PDA

View Full Version : Google says copyright suit 'threatens' Net




Matt Collins
05-26-2008, 05:07 PM
Viacom's $1 billion copyright infringement lawsuit against YouTube "threatens the way hundreds of millions of people legitimately exchange information" over the Web, YouTube parent Google said in a legal response to the suit.


The response, reported by the Associated Press (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080526/ap_on_hi_te/youtube_lawsuit;_ylt=AuZ6K9BjHrnLoD17idGCjK4jtBAF) , was filed late Friday in U.S. District Court in Manhattan. Google says the threat comes from Viacom's attempt to make sites' hosts liable for what people post. Google, by the way, has said this suit will only be resolved in court (http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9938490-7.html)
Viacom originally filed its lawsuit last year (http://news.cnet.com/Viacom-sues-Google-over-YouTube-clips/2100-1030_3-6166668.html) and filed a rewritten version last month.



In the more recent version, the AP reported, Viacom said video-sharing site YouTube consistently allows popular, copyrighted material to be posted to its site, including from Viacom-owned MTV and Comedy Central. Viacom said that it has identified more than 150,000 unauthorized clips on YouTube and that the site has done "little or nothing" to stop the copyright infringement, the AP reported.


"The availability on the YouTube site of a vast library of the copyrighted works of plaintiffs and others is the cornerstone of defendants' business plan," Viacom said, according to the AP.


Google, in its response, said YouTube "goes far beyond its legal obligations in assisting content owners to protect their works." Google added that YouTube has faithfully followed the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (http://news.cnet.com/YouTubes-fate-rests-on-decade-old-copyright-law/2100-1028_3-6166862.html) and responded to claims of infringement.



SOURCE:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9952165-7.html

bill50
05-26-2008, 06:40 PM
For those of you that don't know, Viacom is one of the biggest owners the the media. I'm always surprised to find you guys blasting Fox and Rupert Murdoch and not other news owners (like the liberals do), but Viacom is another NewsCorp owning CBS, MTV, VH1, Nickelodeon, Blockbuster and large number of Cinemas. They are another social globalist corporation that controls the media. They're not suing Google because of loss of revenues, they're finding an excuse to wipe out the freedom of speech youtube promotes.

JosephTheLibertarian
05-26-2008, 06:49 PM
This not good. Viacom sucks

Matt Collins
05-26-2008, 07:51 PM
For those of you that don't know, Viacom is one of the biggest owners the the media. I'm always surprised to find you guys blasting Fox and Rupert Murdoch and not other news owners (like the liberals do), but Viacom is another NewsCorp owning CBS, MTV, VH1, Nickelodeon, Blockbuster and large number of Cinemas. They are another social globalist corporation that controls the media. They're not suing Google because of loss of revenues, they're finding an excuse to wipe out the freedom of speech youtube promotes.Viacom also owns Paramount Studios along with BET, Comedy Central, Dreamworks, Spike, TV Land, Nick at Night, and CMT.

dirknb@hotmail.com
05-26-2008, 08:18 PM
For those of you that don't know, Viacom is one of the biggest owners the the media. I'm always surprised to find you guys blasting Fox and Rupert Murdoch and not other news owners (like the liberals do), but Viacom is another NewsCorp owning CBS, MTV, VH1, Nickelodeon, Blockbuster and large number of Cinemas. They are another social globalist corporation that controls the media. They're not suing Google because of loss of revenues, they're finding an excuse to wipe out the freedom of speech youtube promotes.

Exactly.

PeterWellington
05-27-2008, 04:05 PM
I don't think this particular issue is as simple as "Viacom sucks". Should YouTube be able to make money from content that they have no right to and just keep that money? I think Viacom is entitled to some damages here.

brandon
05-27-2008, 04:30 PM
The DMCA (digital millenium copyright act) is something we should be working to repeal. Although I am not sure how it relates to this viacom lawsuit.

AutoDas
05-27-2008, 05:02 PM
If Viacom wants some ad revenue, then they should have their own servers and stream higher quality than YouTube. YouTube is their competitor yet they're doing nothing.

PeterWellington
05-27-2008, 09:21 PM
If Viacom wants some ad revenue, then they should have their own servers and stream higher quality than YouTube. YouTube is their competitor yet they're doing nothing.

Viacom already provides online content, but that's beside the point. If they want they can lock it up in a closet and no one else has the right to it, they own it. If you believe in the validity of intellectual property, I'm not sure how you can support YouTube profiting from stolen content and not having to compensate the rightful owner in any way.

AutoDas
05-27-2008, 09:48 PM
Your premise is that you think there is such thing as intellectual property.

Matt Collins
05-28-2008, 03:25 AM
Your premise is that you think there is such thing as intellectual property.The Constitution recognizes it

Kludge
05-28-2008, 03:30 AM
"threatens the way hundreds of millions of people legitimately exchange information"

Desperate sensationalism?

hypnagogue
05-28-2008, 04:23 AM
Youtube does quite a bit to assist copyright holders in removing videos from Youtube. In fact, they defaultly remove the material that has been complained about and it's up to the original poster to convince Youtube that it wasn't infringing. So Youtube in fact favors copyright holders over their users.

Google's claims may seem sensational but they aren't untrue. What's at stake in this lawsuit is whether or not a webservice of any type (forums, video, audio, pictures) which allows it's users to post their own content can safely operate without being mauled by copyright holders whose material has been posted by the site's users. I don't believe any could reasonably do more than Google has to keep Youtube free of copyrighted material. If what they've done isn't good enough to avoid liability, then no user content based site can safely exist.

Matt Collins
05-31-2008, 12:44 PM
then no user content based site can safely exist.There ya go. They don't want user generated content. They want top down corporate generated content only available. Just like the days of VCRs, and pre-CD burners.

Kludge
05-31-2008, 12:46 PM
There ya go. They don't want user generated content. They want top down corporate generated content only available. Just like the days of VCRs, and pre-CD burners.

Don't copy that floppy!

Carehn
05-31-2008, 12:56 PM
Viacom already provides online content, but that's beside the point. If they want they can lock it up in a closet and no one else has the right to it, they own it. If you believe in the validity of intellectual property, I'm not sure how you can support YouTube profiting from stolen content and not having to compensate the rightful owner in any way.

i totally agree with you. It sucks but its they way it is.
On the other hand. YouTube has nothing to do with what people put in there videos. Thats the only argument i can think of to defend youtube and its not a good one.

PeterWellington
06-06-2008, 07:10 PM
i totally agree with you. It sucks but its they way it is.
On the other hand. YouTube has nothing to do with what people put in there videos. Thats the only argument i can think of to defend youtube and its not a good one.

Yeah, I do think it's a tough issue, but I would liken it to this:

Let's say you have a booth at a neighborhood festival and someone you barely know says, hey I just bought this popcorn machine, why don't you use it to make some extra money? You agree and make $100 for the day with it. When you're closing up shop, you see the guy who gave you the popcorn machine getting handcuffed and the police explain to you that the popcorn machine you've been using all day was stolen from a guy at a different booth. Do you think it's right to just give the owner his machine back and keep that $100 you made?