Msg#: 4157942 posted 10:03 pm on Jun 23, 2010 (gmt 0)
[marketwatch.com...] 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...]
Msg#: 4157942 posted 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.