StoutFiles - 1:31 pm on May 28, 2010 (gmt 0)

does anybody of the youtube fanboys seriously think that you would get away with this kind of practice on your own websites? the legislation, that the website owner is resposible for content shown on his website is perfectly understandable. why should youtube be an exception? because it's so huge and it isn't practicable to approve the huge amount of user submitted material?

This is actually one of my biggest complaints...as a user I love getting free pirated material from PirateTube all day, notably music. As a webmaster though, It's infuriating that I wouldn't have the same benefits of YouTube because I not a huge corporation.

Personally I don't care who wins, as long as someone wins. YouTube wins, I get to keep pirating their material and can freely put whatever on my site as long as it's "user submitted". Viacom wins, my content which is currently completely original becomes more valuable as other sites can't just take it from me and claim "user submitted ignorance". Just give me a ruling, sooner the better. Don't drag this out for years and don't pay people off under the table.

For many users it seems rather a matter of convenience to hold the status quo as long as possible. you should know it won't last forever. how much that "everything for free" mentality has brainwashed us is absolutely astonishing.

It's still going to be a while. When the major sites like YouTube are forced to play by the rules, it'll start to trickle down. But I don't see YouTube changing anytime soon.