Other news outlets use CSPAN footage ALL THE TIME.
How that works is they pay a royalty to use it if they want unfettered access other than what's allowed under the fair use doctrine.
Also, CSPAN doesn't "need to make money" because they're wholly sponsored by TED TURNER.
Don't think I didn't go look all this up before writing my opinion when he was making his allegations, if I remember right he was linking into CNN's link at a covered CSPAN event, CNN sent him the warning to cease and desist. His argument was he had a right because it was a public event that everyone has access to because it was a open public forum, a host of different corporations fund CSPAN, whether CNN is one of those corporations or pays a royalty for certain events I do not know but it is not free to hook into CSPANS link.
CSPAN's entire mission is to "make the daily function of government available to the public".
Like I stated there is nothing stopping Pakman from going to these "public" functions of government and setting up his own link for free but he chooses to steal access to the events instead.
If ALL streaming commentary of the debate livestream was COPYRIGHT FLAGGED, then @davidpakman couldn't be considered "singled-out" or "unjustly-targeted", HOWeveR, that does not appear to be the case.
If you look it up Twitch has said they have been served numerous times from different entities about copyright infringe, it's something they struggle with keeping up with, once served with notice Twitch has to take down the offender legally. Twitch did not receive any notices of such from any that were served with the fake notices, meaning the entity who held the right did not notify Twitch of any violations. Apparently some pranksters decided to do that which Pakman feels totally comfortable doing and somehow hacked into the system and sent their own notices of violations. It's actually pretty funny considering...but of course not to the lefties whose heads were left exploding as we all know those guilty of such a travesty against those busy bodies engaged in their own illegal activity must be hunted down and given a sentence that'd make Roger Stone feel blessed while all the while the underlying illegal offending criminals must be sympathized with. After all they can't have any snowflakes totally dissipating before they make it to the election booth in November. Pakman evidently thinks he is covered under the fair use doctrine of use because he uses the broadcast in a different type of forum, that being adding commentary content while the broadcast is happening, that may be so but he isn't allowed to profit off it as he stated he is doing...then still hosting the show in it's entirety is also a debatable grey area even if not done for profit, it's just if whoever pays for the rights of broadcast wants to go after the offenders or not, sometimes this isn't always done going after the offenders via giving notice and warning to the web hosting site but rather by direct means of civil litigation.
This is just the nature of how capitalism works, you invest your money for a expected rate of return. These news/television conglomerates don't pay millions of dollars for the right to broadcast if they didn't think they could make their money back, as such when it comes to news organizations other news outlets pay a scheduled fee for access of use, and/or a one time diem for usage of the material, that's how they make their money....every time a Pakman comes by it cuts a little chunk of their income away until all the little chunk stealers start adding up into major losses. People of this mentality are no different than shoplifters who go into the stores and steal. The losses start adding up then it passed off onto the consumers, it's no different in television land.
And when you consider that a 3rd party, unaffiliated with the copyright holder was able to "flag" and successfully block the program, there appears to be a major flaw in this "guilty-until-proven-innocent" PRO-CENSORSHIP environment.
Yeah I'd say there some major flaws involved I am just not confident that one dastardly deed was worthy of more criticism or scrutiny than the other. At a minimum one offender was after a few comedic laughs jokes on you....the other one actually ended up costing people money.
Not only are these brainwashed slaves "accepting" the "morality" (MOBSTER ETHICS) of their corporate owners, they've inculcated these corporate values so deeply into their psyche that they now act as UNPAID agents (vigilantes) "enforcing" fundamentally immoral "rules" (originally designed to protect INDIVIDUALS).
....or it could just be as simple as people don't want to pay more for those who feel compelled to steal.
Legality of Usage (per Public domain)
All video...
...from within the chambers of the United States Congress is exclusively filmed by C-SPAN. C-SPAN's copyright policy states, in part, "Video coverage of the debates originating from the chambers of the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate is in the public domain and as such, may be used without restriction or attribution." Therefore this video is in the public domain as a US Government work.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:CSPAN
Copyright & Licensing
All inquiries must be made online.
Please carefully read all of the following information before proceeding.Under C-SPAN's copyright policy a license is generally not required to post a recording of C-SPAN's video coverage of federal government events online for non-commercial purposes so long as C-SPAN is attributed as the source of the video. However, simultaneous streaming or retransmission of the C-SPAN networks' video coverage of any event not in the public domain, live or recorded, may not be posted under any circumstances without a license.Keeping a C-SPAN logo on the screen during the non-commercial use constitutes sufficient attribution under this policy.Federal government events include:
Congressional committee hearings
Executive agency hearings
Events at the White House
Congressional and Presidential Commissions
Video coverage of the debates originating from the chambers of the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate is in the public domain and as such, may be used without restriction or attribution.C-SPAN does NOT permit unlicensed commercial use of any of its video programming (including coverage of federal government events) whether or not C-SPAN is attributed as the source of the video. Under this policy a license is required to use C-SPAN video for:
Documentaries, films or television programs
Distribution by broadcast, cable or satellite
Corporate, trade or professional use.
Compilation DVDs and the like.
Any use that relies substantially on C-SPAN video to generate revenue.
Any other use that C-SPAN believes enhances the value of an organization or entity.
If you require a license and your use is permitted, please continue.Continue
https://www.c-span.org/about/copyrightsAndLicensing/
It sounds like they're trying to have their (public-domain) cake and eat it too.
Phenomenal analysis by the way.