Quote

Had a very interesting chat. The CAIC people have seen an incredible amount of traffic from the Landmark video episode. Both to the video and also the transcript pages.

The site has received traffic from the EFF site as well as Slashdot, but the standout is the veritable flood that has continued to come from boingboing. (silly site name, but very effective)

The video page has been visited 1115 times and the transcript page has had 576 visits. Not bad for pages that have only been in existence for just over a week.

The site did run out of bandwidth for a few hours on Saturday, but they have bucketed in more than enough to keep serving the demand. I guess they're having some fun over there!

John

Here is the permalink from the boingboing site:
[www.boingboing.net]

And the reason why the CAIC site is getting all that traffic from boingboing? It's [b:7a818c477a]traffic rank is 1,345[/b:7a818c477a] on Alexa's traffic rankings.
[www.alexa.com]

Pretty friggin sweet.

Here is the text from the boingboing article:

Quote

EFF fights another DMCA abuser
EFF's Derek Slater sez, "Michael Crook isn't the only bully who's abusing the DMCA. This week, EFF also fought back against 'self-help' group Landmark Education's attempts to suppress an investigative television news piece critical of its methods. Using the DMCA and alleged copyright violation as a pretext, Landmark subpoenaed three websites hosting the video -- the Internet Archive, Google Video, and YouTube -- seeking the identities of the anonymous uploaders. But the news piece at issue isn't copyrighted by Landmark, and to the extent the video includes Landmark's copyrighted material, such use is self-evidently fair use. EFF filed objections to these bogus subpoenas on behalf of the Internet Archive and the Google Video uploader. YouTube sent notification to the user about its subpoena and is giving the user a reasonable opportunity to move to legally nullify, or 'quash,' it." Link (Thanks, Derek!)

posted by Cory Doctorow at 02:05:14 PM

Just another tiddbit before I forget.

Before all this video kerfuffle came to the fore, Landmark Education/Forum was one of the top groups that people were searching for information on at CAIC.

I guess the video only just added to it.

John

Yes.

Same thing at the Ross Institute database.

Each day the "Top Ten" most popular subsections are listed at the Home page of the site, and Landmark is there pretty much every day.

TechNews on "Misuse Of The DMCA, EFF Files Suit":

[www.technologynewsdaily.com]

Quote

... Last week, EFF filed an objection to a subpoena from Landmark Education, a group that claimed copyright infringement in a video uploaded to the Internet Archive.

"The Internet is home to passionate debate on countless important issues. It is too bad that some people find the robust exercise of free speech so frightening that they use intimidation to try to silence it," said EFF Staff Attorney Corynne McSherry. "EFF is grateful that people like Jeffrey Diehl and the Internet Archive are fighting back."

From the EFF website at [www.eff.org]

Quote

Update: EFF is currently in discussions with Landmark regarding a resolution of it subpoena to Google. In the interim, EFF has held off on filing the motion to quash. A draft of the motion, which explains our legal arguments, is linked below.

The draft motion can be found here: [www.eff.org]

Let's see where this leads. Meanwhile, the video is still available for downloading at [thepiratebay.org]

[presszoom.com]
Anyone read the new press release from Landmark?
Its very well written propaganda, it would be very effective for those not familiar with the case. They must have hired some fancy PR firm to re-write that one.

But the problem is this.
If Landmark just wanted to stop the video, they could have just asked YouTube, Google, etc, to take down the video, and that would have been the end of it.

But the difference is that Landmark is [b:5e412b0269]suing to get the ID of the little guy [/b:5e412b0269]who uploaded the video. That is why they are evil, and against free expression on the internet.
The little guy who uploaded the video didn't MAKE the video, he didn't go into the Landmark course. He just uploaded it, big deal, that's not even the problem.

But Landmark knows that they can't bully and sue a large company as easily, so they want to make an "example" of whoever uploaded that video, by going after the little guy.

Landmark is committing internet legalistic terror, designed to scare people. Internet libel chill, internet Landmark criticizing chill.

