MENU

Is Intel Unwittingly in Bed with its Enemy?

By Stuart K. Hayashi

February 3, 2015

SUBSCRIBE TO SAVVY STREET (It's Free)

 

Intel profits greatly from its wonderful inventions because of the enforcement of intellectual property, which enables the company to leverage its impressive portfolio of patents.

The corporation, Intel, profits greatly from its wonderful inventions because of the enforcement of intellectual property, which enables the company to leverage its impressive portfolio of patents. It is therefore alarming that this great company is lending tacit support to propaganda that openly disrespects intellectual property in both theory and practice.

On January 6, 2015, Intel explained that in its drive for “corporate social responsibility,” it would sponsor several not-for-profit organizations to promote sexual and racial “diversity” in workplaces. Among such organizations is Feminist Frequency—a video series on YouTube, co-written by Anita Sarkeesian and Jonathan McIntosh, hosted by Sarkeesian, and produced by McIntosh. Its stated purpose is to identify what it judges to be sexist, racist, and classist tropes in forms of popular entertainment, most famously in video games. Unfortunately, in their online advocacy, Ms. Sarkeesian and Mr. McIntosh have a long history of treating intellectual property with scorn.

Feminist Frequency has a long history of treating intellectual property with scorn.

Feminist Frequency’s producer, Mr. McIntosh, prides himself on getting around IP rules.  Since 2008, he has been known for his “remix videos”—he takes video footage other people have created, and edits them, juxtaposing other video footage to change their message and meaning. According to court judgments, Mr. McIntosh’s re-editing constitutes “Fair Use,” as that term is understood at law. However, even when Mr. McIntosh’s work falls within the law, other ethical concerns arise.

In 2012, Feminist Frequency launched a Kickstarter campaign. Ms. Sarkeesian said she  intended to raise money to do research on sexism in video games. Donors were under the impression that she would use the money to purchase video games and play them herself as part of her research, and the project raised over $158,900. In the comments section on the Kickstarter page, Ms. Sarkeesian wrote, “…I have to get back to work, these video games aren’t going to play themselves.”

Yet anyone who believed that all of the footage of video games in Feminist Frequency would be recordings of Ms. Sarkeesian playing the games herself was mistaken. Critics have documented Feminist Frequency’s unauthorized use of footage from the “Let’s Play” and “Long Play” videos that other parties have uploaded onto YouTube. A “Let’s Play” or “Long Play” video consists of the following—a person records him- or herself playing a video game. What the video’s viewer sees onscreen is mostly the same as what the player sees onscreen—which is what is happening in the game. Either the player is off-screen completely, or images of the player’s facial and other reactions while playing the game are relegated to a corner of the screen. In the case of “Let’s Play” videos, the viewer also hears the player’s comments on the game as he or she plays as an off-screen voiceover.

One can tell that Feminist Frequency lifted footage from other people’s copyrighted videos because, in both the original “Let’s Play” videos and the snippets Feminist Frequency showed, the player’s numerical scores and the player’s character’s “life meter” are identical—something for which mere coincidence cannot account. The use of snippets of other people’s videos is not unlawful. Under copyright law, it falls under “Fair Use.” Still, Feminist Frequency’s use of these other parties’ footage is, as of this writing, completely unacknowledged and unattributed. It is akin to a writer quoting another author and failing to make the proper attribution.

In another Feminist Frequency video, Ms. Sarkeesian discusses BitTorrenting—that is, file-sharing—websites.  She says she loves the file-sharing service but she is beset by a problem—the file-sharing sites deluge her with tasteless pornography ads. As evidence, she provides screen captures of these ads from her favorite file-sharing sites. The screen captures can be identified as coming from The Pirate Bay—the website notorious for making illegal downloads of copyrighted material widely available.

As the critic Jordan Owen points out, it is precisely because of the illegality of activity on these file-sharing websites that the porn ads dominate. Companies wishing to remain respectable avoid purchasing advertising space on The Pirate Bay because they do not want their brand names associated with the pirating. Even many pornography companies care about IP—they do not appreciate their own material being pirated. Thus, that leaves the least savory of companies—many of which deal in porn—to advertise on The Pirate Bay.  Feminist Frequency laments the sexism of the ads but not the pirating itself. Thus, the video’s message seems to be that Ms. Sarkeesian wants to undertake  copyright infringement in peace without seeing porn ads.

In yet another Feminist Frequency video, “Why We Need You, Veronica Mars,” Ms. Sarkeesian expresses her enthusiasm for the TV show in a rather discordant fashion, urging “you should go out immediately and BitTorrent [that is, download illegally], pirate, rent, buy—whatever you have to do—to watch Veronica Mars because it will totally be worth it” (emphases added). If someone wishes to show genuine respect for artistic content, one should respect the IP of those who provide that content.

That an excellent company that relies heavily on IP would put its name behind a party so consistently disrespectful of IP is perhaps symptomatic of how far political correctness has invaded the corporation.

That an excellent company that relies heavily on IP would put its name behind a party so consistently disrespectful of IP is perhaps symptomatic of how far political correctness has invaded the corporation. One hopes that Intel management realizes that, in their haste toward symbolism and political correctness, they are sponsoring an organization that scorns and routinely violates the very foundation that helped make Intel what it is today.

 

(Visited 267 times, 1 visits today)