Slashdot Mirror


Google Video Sued For Copyright Infringement

PadRacerExtreme writes to mention an Associated Press article about a lawsuit against Google Video over copyright infringement. The company provided no additional information about the case, which it disclosed in an SEC filing on Wednesday. Some analysts are viewing this as a preview of what may happen to the company after it completes its takeover of the YouTube site. From the article: "Because it indexes so much material owned by others, Google has become accustomed to fielding complaints about copyright infringement. Some of the disputes have triggered lawsuits for everything from Google's efforts to make digital copies of library books to its search engine's ability to display snippets of news stories and photos appearing on other Web sites. Those suits haven't become a big financial drain on Google yet, and investors so far appear confident the company's lawyers will minimize the damage from any claims brought on by the YouTube purchase."

12 of 60 comments (clear)

  1. Cultish Landmark Education sues Google by grub · · Score: 5, Interesting


    The cultish Scientology/EST offshoot known as The Landmark Forum has claimed copyright infringement against Google and YouTube. The EFF has extensive details and are trying to squash that case.

    Background: In 2004 a French TV channel had someone with a hidden camera go to a Landmark Forum indoctrination weekend. The expose was shown to 1.5 million viewers. Soon after the broadcast, Landmark left France. A similar situation occured in Sweden a few years before.

    Landmark has no valid copyright in either case but, having learned a lesson from Scientology, are now resorting to intimidation and abuse of the DMCA and court system.

    In any event, fire up BitTorrent and get the French video with English subtitles at Pirate Bay and a Swedish expose on Landmark, sans subtitles at the moment, at this link.

    You will definately want to see these in case one of your family members or friends starts to push you to take a weekend course "that will create new possibilities"...

    Spread the word, knowledge is power.

    --
    Trolling is a art,
    1. Re:Cultish Landmark Education sues Google by thorholiday · · Score: 2, Informative

      You will definately want to see these in case one of your family members or friends starts to push you to take a weekend course "that will create new possibilities"...

      I hate doing this, but it's definitely. DEFINITELY.

    2. Re:Cultish Landmark Education sues Google by grub · · Score: 2, Funny


      Arrrgh... thanks :) Now you owe me: download the video!

      --
      Trolling is a art,
  2. They should have waited by Salvance · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This just reconfirms my belief that Google should have waited a few months/years to buy YouTube. I think Mark Cuban was right, YouTube was a big ole lawsuit waiting to happen. Google could have waited until the copyright lawsuits hit then sweeped in to buy it for a fraction of the price. Now they've just increased their liability.

    --
    Crack - Free with every butt and set of boobs
    1. Re:They should have waited by Ariastis · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I believe what Google assument is that YouTube alone might end up being squashed by the lawsuits and lost a lot of its marketshare/value if it had to face lawsuits on its own (Since it was starting to lack funding). Also, YouTube might have been pressured to ink bad deals in the long term to fend off some of those lawsuits.

      By buying it now, they decided to play it the other way around by dealing with the problems themselves, the Google Way, with all their ressources & influence backing up the dealmaking process.

      While I agree this was a costly move, I believe it was a smart one to appropriate themselves the First Mover Advantage.

    2. Re:They should have waited by Zadaz · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I can't see how there would be any other answer. A company doesn't spend $1.7 billion without kicking the tires and having a plan.

      (Well, the other answer would be "They're snakeshit crazy" but every other action the company has taken indicates they're stone cold sane, if not downright clever.)

    3. Re:They should have waited by LotsOfPhil · · Score: 2, Funny
      That's an unusual typo:
      I believe what Google assument is that YouTube...

      It seems you should have typed assumed, but the d key is pretty far from the n and t keys. Parlez vous francais? Je parle seul un peu. Plus lentemente, s'il vous plait.
      --
      This post climbed Mt. Washington.
  3. The money...!! by bogaboga · · Score: 3, Interesting
    I am sure that by now, folks at Google know that it's all about the money.

    My advice to Google is this: Prepare some form of profit sharing and all potential suits will be stopped din their tracks.

  4. Operation Clambake by paladinwannabe2 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Hey, the 'Reply' button is back!

    Seriously, though, Scientology has a long history of suing people who talk about Scientology for copyright infringement. "You're showing people our secret dogma? How dare you distribute our papers without our consent!" Xenu.net and Wikipedia have lots of information on Scientology now. (Disclaimer- Xenu.net is strictly anti-Scientology. Wikipedia has mostly facts, which, as we know, have a decidedly anti-Scientological basis).

    --
    You are reading a copy of my copyrighted post.
    1. Re:Operation Clambake by tehcyder · · Score: 3, Funny
      Hey, the 'Reply' button is back!
      Is it? How can you tell?
      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  5. It's standard 10-Q boilerplate by rickkas7 · · Score: 5, Informative
    The text in Google's 10-Q looks like the standard sort of thing companies always put in their 10-Q: We've been sued; we may get sued again. The same text (minus the YouTube sentence of course) appeared a year earlier.

    Legal Matters

    Certain companies have filed trademark infringement and related claims against us over the display of ads in response to user queries that include trademark terms. The outcomes of these lawsuits have differed from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Courts in France have held us liable for allowing advertisers to select certain trademarked terms as keywords. We are appealing those decisions. We were also subject to two lawsuits in Germany on similar matters where the courts held that we are not liable for the actions of our advertisers prior to notification of trademark rights. We are litigating or recently have litigated similar issues in other cases in the U.S., France, Germany, Italy, Israel and Austria. Adverse results in these lawsuits may result in, or even compel, a change in this practice which could result in a loss of revenue for us, which could harm our business.

    Certain entities have also filed copyright claims against us, alleging that features of certain of our products, including Google Web Search, Google News, Google Video, Google Image Search, and Google Book Search, infringe their rights. In addition, our planned acquisition of YouTube may also subject us to additional copyright claims upon the closing of the transaction. Adverse results in these lawsuits may include awards of damages and may also result in, or even compel, a change in our business practices, which could result in a loss of revenue for us or otherwise harm our business.

    From time to time, we may also become a party to other litigation and subject to claims incident to the ordinary course of business, including intellectual property claims (in addition to the trademark and copyright matters noted above), labor and employment claims, breach of contract claims, tax and other matters. Although the results of litigation and claims cannot be predicted with certainty, we believe that the final outcome of the matters discussed above will not have a material adverse effect on our business, consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flow.

  6. I propose to remove them from google by jackjeff · · Score: 2, Funny

    Ahaha.. whoever made that claim, will soon disappear from the google enginer index altogether !!