Gray Television vs. Florida NewsCenter

[leach]

Over at www.tvnewstalk.net there is a very interesting discussion about Gray Television going after www.flnewscenter.com demanding that they be taken off that website. For those who don't know, Flnewscenter is a website that features news about Florida's Tv stations with clips and screen shots.

Reading the messages over at TV Newstalk, makes me wonder. Can a radio/TV station really demand a website to take them off whether its a clip of their newscast, their logo or even news about them? If a site says no, could they really be sued? I can see a station doing just that if a site features a complete newscasts or a full radio show but clips, logos, and airchecks, well don't they fall under fair use?

One poster even suggested that all of this could be a joke on the part of someone at Gray. Sounds crazy but I have worked beside people in radio who really did get their kicks buy emailing bogus stories to various media websites, even using their company's email accounts to make it look real. Our Engineer once sent an email to a website saying we were going to hook up with Jones radio network and all of our part-timers will be getting the ax. Of course it was false, he just did it to well scare the staff. I know, our Engineer should get a life but it was his strange way to have fun.

If a radio/TV station does have the legal power to get themselves taken off a website, how long will it be before they go after sites that speak negative towards them? After all, there are many media based websites including this one that has many of mesages going after Clear Channel, Sinclair, Infinity, Viacom, and so-forth. If Gray Television has the power to do this, what is next? Sinclair going after those who post messages saying that the quality of their news sucks?

Also on www.tvnewstalk.net the webmaster for the Florida NewsCenter says that his site has been banned in at least one place. How common is that? Is it common practice of a radio/TV station to ban access to media based websites such as www.dcrtv.com or even this one at work? Or even to allow their employees to post messages.

 

[Markxxx]

> Over at www.tvnewstalk.net there is a very interesting
> discussion about Gray Television going after
> www.flnewscenter.com demanding that they be taken off that
> website. For those who don't know, Flnewscenter is a
> website that features news about Florida's Tv stations with
> clips and screen shots.
>
> Reading the messages over at TV Newstalk, makes me wonder.
> Can a radio/TV station really demand a website to take them
> off whether its a clip of their newscast, their logo or even
> news about them? If a site says no, could they really be
> sued? I can see a station doing just that if a site
> features a complete newscasts or a full radio show but
> clips, logos, and airchecks, well don't they fall under fair
> use?
>
> One poster even suggested that all of this could be a joke
> on the part of someone at Gray. Sounds crazy but I have
> worked beside people in radio who really did get their kicks
> buy emailing bogus stories to various media websites, even
> using their company's email accounts to make it look real.
> Our Engineer once sent an email to a website saying we were
> going to hook up with Jones radio network and all of our
> part-timers will be getting the ax. Of course it was false,
> he just did it to well scare the staff. I know, our Engineer
> should get a life but it was his strange way to have fun.
>
> If a radio/TV station does have the legal power to get
> themselves taken off a website, how long will it be before
> they go after sites that speak negative towards them? After
> all, there are many media based websites including this one
> that has many of mesages going after Clear Channel,
> Sinclair, Infinity, Viacom, and so-forth. If Gray
> Television has the power to do this, what is next? Sinclair
> going after those who post messages saying that the quality
> of their news sucks?
>
> Also on www.tvnewstalk.net the webmaster for the Florida
> NewsCenter says that his site has been banned in at least
> one place. How common is that? Is it common practice of a
> radio/TV station to ban access to media based websites such
> as www.dcrtv.com or even this one at work? Or even to allow
> their employees to post messages.
>
There is a things called a "fair use" doctrine. Outside of that, yes a company can demand that logos and other trademarks be taken off websites.

If you do a check of domains you will find a lot of companies will by negative domain names to prevent some disgruntled customer from getting it. Like "thiscompanysucks.com"

Usually it's a scare tactic by the company to force websites to comply. Remember no service provider wants the hassle of a lawsuit. So if customer X puts up an "anit-website" the company will sue the person who operates the site as well as the host provider. The host provider will simply say "take it down."

It's very costly to defend a lawsuit even if you're right.

Business are also getting more internet savy. For instance the appeals courts have ruled companies have a right to restrict employees from commenting on website. This goes back to an employee that lost her job because she had a blog and was critical of her company. Another man lost his job because he wore his company uniform when put a picture of himself in a personal ad. Both time the courts rules the company was in its right to do so.

So there is a clear difference between use of trademarked logos and opinion. But it's the "fair use" that is tricky. For instance you can quote PART of a published article. How much of the article can be quoted before it stops being "fair use" and becomes copywrite infringment is the iffy part<P ID="signature">______________
Once I figured out the meaning of life....Then I forgot to write it down.</P>