Recently, You Tube removed a video posted by a user of her baby dancing to a Prince song after receiving a takedown request from Univiersal Music Group because Universal claimed the video infringed its copyrights

[].  And, for all those who have watched the grainy and barely audible video clip, the decision to vigilantly protect their rights in this case is a bit of a head-scratcher.  Surely someone from Universal or Prince’s staff must have weighed the risk of negative press and customer backlash? Contrary to the opinion expressed by Gigi Sohn of Public Knowledge that sending takedown notices is a "riskless endeavor", I would argue that there is much at stake in deciding how stringently to protect rights in creative works.  This is a case in point.  The clip is gone, but the public heard the message loud and clear, "Big, Rich Copyright Owners do not care about the Masses".

And while this is all an interesting philosophical discussion on the relationship between artists and fans, it misses the point entirely.

The creator of the work has the right to determine how the work will be disseminated to the public.  And regardless of a huge fan base and consumer demand, an artist like Prince can legally choose to protect his material in a way that will only irritate his loyal followers. A savvy business move, perhaps not.  But, his choice nonetheless.

If you think about it, crappy products and customer service are offered all across America in every industry every day.  For example, I, for one, continue to patronize a particular major hardware store despite the complete lack of personnel or expert assistance.  But, its proximity to my house wins out when in the middle of emergency home repairs.  In the end, it’s my decision to shop there- knowing full-well that it will only bring aggravation.  And, here is the kicker, everyone I know has the same negative experience when shopping there, despite the fact that they continue to shop there too.  Strange. 

So, why is it that there is so much public outcry when creators of copyrighted works make arguably poor business decisions?  Why is it that consumers believe they have some "rights" to take and use the product however they desire?  Ahhh, yes, EFF and the gang keep telling consumers they have "fair use rights."  Somehow, "rights" which do not apply to any other commercial product allow consumers to take and use copyrighted products as they choose.  "Thank you creator for your contribution to business and culture, but we can take it from here."

Fortunately, that isn’t the end of the discussion.  Inventors and creators have the Constitutional right to protect their rights.  Some may choose to do so in a manner that will only draw consumer ire and customer backlash.   Backlash is good.  Creators can choose to adapt and change business models to meet consumer expectations.  Then consumers make the decision as to what level of frustration they are willing to accept before taking their business elsewhere.  This is the system working at its best.

So,EFF will grab a few more headlines for taking up arms to protect the plebs.  And who knows, maybe the court in this case will determine that the dancing baby video clip is fair use.

In the end, Prince is Rock Royalty and it remains to be seen if his this incident will make his loyal subjects go crazy.