Dabitch.net - Everything is so random there must be a pattern

David Burn did a proper interview here: "Åsk Wäppling’s Adland Torpedoed By “Nuisance DMCA” asking the questions that many others also wondered about, so I was happy to get to answer these publically. 

Q. Can you explain the need to host the videos on your site versus using an embed from Vimeo or YouTube?

At YouTube and Vimeo I would be DMCA’d exactly in this fashion, and it would have happened a lot sooner. You have to remember that I hosted video for many many years before YouTube was even conceived of. The permission that I got to host these ads was granted to me, to be hosted on Adland, not YouTube. I’m literally honoring the agreements made then. Back in 2003. This takedown request stems from an article about an ad 17 years ago. YouTube only came to the market 14 years ago. The fact that people are asking me to move to the second comer gets a little insulting at times. Why, instead, wasn’t I showered with VC funding money like they were? Hmmm. What could be the differentiating factor, between me and the lads who were geeking out with equally lofty ideas of the future? Let me know when you figure out the answer.

Was it because I respected copyright and sought permission for each ad that I put up, in stark contrast to what they did? You know they filled YouTube with stolen content to make it as big as it is. That was what all those lawsuits were about. And there I was, asking for permission like some well brought up, polite, little girl. Which, in fact, I am, despite the impression people might get from my name.

Techdirt notes that we're offline and write "Adland Shuts Down After Web Host Complies With Bullshit DMCA Notice" on Fri, Sep 27th 2019.

To be clear: This. Is. Bullshit. The DMCA notice calls out the hosting of the commercial from well over a decade ago, but the entire point of Adland is to archive and comment upon advertisements. This is squarely fair use. As is the use of the Bridgestone name and identifiers in the context of what Adland does. Not to mention that the entire point of ads is to get them seen. Sending a takedown notice to anyone distributing what is apparently an award-winning ad makes zero sense.

As for the host, they really should know better. It's also odd to see the host demand the entire domain be removed from its services, rather than the specific content alleged to be infringing. Why in the world should Adland have to totally go over one DMCA complaint?

Why in the world indeed.

There is one advertising website that has been around longer than Adland has, and it is the Brazilian BlueBus site that premiered in 1995, a whole year before us. They noted the death of Adland in this article here. Google translated: 

The ' Adland ' is one of the pioneers among news sites in the advertising market. On the air since 1996 - only 1 year less than Blue Bus - it has been through some “perrengues” such as being banned from Google AdSense and using crowdfunding to stay on the air -  read previous note . Last week, another threat to its continuity. Site founder Åsk Wäppling was told by his Vultr server that he had 24 hours to take the domain down. The reason? The server received an email from the Holland & Hart LLP law firm demanding that the site remove a 2003 Bridgestone ad. The commercial in question, ' A Dog's Life'', created by BBDO Bangkok, took silver at Asia-Pacific Adfest that same year. Apparently Bridgestone doesn't want to have its name associated with the content in question, and is penalizing a site that simply publicized its creation - and awards, by the way. The law firm also claims that by quoting the name Bridgestone, Adland is violating a trademark (!). For now the site remains down and it is unknown whether it will be back in business - Åsk Wäppling has already shown to be tired of going through similar situations and seeing his decades-old work threatened in this way. See what Adland said about it on LinkedIn and Twitter .

The SF Egotist, another advertising blog that has been around for years reported on the demise of Adland here. "Adland shut down over DMCA takedown"

If you’ve watched an ad on Adland, you’re not alone. It’s been around since 1996 and survived as the preeminent advertising archive all these years. But for some reason, a post about a Bridgestone ad from 2003 raised the hackles of a Boulder-based lawyer and resulted in a DCMA takedown notice. It quickly spiraled from there, with Adland’s host giving them just 24 hours to find a new host.

The Adland founder took to Twitter and via email to pass on the sad news that Adland was going down.

Resumé rapporterar om Adland's plötsliga nedläggning som hotar bli permanent. Det finns en arkiverad länk här.  
 

"Reklamsajten Adland har drivits av den frilansande art directorn Åsk Wäppling i 23 år. Utöver regelrätt nyhetsbevakning har Adland även ett av världens största och mest detaljerade reklamarkiv där 50 år av Super Bowl-reklamer finns arkiverade.

