Last month, I wrote an article, The 3 (or 7) Houses of Parliament. It was about a joke in the TV series Arrested Development. For the article, I made a video that used 22.8 seconds from one of their episodes, “The Ocean Walker.” And I uploaded it to YouTube.[1]

Fox, via some robot on YouTube determined that I was using copyrighted material and banned the video instantly. At first, I just bitched. Typical! Fox is evil. You know the script.

Finally, I decided that I would fight it. I filed an appeal. I noted that I was using only one-fiftieth of an episode. I noted that it was part of a larger video and that video was part of a larger article and so my use should be considered fair use. And I noted that my video acted as a commercial for the episode.

Shockingly, today I received email from YouTube:

This is great news. It makes me think that the system—at least when it comes to Fox—works. I think the copyright system is completely broken. Until it is fixed, however, I don’t think people should be able to post whole episodes and such. But my video—and now that it’s been approved, I wish it were better—clearly falls under fair use rights. I’m glad that Fox agrees.

Of course, Fox is still evil.

[1] Here is the video:

[2] GBUtests is short for “Good Bad & Uglies Tests,” which are the videos I am trying to make but are still too weak to show in public. It does, however, still have a couple misc videos that don’t involve my face that you can look at. Don’t expect much.

Rush Limbaugh said today, “Do you think that it is accidental, that the name of the really vicious, fire-breathing, four-eyed, whatever-it-is villain in [The Dark Knight Rises] is named Bane?” Here’s the whole 4 minute bit:

The problem, of course, is that this comment shows a complete lack of familiarity with the facts. You don’t have to be a comic book geek (which I am, but in the amateur category) to look on Wikipedia to find out that Bane first appeared in January 1993, in Batman: Vengeance of Bane #1.

And just from a grammar standpoint: please! Bane is a great name for a supervillain. Bain is just the name of a Scottish philosopher.

Repeat after me, “There is such a thing as a homophone! There is such a thing as a homophone!” After you accept this, we can have such a damned good time together.

Isn’t it pretty to think so?

Update (19 July 2012 12:16 am)

Update (19 July 2012 11:16 am)

Rush Limbaugh now claims he never said the character of Bane was created as an attack on Romney’s experience at Bain Capital, except, you know, he did. He now claims he only said that Democrats would use it in the campaign. But even that is not going to be the case. This whole thing shows Limbaugh in an even more contemptible light than usual. It is really pathetic.

In a widely quoted passage from The Real Romney, Kranish and Helman explain that when Romney was asked to take over Bain Capital, he first demurred. It was only when he received guarantees that if the Bain Capital venture went bad he would not lose any money and that his reputation would be protected.

Ezra Klein today, uses this story to discuss Romney’s economic policies. He goes on to discuss the careful “no way I can lose” manner that Romney left Bain Capital. And this, to Klein, shows the lie of Romney’s entire argument for cutting the taxes of rich people:

Let me put this more directly than Klein does: Romney’s wealth does not come from risk taking; it comes from risk avoidance. His argument that the rich need to be rewarded for taking risks is belied by his own story. People need a certain amount of security if they are going to take risks. Romney’s economic ideas will only make the wealthy more so and provide fewer options for everyone else.