Viacom's YouTube suit threatens freedom

[Lasker]

NEW YORK - A $1 billion copyright infringement lawsuit challenging YouTube's ability to keep copyrighted material off its popular video-sharing site threatens how hundreds of millions of people exchange all kinds of information on the Internet, YouTube owner Google Inc. said. if Google's lawyers made the claim in papers filed in U.S. District Court in Manhattan as the company responded to Viacom Inc.'s latest lawsuit alleging that the Internet has led to "an explosion of copyright infringement" by YouTube and others.

The back-and-forth between the companies has intensified since Viacom brought its lawsuit last year, saying it was owed damages for the unauthorized viewing of its programming from MTV, Comedy Central and other networks, including such hits as "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart."

In papers submitted to a judge late Friday, Google said YouTube "goes far beyond its legal obligations in assisting content owners to protect their works."

It said that by seeking to make carriers and hosting providers liable for Internet communications, Viacom "threatens the way hundreds of millions of people legitimately exchange information, news, entertainment and political and artistic expression."

Google said YouTube was faithful to the requirements of the 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act, saying the federal law was intended to protect companies like YouTube as long as they responded properly to content owners' claims of infringement.

On that score, Viacom says Google has set a terrible example.

In a rewritten lawsuit filed last month, Viacom said YouTube consistently allows unauthorized copies of popular television programming and movies to be posted on its Web site and viewed tens of thousands of times.

Viacom said it had identified more than 150,000 unauthorized clips of copyrighted programming ? including "SpongeBob SquarePants," "South Park" and "MTV Unplugged" episodes and the documentary "An Inconvenient Truth" ? that had been viewed "an astounding 1.5 billion times."

The company said its count of unauthorized clips represents only a fraction of the content on YouTube that violates its copyrights.

It said Google and YouTube had done "little or nothing" to stop infringement.

"To the contrary, 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.

Source: Yahoo

[Argi]

Content holders need to stfu. If they're really worried about their stuffs being leaked onto the net they'd be going after places like eztv or vtv. I mean, honestly, 30 second clips from vairous eps on Youtube is hardly what I call infringement as it is free advertising.

[Neoauld]

its almost as tho

they dont want ANYONE to EVER see their stuff

[The_Decryptor Veteran]

Shouldn't Google/YouTube be covered under the safe haven parts of the DMCA? YouTube can't be expected to watch every video before it's put on the site, the most they can be realistically expected to do is to remove the offending content when they're notified (which they do, hence complying with the law)

And I can see why Google/YouTube don't want an automated infringement checker, a few wrong detections (i.e. this video of your cat is detected as the james bond movie) and they could screw up their "reputation" with uploaders and viewers.

[Miuku.]

Move the server and business out of USA, problem solved.

[KiHu]

Move the server and business out of USA, problem solved.

They would still go after them most likely

[GEIST]

Move the server and business out of USA, problem solved.

ROFLMAO @ "The" server

You can't even imagine Youtube's or Google's infrastructure, can you? :rofl:

[Miuku.]

You can't even imagine Youtube's or Google's infrastructure, can you? :rofl:

So I forgot an s, I'm so very sorry I forgot Neowin has people like you so I have to check spelling everytime.

Still the point is valid, since Youtube also sports data centers across the world - simply move the entire operation overseas and dump what's left of the fascists states of usa behind to do business elsewhere.

Edited May 27, 2008 by daPhoenix

[+Majesticmerc MVC]

And what the hell is GoogleTube supposed to do about all the copyrighted material that's on the site. As long as users continue to upload more than a few videos a day, YouTube cannot monitor all the content that goes onto the site, but they do comply with removal notices (therefore complying legally with the DMCA). The fact is that YouTube is not breaking the law, and Viacom couldn't win in an ideal world... but this isn't an Ideal world

[Phantom Limb]

Oh my god, poor Viacom is losing SO much money off of David Letterman clips of band performances on teh intraweb!11

Like seriously, I can understand full episodes being ripped/upped, but a lot of the clips their panties are in a bunch about are at most 3 minutes long from programs they'll NEVER AIR AGAIN.