Nu hotas sajtens existens. Åsk Wäppling berättar för Resumé att hon flera gånger i månaden får hot från olika advokater, så kallade DMCA-complaints, om att ta ned vissa reklamfilmer. Vanligtvis brukar situationerna lösas relativt enkelt men i början av veckan kom dock ett klagomål som fick Åsk Wäpplings bägare att rinna över. Den här gången gäller klagomålet kampanjen "A Dog's Life" framtagen av BBDO Bangkok för Bridgestone år 2003. I ett mejl menar advokaten i fråga att Adland och Åsk Wäppling genom att nämna "Bridgestone" skadar företagets varumärke, något som enligt hen bryter mot internationell upphovsrätt. Adland ligger sedan klagomålet kom in nere och istället möts läsare av ett meddelande från Åsk Wäppling.

– Jag har blivit så van att få de här kraven att jag i princip har ett standardsvar som jag kan rabbla utantill. Nu känner jag att det måste få ett slut och letar därför en advokat, berättar hon för Resumé."

---

The Adland advertising site has been run by the freelance art director Åsk Wäppling for 23 years. In addition to regular news coverage, Adland also has one of the world's largest and most detailed advertising archives where 50 years of Super Bowl commercials are archived.

Now the site's existence is threatened. Åsk Wäppling tells Summary that she receives threats from various lawyers, so-called DMCA complaints, several times a month to take down certain commercials. Usually the situations are usually resolved relatively easily, but at the beginning of the week, however, a complaint came which caused Åsk Wäppling's cup to run over. This time, the complaint concerns the campaign "A Dog's Life" produced by BBDO Bangkok for Bridgestone in 2003. In one email, the lawyer in question claims that Adland and Åsk Wäppling by mentioning "Bridgestone" are damaging the company's trademark, which according to them violates international copyright law. . Adland has been lying since the complaint came down and instead readers are greeted by a message from Åsk Wäppling.

- I have become so used to getting these requirements that I basically have a standard answer that I can bicker off by myself. Now I feel that it must come to an end and therefore seek a lawyer, she tells Resumé.

A site called Reclaim the Internet was the first out to report that "World’s largest and oldest commercial archive Adland taken offline after questionable DMCA claim" (archive link)

They continue; Adland had been online for 23 years and often hosted ads that had been banned or censored elsewhere.
 

Adland, the biggest commercial archive in the world, has been shut down after its host Vultr responded to a questionable Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) claim by telling Adland to remove its domain from the network within 24 hours.

Adland had been online since 1996 and was home to many notable archived commercial collections including its “47 years of Super Bowl Commercials.” It was also known for hosting ads and commercials that were banned or censored elsewhere. However, it’s long history and reputation as a commercial archive didn’t stop it being taken down via DMCA.

The DMCA is often criticized for giving publishers very little flexibility when responding to claims and requiring them to take content down before they can check if it’s actually infringing. Public interest lawyer Avani Singh says that the DMCA process poses a risk “both to free speech and procedural fairness.”

Lawyer Ron Coleman, who blogs "on the law affecting brands, the Internet & free speech" at Likelihood of Confusion noted dryly that: 

The more things change, the more they stay the same. This could be a story from 15 years ago, or any of a number of posts on this blog from its earliest days. This is no joke. As of the time the post was published here’s what’s at the Adland website:

Resumé Magazine, the "Campaign" of Sweden if you will, found Kidsleepy's rant about Nike's "Dream Crazy" campaign and reported on the similarity to "Think Different".

"The Cannes Lion-winning campaign is accused of being a stolen idea" they write and continue; 

In a reflective op-ed after the Cannes Lions, he criticizes Nike's campaign by focusing his attention on the campaign "Think different / Here's to the crazy ones" that TBWA / Chiat / Day brought to Apple in 1997 with several famous historical personalities such as Martin Luther King Jr. and Gandhi.

Kidsleepy concludes his op-ed by asking whether the jury actually knows their advertising history, which you can read in full here: Is Cannes festival of creativity really awarding best creative?