tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5383512304639632735.post3608570136481769704..comments2024-01-23T07:34:52.253-08:00Comments on Copyrights & Campaigns: Viacom v. YouTube: A disappointing decision, but how important?Ben Sheffnerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06477793715765992689noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5383512304639632735.post-89794641452153535582010-08-12T09:10:50.703-07:002010-08-12T09:10:50.703-07:00Late Comment -- I disagree with your conclusion th...Late Comment -- I disagree with your conclusion that Judge Stanton should have dissected individual instances of YouTube's failure to take down certain programs that Viacom alleged were still up on YouTube's site. To be consistent with his ruling, if Viacom did not send take-down notices for those programs, YouTube was under no obligation to police its own site. The DMCA, for all its flaws, is the law controlling this area, and it provides a safe harbor for ISPs such as YouTube. Further, YouTube obtains no direct commercial advantage from the uploading by its viewers of any form of content. And finally, Viacom has a force of Internet watchers who send out takedown notices the moment they find an instance of illegal uploading. Viacom's damages from YouTube's activities are minimal to zero.Leonardnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5383512304639632735.post-66558818023172172532010-07-20T12:29:29.607-07:002010-07-20T12:29:29.607-07:00Imagine a video that gains global attention. Any ...Imagine a video that gains global attention. Any video: Lady Gaga’s latest music video, in its entirety, is posted by CpyrghtAbUsr. For whatever reason, this video soars to the top of YouTube. It overwhelms their transmission lines. Corporate decides to dedicate huge amounts of bandwidth for this one video. The Today Show covers the video. Lady Gaga herself refers to it, but for some reason never sends a takedown notice. Would this qualify as a red flag?Tomhttp://www.galvanilegal.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5383512304639632735.post-6264703159242883282010-07-01T02:05:28.569-07:002010-07-01T02:05:28.569-07:00Perhaps Stanton just looked at the pile on his des...Perhaps Stanton just looked at the pile on his desk and thought "WTF, whatever I decide the luzer will appeal, let someone else sort it out, I'm off down the pub." tosses coin "OK Google won." fetches hat and coat.overtonhttp://professor-moriarty.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5383512304639632735.post-23502245983490623472010-06-30T23:33:42.640-07:002010-06-30T23:33:42.640-07:00Ben: I'm enjoying your blog more and more. Far...Ben: I'm enjoying your blog more and more. Far from making the case for the necessity of current (or even stronger) copyright laws, you only end up demonstrating just how radical and anti-new technology your views truly are. This post is a perfect example. It will only end up convincing others that the 'copyleft' has a point.Justin Levinenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5383512304639632735.post-71815464208181131462010-06-30T10:14:21.695-07:002010-06-30T10:14:21.695-07:00Great, apparently internet piracy is now legal: ht...Great, apparently internet piracy is now legal: http://lawblog.legalmatch.com/2010/06/01/the-internet-piracy-revolution-protecting-your-intellectual-property-rights/<br /> Yay! Time to download me some big budget Hollywood movies and totally undercut the industry thereby contributing faster to its ultimate demise. Way to go US judicial system...Joey Bonesnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5383512304639632735.post-89230717583440317312010-06-30T02:51:30.030-07:002010-06-30T02:51:30.030-07:00How can YouTube, or any other hosting site, know w...How can YouTube, or any other hosting site, know who posted something and why. One of the biggest facts that hurt Viacom's case is that Viacom employees posted a large number of video clips of their own copyrighted material on YouTube, as a way of marketing their shows, while trying to maintain the anonymity of the people posting the clips so that YouTube and all of the other YouTube viewers wouldn't know that it was Viacom who had posted them. In fact, several videos that were the subject of takedown notices had been originally posted by Viacom employees and were later reinstated at Viacom's request because the department within Viacom that sent the takedown notices didn't know that the marketing department of one of the subsidiaries had posted the material with the approval of the management of the subsidiary. How can YouTube know which copyrighted material is posted legitimately by the copyright owner when the the copyright owners themselves don't know?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5383512304639632735.post-51799506762396677172010-06-28T10:15:55.359-07:002010-06-28T10:15:55.359-07:00Sir,
I find it strange that one of the most proac...Sir,<br /><br />I find it strange that one of the most proactive and legitimate operations of user hosted content online still seems to come across as a criminal in your view. I have but one question...<br /><br />What user content hosting operations active today meet your criteria for legitimacy?Garretthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00149279325429159669noreply@blogger.com