Andrew Orlowski, writing for The Register, has done the best job so far of placing the “Dancing Baby” case (Lenz v UMG) in its proper context — as part of Silicon Valley’s broader strategy to strip individuals of their rights. Not just professional creators of copyrighted works. All individuals.
“If Big Tech can get the public to cheer as they disenfranchise themselves, then victory will be all the sweeter.”
“Understanding the “Dancing Baby” case properly – to see why Silicon Valley has gone to war – requires you to look beyond the specifics of a baby dancing on YouTube to the underlying legal issues being contested. Silicon Valley has doggedly kept this case running for eight years and it isn’t doing so for fun. It wants to extend its own power and diminish everyone else’s.
For some readers, looking beyond the immediate absurdities of the case is tough to do. If a case highlights a legal absurdity, then it follows that the law must be repealed. But we don’t repeal accountancy fraud laws because they’re technically complex or murder laws because sometimes the wrong guy gets caught. Before we repeal a law, we must find out if there is an underlying justified grievance or issue of justice. So a response of “scrap this law” is a serious intellectual cop-out.”
