that was broadcast by ESPN that clearly shows the wreck from a perspective not shown on the ESPN2 broadcast yesterday. It was shot from behind the line and off to the right and looks like it came from a camera on a lift. It shows the full wreck and clearly shows the tire bouncing down the track, into the pits and over the trailers. Is NHRA going to go after ESPN for that one?

Brent.. i belive ESPN has a contract to record and use the footage... even being paid to broadcast gives them rights to the footage on ESPN networks... you won't see that footage on any other networks...


Billy

 

[.]

<snip>

I don't know how I can explain this any simpler. It was a personal video. Just because NHRA filed a copyright claim and had YouTube yank the video does not mean that NHRA owns the copyright. Again, Goggle "Michelle Malin DMCA' and do some reading. If the people who filmed your buddy's son had filed a DMCA counter-claim and wanted to go through the effort I bet they could have won. YouTube may be considered a rebroadcast but that's where "fair use" comes in, because it's being used for discussion and it's newsworthy.

Read the following links to understand the issue:
Michelle Malkin Akon’s record company abuses DMCA to stifle criticism on YouTube
Michelle Malkin Fair use fight: Challenging Universal Music Group
Michelle Malkin UMG & YouTube retreat over Akon report

 

[Raconteur]

Is NHRA going to go after ESPN for that one?

No, NHRA has granted the rights for usage to ESPN for all on-track footage, not to you or anyone else.

Donate away!

 

[.]

Brent.. i belive ESPN has a contract to record and use the footage... even being paid to broadcast gives them rights to the footage on ESPN networks... you won't see that footage on any other networks...


Billy

I forgot to include a /sarc at the end for sarcasm. I know they have a contract, it just seems very funny to me that ESPN broadcasts professional video showing the wreck and the tire bouncing into the pits and over trailers while NHRA is fighting so hard to keep an amateur version that doesn't show as much off of YouTube with copyright claims.

 

[.]

No, NHRA has granted the rights for usage to ESPN for all on-track footage, not to you or anyone else.

Donate away!

No sh!t, Sherlock. It's called sarcasm.

 

[Raconteur]

No sh!t, Sherlock. It's called sarcasm.

Apparently nobody got your sarcasm.

BTW, ESPN is still showing the crash footage on their Copyrighted ESPN Website, but of course they have the rights to do so... Unlike U-Tube.

 

[rocketman]

The woman was on vacation from the midwest and went to go to the concession stand when she got hit by the tire. I expect some more rule changes between now and Gainesville.

 

[.]

Apparently nobody got your sarcasm.

BTW, ESPN is still showing the crash footage on their Copyrighted ESPN Website, but of course they have the rights to do so... Unlike U-Tube.

That is not the video I saw earlier! Christ, pay attention and use some reading comprehension skills.

What I saw was filmed from a camera on a lift from behind the starting line and off to the right. It shows the wreck and it clearly shows every bounce the tire takes down the return road, into the pits and into the trailers. Whoever uploaded it used a camcorder to tape it off of his TV but it clearly shows the ESPN logo on the screen!

It has the following commentary by what sounds like Paul Page:

...was not injured. The wheel then traveled nearly an 1/8th of a mile, bouncing down the return road, and hitting the top of a six foot fence. Witnesses then say it hit a woman spectator.

That sure as hell isn't the same video that's on ESPN.com that you linked, is it? And it certainly was not shown on the race broadcast on ESPN2 last night.

 

[Raconteur]

That is not the video I saw earlier! Christ, pay attention and use some reading comprehension skills.

What I saw was filmed from a camera on a lift from behind the starting line and off to the right. It shows the wreck and it clearly shows every bounce the tire takes down the return road, into the pits and into the trailers. Whoever uploaded it used a camcorder to tape it off of his TV but it clearly shows the ESPN logo on the screen!

It has the following commentary by what sounds like Paul Page:

That sure as hell isn't the same video that's on ESPN.com that you linked, is it? And it certainly was not shown on the race broadcast on ESPN2 last night.

NHRA and ESPN will continue to show you and the public what they will of the Phoenix crash and debris, they can manage the footage anyway they see fit, it is not your business. Just as ESPN showed a managed piece of video when Scott Kallita crashed and with Darryl Russell's tragic death.

Hold your breath, stomp your feet, if they do not want a spectator or home viewer to use a price of copyrighted video, it is their business, NHRA and ESPN hold the copyright.

Sorry but I have a life to get back to, your mileage may differ. (sarcasm intended)

 

[TSK]

I've actually read it both ways, Martin. What I've heard on more than one occasion over the years from more than one track owner is that in the event of a death, the facility is immediately shut down pending investigation. However, if the individual is transported to a hospital prior to being officially pronounced dead, that particular rule doesn't necessarily apply.

I'm not saying that was the case in this particular situation, but it's not only happened before (not necessarily saying at a National Event), it's also not inconveivable for the brass at NHRA to make sure this was the case for the sake of the event not being stopped.

Anybody else have any solid information on how that actually works?

