| This 63 message thread spans 3 pages: < < 63 ( 1 2  ) || |
|Judge rules in favor of YouTube over Viacom|
| 10:03 pm on Jun 23, 2010 (gmt 0)|
Viacom has divulged internal YouTube emails that seemed to acknowledge copyright infringement on the service, while Google has charged that Viacom itself has posted its material on YouTube for promotional purposes.
Viacom spokesman Jeremy Zweig said in a statement that the ruling Wednesday is "fundamentally flawed," adding that, "We intend to seek to have these issues before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit as soon as possible."
Viacom's US$1 billion copyright infringement lawsuit against Google's video-sharing site YouTube has been dismissed by the court, ending for now an acrimonious legal battle between the companies that has been going on for more than three years.
On Wednesday, Judge Louis L. Stanton, of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, granted Google's motion for summary judgment. [computerworld.com...]
ViaCom Finds Smoking YouTube Gun
Stalemate In YouTube Identity Protection Between Google and Viacom
EBay, Facebook, Yahoo, Want An End To Viacom YouTube Lawsuit
| 8:57 pm on Jun 28, 2010 (gmt 0)|
No I will not calm down... You steal music from Youtube and you tout how Youtube should be shut down because you can't use it the way it was intended to be used.
People don't use knifes the way they were intended to be used. Does that mean that the Henkel knife company should be held responsible when someone stabs someone with one of their knives?
Are there calls for them to build knifes that can only be used the proper way?
No matter what tools humans create there will be people who use those tools improperly, there will be people who use those tools for good, there will be people who use those tools for bad.
There are bad tools used for good, there are good tools used for bad.
What is comes down to is who should be held liable when someone uses a good tool for something bad?
Should we go after the people doing the bad thing or should we go after the creators of the tool they used for bad things?
My position is society should go after the person stabbing not the person making knives. Your position seems to be that the knife maker is more responsible than the person stabbing people with it.
Is any of this getting through or are you going to explain again how you can use a knife for bad and since the knife maker didn't stop you that they should pay and you should go about your day.
| 9:49 pm on Jun 28, 2010 (gmt 0)|
After all this the question that drives me hazy: am I or are the others crazy?
| 4:04 pm on Jun 29, 2010 (gmt 0)|
demaestro, your analogy has multiple flaws. youtube is not the manufacturer of the knives, it provides the infrastructure. it is neither the producer nor the uploader of the respective video content. uploading copyrighted content is illegal. google profits from it.
uploading copyrighted content and downloading copyrighted content are two different things. the reality is, that youtube is used by many people as a convenient music download website. in the current state, it's impossible to go after them. but don't mix up the issues, stay on topic.
so people who upload copyrighted content should be held accountable. but they aren't with good reason. google knows, that if they'd hand over their users to the authorities, youtube would soon break down as users would stop contributing after the first lawsuits.
there is a huge gap in how it should be to your mind and how the current practice respectively legal ruling is. so your expectations belong to a dream world.
| This 63 message thread spans 3 pages: < < 63 ( 1 2  ) |