[GrimReeper]

I would never want to watch full episodes or movies on youtube because the quality is so bad. On the other hand when there is a awesome clip of a show which is only a few minutes long, instead of waiting for it to be shown on tv as a repeat I can just go on youtube and watch it which only makes me want to watch or buy the show even more.

nice sig power out :punk:

[gaurav]

****ing idiots know nothing other than suing these days.

[Julius Caro]

Shouldn't Google/YouTube be covered under the safe haven parts of the DMCA? YouTube can't be expected to watch every video before it's put on the site, the most they can be realistically expected to do is to remove the offending content when they're notified (which they do, hence complying with the law)

And I can see why Google/YouTube don't want an automated infringement checker, a few wrong detections (i.e. this video of your cat is detected as the james bond movie) and they could screw up their "reputation" with uploaders and viewers.

but they DO have an automated infringement checker, I believe, especially when it comes to viacom. Viacom stuff is promptly removed

[boho]

I would never want to watch full episodes or movies on youtube because the quality is so bad.

All Viacom need to do is put tickers across the bottom of the screen with "messages from the sponsor", and the problem would be solved. In fact they could offer it as a bonus to those advertising on their stations.

Now stuff ripped off from publicly funded broadcasters such as the BBC is a different matter. But funnily enough they have one of the best quality "iplayer" on the web! www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer

[C_Guy]

Google said YouTube "goes far beyond its legal obligations in assisting content owners to protect their works."

Is that the same way Google has gone "far beyond" to "enhance" user's Internet experience with advertising? Or the same way they have gone "far beyond" to protect privacy by analyzing (reading) it to deliver even more advertising?

I suppose if Google actually did remove offending content they that's all you could expect them to do. Either the offending videos are not being taken down after notifying Google or Viacom can't hire enough people to scout out YouTube and find and report any offending videos. So, which is it?

[C_Guy]

Viacom's YouTube suit threatens freedom

Oops! No, the only thing it threatens is the ability to illegally make media available on YouTube. It has nothing to do with freedom, not even a little.

[Zab]

Google should come back up north to Zee Mother Land, (Its a Canadian Company)

last time i checked

[+M2Ys4U Subscriber¹]

Google already has a very draconian approach to removing stuff. And Viacom wants MORE?!

[Mike Frett]

Google does a pretty darn good job of removing things now days. I've seen plenty of stuff get removed just for being suspicious.

[-T- Member]

How do these company bosses think money is being made from 30 sec clips of their shows on tv. The South Park episode got the whole thing spot on.

There could be a plus side to this, Google may be forced to remove any ads from YouTube.

[That Guy Veteran]

And here's what they did in return :rofl: : http://www.crn.com/it-channel/208400285

Even if they do win the case, suing a company backed by one of the richest companies in the world won't do much :) (although I guess that doesn't include restrictions)

[Julius Caro]

Google said YouTube "goes far beyond its legal obligations in assisting content owners to protect their works."

Is that the same way Google has gone "far beyond" to "enhance" user's Internet experience with advertising? Or the same way they have gone "far beyond" to protect privacy by analyzing (reading) it to deliver even more advertising?

I suppose if Google actually did remove offending content they that's all you could expect them to do. Either the offending videos are not being taken down after notifying Google or Viacom can't hire enough people to scout out YouTube and find and report any offending videos. So, which is it?

VIACOM content on youtube gets deleted a lot faster than any other copyrighted material. Remember britney at the VMAs? I bet someone spent the whole day deleting videos, they didnt last too long.

I had a hard time finding spongebob's opening song once, because it's viacom and it wasnt easy finding.

I find it outrageous that they are requesting the information of the people who watched those videos. It's certainly not neccessary.

Viacom's YouTube suit threatens freedom

Oops! No, the only thing it threatens is the ability to illegally make media available on YouTube. It has nothing to do with freedom, not even a little.

it's threatening freedom because they are requesting the data of the people who watched the videos, which is irrelevant information, since the ones who watched the videos did not engage in any copyright infringement

[ThePitt]

I could bet that only the corporations are interested on that sueing race and the owners of the copyrights dont give a **** (like comedy central, they see this as free and fast publicity)

[RAID 0]

So I forgot an s, I'm so very sorry I forgot Neowin has people like you so I have to check spelling everytime.

Still the point is valid, since Youtube also sports data centers across the world - simply move the entire operation overseas and dump what's left of the fascists states of usa behind to do business elsewhere.

You have a real attitude problem.

[Athernar]

So I forgot an s, I'm so very sorry I forgot Neowin has people like you so I have to check spelling everytime.

Still the point is valid, since Youtube also sports data centers across the world - simply move the entire operation overseas and dump what's left of the fascists states of usa behind to do business elsewhere.

Google could move the servers to the moon but it wouldn't make the slightest bit of difference, Google is an American company and as such is subject to the laws and rulings of the USA.

And seeing as you seem to have such a problem with the USA, why don't you boycott Google?