Viacom Entertainment Suing YouTube.com - Page 2 - Never Forgotten: a Foster's Home Community

Medikor · 03-14-2007, 10:52 AM

I can understand that. Youtube did kind of paint itself into a corner by being made in the first place. And I think the logic behind takeing off AMV's is beccause the video and music used to make them was likely obtained illegally too. This is a prickly bush to say the least.

Dark "DC" Chaos · 03-16-2007, 04:38 PM

As if I didn't have enough reasons to hate Viacom already.

Really, Viacom is being quite foolish with this lawsuit. For two reasons:
1. From what I understand, in the Digital Millenium Copyright Act, there is a provision (specifically, provision 512(c) ) which basically says that Google is not liable for the copyright infrigement because the users uploaded the infringing videos, not Google themselves. And even if they were aware, they'd only have trouble if they refused to take it down after Viacom told them to. As far as I know, Google was quite compliant in removing the videos, and Viacom just said "YOURE NOT DOING IT FAST ENOUGH RARRRRRRRRGH SUE SUE SUE!!!"
2. Even if Google is in the wrong here, Viacom's lawyers are going to have a hell of a time proving a billion dollars in damages.

montitech · 03-16-2007, 11:36 PM

"YOUR NOT DOING IT FAST ENOUGH" hmmm, this sounds like an old copyright infrigment excuse....

BBS's in the late 80's used to keep copyrighted material in the upload directory for downloading by members. most of the Site admins thought they could use the excuse of "I did not know it was there, I do not review the upload directory daily". but Leagally they could have been held liable the binaries. and occationally some people did loose there systems to the goverment for copyright infringment.(or maybe that part is just an Urban Legend)

MOnty

03-14-2007, 10:52 AM	#11
Medikor Robot Master I'm a bubble man! Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Nova Scotia, Canada Posts: 1,428	I can understand that. Youtube did kind of paint itself into a corner by being made in the first place. And I think the logic behind takeing off AMV's is beccause the video and music used to make them was likely obtained illegally too. This is a prickly bush to say the least. __________________

03-16-2007, 04:38 PM	#12
Dark "DC" Chaos Newly Abandoned Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Cold Northern California Posts: 22	As if I didn't have enough reasons to hate Viacom already. Really, Viacom is being quite foolish with this lawsuit. For two reasons: 1. From what I understand, in the Digital Millenium Copyright Act, there is a provision (specifically, provision 512(c) ) which basically says that Google is not liable for the copyright infrigement because the users uploaded the infringing videos, not Google themselves. And even if they were aware, they'd only have trouble if they refused to take it down after Viacom told them to. As far as I know, Google was quite compliant in removing the videos, and Viacom just said "YOURE NOT DOING IT FAST ENOUGH RARRRRRRRRGH SUE SUE SUE!!!" 2. Even if Google is in the wrong here, Viacom's lawyers are going to have a hell of a time proving a billion dollars in damages. __________________ Don't let the name fool you; I'm quite cheerful. ^_^ Last edited by Dark "DC" Chaos; 03-16-2007 at 04:39 PM. Reason: Changed a sentence for clarification

03-16-2007, 11:36 PM	#13
montitech Foster's Legend Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: ny Posts: 752	"YOUR NOT DOING IT FAST ENOUGH" hmmm, this sounds like an old copyright infrigment excuse.... BBS's in the late 80's used to keep copyrighted material in the upload directory for downloading by members. most of the Site admins thought they could use the excuse of "I did not know it was there, I do not review the upload directory daily". but Leagally they could have been held liable the binaries. and occationally some people did loose there systems to the goverment for copyright infringment.(or maybe that part is just an Urban Legend) MOnty