By the way, everyone knows that anyone who really wanted to [b:5e412b0269]upload the video again[/b:5e412b0269], and remain anonymous, could easily do it. All that person would have to do is take a downloaded copy of the video, and then burn it on a CD or DVD. Then go to a [b:5e412b0269]busy [/b:5e412b0269] internet cafe somewhere downtown far from their house, where you don't give your name to use the computer, and just pay cash to use the computer for a few minutes. Then they could easily upload the video again, and it would be completely anonymous [/color:5e412b0269].

(of course, a public library where you use your library card is [b:5e412b0269]not [/b:5e412b0269]anonymous! Neither is a work computer!)

Everyone knows this, right? So what has Landmark gained by their harrassment?

So Landmark is not going to create a serious internet chill, if anything, it will make their critics more pissed off, so they will go to the bother of uploading from some busy downtown internet cafe.
So Landmark still loses in the end.

Thank you internet!

Looks like there's a new blog post about it over at EFF:
[www.eff.org]

Quote

EFF and Landmark: Cards on the Table
November 09, 2006
Last week, EFF announced that it was fighting against Landmark Education's campaign to identify individuals who posted a French documentary, entitled Voyage Au Pays Des Nouveaux Gourous (Voyage to the Land of the New Gurus), that was critical of the Landmark program, and included hidden camera footage from inside a Landmark Forum event in France.

EFF is currently talking with Landmark in an attempt to reach an amicable resolution about Landmark's DMCA subpoena to Google. In the hope that we can resolve this without need of litigation, EFF has held off on filing its motion to quash that subpoena.

In the mean time, Landmark responded to our press release, according to Red Herring magazine:

"While we appreciate the work of the EFF, the allegation that our copyright claim is bogus is entirely inaccurate," [Art Schreiber, general counsel for Landmark Education] said. "The facts are clear that the Landmark Forum program has for many years been copyrighted. Materials covered by this copyright registration were included throughout the video."

While we appreciate the kind words, we disagree with Mr. Schreiber's copyright analysis. To the extent that the documentary includes any materials copyrighted by Landmark, that use is clearly for purposes of criticism and commentary, i.e., a non-infringing fair use. Yesterday we released a draft of our motion to quash, which explains in detail (see pages 11-16) why Landmark's copyright claim does not hold water. Indeed, it's not even a close call. Sorry, Landmark, but your claim is still bogus.

[www.eff.org]

[thepiratebay.org]

Hey, that's what I said!

But its true, Landmark [b:061ea1cd08]is [/b:061ea1cd08]BOGUS.
that is the perfect word for them... BOGUS.

Art Schrieber, drop the case, and save face!

The EFF is going to hand Landmark their sorry ass on a platter.
Maybe Landmark should also fire their lousy lawyers!

So Landmark, DROP those bogus and false claims against the little guy.
Because no matter what you do, people are going to upload that video, and do it anonymously.

The more Landmark tries to attack some regular Joe for nothing, the angrier the internet community will be towards Landmark.

Everyone knows that anyone who really wanted to upload the video again, and remain anonymous, could easily do it. All that person would have to do is take a downloaded copy of the video, and then burn it on a CD or DVD. Then go to a busy internet cafe somewhere downtown far from their house, where you don't give your name to use the computer, and just pay cash to use the computer for a few minutes. Then they could easily upload the video again, and it would be completely anonymous .

(of course, a public library where you use your library card is not anonymous! Neither is a work computer!) [/color:061ea1cd08]

If Landmark's claims won't hold water then they must surely know it. They must surely be the big bad wolf (with emphysema).

John

Quote
ajinajan
this from SLASHDOT:
[yro.slashdot.org]

Quote

An offshoot of the [b:6b933d4717]Scientology cult known as The Landmark Forum[/b:6b933d4717] is using the DMCA against YouTube, Google and The Internet Archive because of a scathing French documentary about Landmark being shared on those sites. It aired in France to 1.5 million people, a month later Landmark pulled out of France. Story at the EFF's site [eff.org] and other news sources.

The video with English subtitles is available via BitTorrent at PirateBay [thepiratebay.org], search eMule for "Inside Landmark Forum" or view it online at DailyMotion [dailymotion.com].

That was my posting, I even use the same nickname ("grub") :)