TimeWarner-AOL

I was asked if I wanted to help The Nation identify the blogosphere's influentials that could help them in one of their current campaigs, the first thought that popped into my head was, "here we go again, another one of those blogger phone calls". Yet, when I heard the name "TimeWarner" as one of the main antagonists, I knew I had to take on this project.

Earlier this year, the Postal Regulatory Commission (PRC) rejected a postal rate increase plan offered by the U.S. Postal Service. Instead of implementing a plan that would spread equitably the rate hikes across all bulk mail clients, they opted to implement a modified version submitted by and partial to media giant Time-Warner Inc.

The new postal increase drafted by TimeWarner-AOL and approved by the PRC favors large bulk mail users like the magazine publishing divisions of TimeWarner-AOL by increasing the rate of small independent publishers by as much as 20%. Just to put things into perspective, for a publication like The Nation, this translates into paying $500,000 extra in postage yearly and in perpetuity (or until the next postal increase comes along).

As Teresa Stark put it in Disseminate Information, Protect Democracy, "While it is understandable that Time Warner would relish the idea of making it more difficult for new competitors, there is no reason to think that it is in the interest of the American people or the market economy.

Ironically, about two years ago a coalition of organizations and netactivists created DearAOL.com after the media giant tried to impose an email “stamp” system for bulk emailers like MoveOn.org or bloggers with weekly newsletters produced by blogs like YearlyKos, BradBlog or Afronetizen. Yes, they actually tried to play post office with AOL's email service.

And it was thinking about this bit of irony that it hit me : TimeWarner has been one of the biggest enemies of the free internet (aka, net neutrality) not just so they can be free to charge whatever they want for all aspects of publishing, privacy, creativity and freedom on the internet. It's part of a larger business vision in which all publishing, recording and broadcasting in the United States is control by a handful of large (and therefore manageable) media conglomerates.

This is what I got late last night :

From: margaret_langston@timeinc.com
Date: 28 February 2007 06:57:58 PM EST
To: Liza Sabater ...

Subject: Re: DMCA Copyright Notice

Dear Website Proprietor:
I am an attorney for Time Inc., the corporate publisher of People Magazine. This will put you on notice that Time Inc. has concluded an agreement with a photo agency for exclusive rights to publish photographs of Patrick Dempsey and his family (including his newborn twins) in People Magazine and on People.com. These are the only photographs of Mr. Dempsey and his twins now in existence.

In the past your website has posted photographs which have been licensed exclusively to Time Inc. for publication in People Magazine and on People.com, in violation of Time Inc.’s exclusive rights.
This letter is an official notification under the provisions of Section 512(c) of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act that the posting of any photographs of Patrick Dempsey and/or any other members of his family with his newborn twins, would infringe Time Inc.’s rights in North America, Australia and New Zealand.

I have a good faith belief that use of such photographs in the manner set forth herein would not be authorized by of Time Inc., its licensing representatives, or the law. The information provided herein is accurate to the best of my knowledge. I hereby swear under penalty of perjury that I am authorized to act on behalf of Time Inc. for matters pertaining to notification of infringement of its exclusive rights in its copyrighted material.

Very truly yours

Nicholas J. Jollymore
Deputy General Counsel
Time Inc.
nicholas_jollymore@timeinc.com

Here is my response: