RSSGoogle: Viacom Abusing Copyright Act
By Ed Oswald | Published March 30, 2007, 4:23 PM
Google struck back at Viacom through the media on Thursday, responding to a March 24 op-ed by Viacom's general counsel Michael Fricklas in the Washington Post with a letter of its own from Google's counsel for the case.
Managing Counsel Michael Kwun called the Viacom suit "an attack on the way people communicate on the Web and on the platforms that allow people to make the Internet their own," saying it was abusing the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.
Kwun accused the company of first supporting the law as it passed through Congress, and then deciding to not follow through with its responsibilities in identifying copyrighted content. The DMCA provides a "safe harbor" for sites like YouTube as long as they remove offending content upon request.
If Viacom is successful with its suit within the courts, Kwun argued it would "[place the] burden on hosting platforms" and "would turn the DMCA on its head." He further argued that the lawsuit had no basis in law.
YouTube had earlier cooperated with a request to remove some 100,000 videos that Viacom saw as infringing, although it later rescinded some of those requests over confusion whether they actually infringed. Kwun argued that Viacom was attempting to force YouTube to make that decision.
"Fortunately, the law is clear, and on our side," he concluded.
On March 24, Fricklas argued that the DMCA did not protect YouTube, saying the company knew that its users were posting infringing material and therefore did not qualify for safe harbor protection.
"If the public knows what's there, then YouTube's management surely does," he argued. "Under the law, the obligation is right where it belongs: on the people who derive a benefit from the creative works and are in the position to keep infringement out of their businesses."
Sukitlong=Viacom
Score: 0
|If I put this FLV converter here, I don't know whether it works. Maybe negtive, positive?
Aha, google Knows.
Score: 0
|"If the public knows what's there, then YouTube's management surely does"
Perhaps they should hire mr. "public" to their management department...
Score: 0
|Fortunately for Google the law makes no such assumption. They are using rhetoric to replace reason and trying to put a burden of monitoring a site's content upon the host and not upon the copyright holder where the law clearly places it.
Viacom has no case and is playing some kind of game using the courts to do it.
Score: 0
|Go newsgroups! All the MP3's and apps you could ever want for 10 bucks a month.
As all the players are lining up to see who gets to sell you music and videos like iTunes, some people know how to get anything they want for practically nothing (not me).
Score: 0
|This is a hoot, watching so much angst as so many debate such a mix of disparate perceptions!
For me it is fascinating to watch two big players who have about the same to gain and to lose and who are Both playing both sides of the fence in various markets, beat each other up.
But now we can add you folks to the game as well.
But please continue, as this is fun to watch. Oh, and I Know that all of you can use more egregious personal insults! After all, we want entertainment!
Score: 0
|Viacom is just upset cause iFilm has gone down....since they own stock in it.
Score: 0
|wonder how long google will have the good guy image. I remember years back sony and ms were far less hated.
Score: 0
|The DMCA is the result of the shame that the Clinton Administration really was. No more Clinton clans in the White House, no Democrats with their DMCA mentality in the White House !
Score: 0
|In that case, why is the DMCA still around through the last 6 years? We've had a one-sided government since 2000, and they could have killed DMCA if they WANTED to!
Score: 0
|In order for it to be struck down, it must be ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. Thus, it must be brought before the Court by the people.
King George can't just wave his hand and say it's no longer a law.
Score: 0
|Not in his own country - but in any other he can. Or at least he can bomb them until they change the law. :P
Score: 0
|Or at least he can bomb them until they change the law. :P
Sure, if he gets approval. You're not one of those nuts that has long since forgotten the bipartisan support he got when this war started are you?
Score: 0
|Google must win and the DMCA must be defeated. Google we the little people are behind you.
I now have more respect for Google.
Score: 0
|It is the DMCA that _allows_ Google/YouTube to do what they do today through safe harbor provision.
_Viacom_ must be defeated, by _upholding_ the provisions in the DMCA.
Score: 0
|This should be good.
Hopefully this will get the DMCA to the Supreme Court, where it can finally be killed for being unconstitutional.
Yeah, high-hopes, I know...
Score: 0
|That isn't just high hopes, that's delusional :P
Score: 0
|For once we agree!
Score: 0
|Nah...just high. Really, really, high. Purple elephants high...
Score: 0
|I thought they were pink? Or do they go purple when you get higher?
Score: 0
|...all depends on the tools of the trade, man....
Score: 0
|I got a video deleted by Viacom (and I know for a fact they didn't own it)
Score: 0
|As long as YouTube has a TOS that is clear and a checkbox to confirm that users acknowledge that their content must be legal, then well - Viacom don't have anything to stand on in a fair court.
I've never submitted to YouTube, so I'm not sure if this is how this are...
I do agree with Google. Well said.
Score: 0
|Or they can have a hold on all submitted works and verify it like alot of websites do for images and other digital material.
Write a script to dump first 10secs and last 10secs of all video uploaded.
Hire 1-200 people, to review these 10sec rips, if there is no disclaimer in the alotted time such as that fbi warning or mpaa warning which is seen within first 10secs of most movies, then they hit a button that says approved.
If it is there then hit denied.
Or maybe the whole thing can be automated ?
Assuming that fbi and mpaa warning does indeed show within the first 10secs.
This would go beyond the simple measures of a 'checkbox' and then leave the burden on the parties that cry infringement to then go over every item and ask that they be removed instead of just shooting over file names.
Lets hope google wins this battl though :)
Score: 0
|How many TV shows and whatnot do you watch with FBI & MPAA warnings before they begin?
Score: 0
|Hell, most of my DVD's have been re-ripped to play automatically and skip all that BS anyway.
Score: 0
|Many.
I rent and or *borrow* and do 1-1 copies for personal use
Score: 0
|Good for you,I also find it obnoxious to be watching a screen that comes up with multitude of statements about not pirating a movie you are watching, as if the warnings will change the circumstances of you having the movie.
I dislike not being able to skip them, but 1-1 copies is what i like just not into taking out parts no matter how retarded they are.
I also did not address the biggest question of all.How can any company be sure that the movie someone is uploading is not there's and do it in such a way that does not add more expense and huge backlogs.?. Photo with them and a cop in it ? Letter from a judge saying it's your's ?.
It is hard for me to see how any company can do that in the future and be profitable and not have huge backlogs with the type of verification the movie studios want.
One would assume they want every clip uploaded to be screened by their company before it's posted to the sites community, which is ridiculous.
Score: 0
|Finally, MEDIA goes after a company their own size. The constant extortion by MEDIA of SMBs that don't have the resources to defend themselves has angered me for ages.
Hopefully, we will see a strengthening by precedent of DMCA 'safe harbor' rules.
Sic em G!
Score: 0
|Go Google!
Score: 0
|