zett - 8:05 am on May 31, 2010 (gmt 0)
The bottom line is that the YouTube owners uploaded copyright material themselves.
You have not read all the documents, right? Youtube founders seem to be aware of copyright infringement going on but apparently asked their teams to continue hosting the content for a while longer (instead of taking it down right away). The question whether or not YT uploaded infringing clips themselves is also still unanswered.
ads are only shown on YouTube videos that have been confirmed not to be copyrighted, so it's not like YouTube/Google is profiting wholesale off of copyright infringement. Sure, they benefit by getting traffic that's driven by copyrighted videos
Exactly. They benefit by making Youtube the #1 destination for ANY video, be it infringing someones copyright or not. Tiny websites would get sued out of business if they did this; Google thanks to their funding and power try to get away with this.
let's be clear about what's really going on here. Because of the sheer size of their site, it's logistically impossible to hand-moderate each clip that's uploaded.
Of course THEY COULD review every clip. They could, for example, hire the millions of jobless people out there. But this would cost them money. So much, in fact, that they could not run Youtube returning a PROFIT (or at least earn some cash). It would be even more loss-making.
They could also create processes that verify uploaders identity and then just point to the uploaders if things go wrong. Again, manual labor and probably stiffling the willingness of users to upload videos.
So what happens is that copyright owners are treated like dirt because some mega-corporation wants to generate a profit. I don't like that idea.