Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 220.127.116.11
Forum Moderators: not2easy
Is it possible to claim for infringement when someone posts your viral message?
the creators of the content that went viral... usually from their phone or vidcam... had no commercial intent OR realization that they might have made a buck
Many popular users on Youtube are revenue sharing partners. I have had a video with only 45,000 views be offered ad revenue sharing, I get about $20 a month, so many of these users do have monetary gain in mind when they upload these videos to Youtube.
There is no infringement because the creator relinquishes their rights to control or restrict its distribution
I'm not referring to public domain in the intellectual property sense,
If you write a joke and utter it in public you still hold the copyright on it.
If you wrote a book with 1 joke, and you uttered that joke in public people would be allowed to repeat it to their friends, making it viral, but they aren't allowed to make a copy of it and publish that copy. Not on their website, not in a book, not in a school newsletter.
1) You aren't allowed to embed Youtube videos on pages for the sole purpose of advertising around it... which is exactly what they do.
2) You aren't allowed to alter the embed code to make the video behave differently, which is what they are also doing. Embedded Youtube videos have specific functionality, like double clicking takes you to the Youtube page with the original video loaded. Spike's site disables this...
...you don't relinquish your rights just because your content went viral...
Me: I'm not referring to public domain in the intellectual property sense,
You: Should... after all, most countries are Berne Convention signatories these days... that means creation and copyright are invested in final form. And for 75 years after creator's death.
Public Domain is what has passed out of creator copyright OR is intellectual property expressly granted into PD (that's where Open Source butts head with PD... one of those attempting to have cake and eat it, too, kind of things).
In a general context public domain may refer to ideas, information and works that are "publicly available", but in the context of intellectual property rights public domain refers to ideas, information and works which are intangible to private ownership and/or which are available for use by members of the public, subject to respect for moral rights.
I'm guessing that you mean here the spread of a url.
[edited by: Demaestro at 6:52 pm (utc) on May 1, 2010]
You can't copy my article and publish it for your own means without my permission.
Lack of punishment or enforcement aside from a legal stand point you are not allowed to do it. And If you do the person you do it to does have legal recourse despite the cynical viewpoint of some.
If you really think this is true Stout do some searching for RIAA judgments punishing people who have been caught doing this. There are some big ones that go way beyond a slap on the wrist as you put it.
That's the question that is being dealt with. All this other stuff has just been interesting philosophical discourse.
Viacom and Google will have an under-the-table deal and nothing will ever come of Viacom taking content from others. Big business for the win!