Sean D

Someone in an official capacity; attending physician, medical examiner, coroner, etc., has to pronounce the person dead before it becomes official.
Also, no official notification is released to the public until members of the victim's family are notified.
No way can NHRA falsify, or alter, the time of death.

 

[.]

NHRA and ESPN will continue to show you and the public what they will of the Phoenix crash and debris, they can manage the footage anyway they see fit, it is not your business. Just as ESPN showed a managed piece of video when Scott Kallita crashed and with Darryl Russell's tragic death.

Hold your breath, stomp your feet, if they do not want a spectator or home viewer to use a price of copyrighted video, it is their business, NHRA and ESPN hold the copyright.

Sorry but I have a life to get back to, your mileage may differ. (sarcasm intended)

That's fine, NHRA and ESPN can show their footage however they like. That does not negate "fair use" of their copyrighted material.

The spectator video that was taken off of YouTube is not NHRA's or ESPN's! NHRA and/or ESPN do not own the copyright to amateur video shot by a fan despite what they claim on the back of the tickets. It has been decided numerous times in court that the person who shot the photos or video is the copyright owner. Not the facility and/or facility owner(s). Not the team and/or team owner(s). Not the sanctioning body. Get it through your thick head.

 

[rocketman]

Here's something for you...NHRA plays a disclaimer at each national event that say something to the effect that no photographs or video taken at today's event can be published without the consent of the NHRA.

I think this disclaimer is in the event something like this happens.

Sorry if someone has already mentioned this.

 

[Rajunz]

Like I've said several times now, just because NHRA claims they own the copyright does not make it so. The general rule of law, despite what an association, sanctioning body, etc., claims, is that the person who shot the pictures or video is the copyright owner. A blanket statement like NHRA slaps on the back of their tickets is usually laughed at in court. I can claim I'm the president, that doesn't mean I am.

And even if NHRA did own the copyright to a certain video or picture, there's still "fair use" which allows for somebody to use another persons copyrighted work for various reason such as commentary, criticism and/or because it is newsworthy. Antron's crash is certainly newsworthy and it's certainly being discussed, both of which are factors in determining "fair use" of a copyrighted work.

BROADCAST is the key word here!

 

[.]

Here's something for you...NHRA plays a disclaimer at each national event that say something to the effect that no photographs or video taken at today's event can be published without the consent of the NHRA.

I think this disclaimer is in the event something like this happens.

Sorry if someone has already mentioned this.

Just because NHRA says that doesn't make it true! The person who shot the pictures or video owns the copyright, not NHRA. It's been decided in numerous trials across the country over many years. The copyright owner determines how it's viewed or shared, not NHRA.

 

[.]

BROADCAST is the key word here!

I don't own a TV channel, do you? Did any of you bother doing a Google search for "Michelle Malkin DMCA" and reading any of the links? If not, stop posting and do some reading before you post again! I made it simple, I posted the links earlier in this thread. Go read them. Even if NHRA and/or ESPN own the copyright to something you can still use it under "fair use." What's so goddamn hard to understand? This isn't new, "fair use" has been around for a long time. The first some of you may remember it being discussed was when Sony was sued over VCR's. Stop posting and ****ing read! Fair use - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The "fair use" exception is codified at 17 U.S.C. § 107, and states that "the fair use of a copyrighted work ... is not an infringement of copyright." The section lists four factors that must be assessed to determine whether a particular use is fair.

United States copyright law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[MOB]

What I saw was filmed from a camera on a lift from behind the starting line and off to the right. It shows the wreck and it clearly shows every bounce the tire takes down the return road, into the pits and into the trailers. Whoever uploaded it used a camcorder to tape it off of his TV but it clearly shows the ESPN logo on the screen!

It has the following commentary by what sounds like Paul Page:


That sure as hell isn't the same video that's on ESPN.com that you linked, is it? And it certainly was not shown on the race broadcast on ESPN2 last night.[/QUOTE]

When I was watching the ESPN2 Monday 3pm broadcast, they showed that same footage 1 time.

 

[willy]

If anybody would take the time to check it out. Brent is actually right here when it comes to who owns the rabbit poop. (does the rabbit own the poop he pooped? Or whoever owns where he pooped?)

 

[Von Halen]

I agree with Brent, even if he weren't right.

How do you think photographers and videographers sell their product, if they don't own the copyright to it?

ESPN and NHRA own the rights to the stuff they broadcast, shot by their employees. Anybody else there that shoots footage, owns said footage.

If this weren't the case, wouldn't the big money celebrities have figured out a way to keep the paparazzi from photographing and filming them, and then selling it to tabloids?

 

[Raconteur]

If anybody would take the time to check it out. Brent is actually right here when it comes to who owns the rabbit poop. (does the rabbit own the poop he pooped? Or whoever owns where he pooped?)

and until this particular issue is decided by the Federal Court system it is rabbit excrement.

How do you think photographers and videographers sell their product, if they don't own the copyright to it?

They (including me) pay a commercial license fee to sell their product from an NHRA National event.

Try it.