Disco. Inst. tries to "expel" critics from Youtube

Afarensis and PZ note that the Discovery Institute is trying to hide Youtube videos criticizing their pet dachshund, Casey Luskin.

Luskin Someone at Disco. has apparently been hitting his their own product, a danger in the Disco. scene. He or she thinks that they have a copyright claim on video made by Fox News. He Disco. doesn't. Fox News does, so if anyone is going to take down this video, it will be Fox, not Disco.

CaseyWhichever Disco spinner did this also needs to understand that copyright law is not a tool for censorship. Copyright exists, according to the US Constitution, "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts." While I might question whether anything associated with the term "Disco" can be considered science – let alone a useful art, I don't question the necessity for the law to treat those concepts broadly for purposes of copyright.

I can and do question that it serves any useful purpose, for science, for art, for democracy itself, that a petty and fallacious claim of copyright infringement might be used to silence debate. Disco., especially Casey, makes a big show of talking about civility, yet DI is using lies and deceit to block their opponents. They talk a good game about freedom, but when the pedal hits the metal, they're happy to use whatever underhanded legal maneuvers they can to silence critics.

This isn't the first time they abused copyright to shut someone up. Casey sent my friend Les Lane and my Scibling ERV nastygrams for posting his picture. Actual lawyers showed that Casey's claims had no legal merit, and the matter died down. In this case, Youtube's hair trigger for copyright infringement might not just doom the videos, but the Youtube account of Casey's critic. The damage would be much more widespread than any dispute over Casey's stunning visage.

Here are the videos. Pass them around before the Disco. gang hustles them off the floor.

Updated to add: Casey denies sending the takedown notice. He doesn't say who sent it, calling that "an internal DI matter." This is a point on which we disagree, clearly. However, I made certain assumptions about the author of the notice, and as we all know, when you make assumptions, you make an ass of u and mptions. I made small adjustments above to clarify the matter, and regret the error.

More like this

Back when Yoko Ono was suing the makers of Expelled over their use of John Lennon's "Imagine," the Discovery Institute was a hotbed of copyfighters. Disco. DJ Bruce Chapman called Ono a "censor" and pitched it as a battle for free speech. Chapman complains about an Ars.Technica post which rightly…
I know you all read PZs blag, but I really need to take a moment to point out this bit of irony. Casey Luskin I mean, 'The Discovery Institute' *WINK!*, just filed a false DMCA claim against a YouTube user for criticizing Luskins appearance on some random FOX News show. Now, Im fairly certain that…
We have another point of correspondence. Remember how Kent Hovind's organization was bellowing and bucking about to block criticism on youtube? Now the Discovery Institute is up to the same shenanigans, trying to silence criticism by shutting down their youtube critics. It's a good video that…
Just under a year ago, I quoted and endorsed Stephen Post's argument that lack of civility isn't the problem we face in society, that incivility is a symptom, not an end unto itself. Civility matters, and there are good reasons to urge people to be more civil in their interactions, and to model…

I noticed when I first saw this clip, something kind of freaky. I had once read that if you watch a persons eyes when they are talking, if the eyes twitch to their right frequently, it means they are lying. Supposedly, it showed activity in the left (ostensibly the creative)hemisphere of the brain as they are "creating" the narrative. I don't put a whole lot of stock in it, but as he's talking about Haekel's embryos, he does it.

Sorry, right hemisphere.

Afarensis and PZ note that the Discovery Institute is trying to hide Youtube videos criticizing their pet dachshund, Casey Luskin.

Calling Casey Lusking a dachshund is an insult to thesenoble, intelligent beasts.

By Josh in California (not verified) on 12 Jun 2009 #permalink

Where is this denial by Casey? After all, he's (allegedly) a lawyer, and should know at least a little bit about DMCA. Doesn't he have any influence at the DI? (I know, I know: rhetorical question.)

Luskin is a lawyer who works AT the DI, not a lawyer who works FOR the DI. Casey is simply a spokesperson who does what he's told. Sort of like a go-fer which is why he's known far and wide on the Internet as the DI's Attack Gerbil. Squeaky, but mostly harmless.

I doubt that Casey has the intellectual ability or the authority to mount a DMCA claim on his own, but it's likely, as the most technically savvy of the denizens of the DI, that he actually pushed the buttons.

"Trust me, Obi-wan, I am your Emperor."

On the Really, Really Funny HAHAHAHAHAHAHA side of things,

the videos that the DI hosts on YouTube get maybe a hundred hits.

Luskin the Fool hosted by Thunderf00t is getting tens of THOUSANDS of hits. No telling how many hits all the mirrored sites combined have gotten.

Hey, Luskin, great PR Coup for you and your fellow miscreants! Nice Job, Gerb.