Slashdot Mirror
Fox Subpoenas YouTube Over Content
popo writes "FOX has subpoenaed YouTube for the identity of a user who posted entire episodes of '24' and 'The Simpson's'. It is not yet known whether YouTube has complied with the request. The '24' episodes in question actually appeared on YouTube prior to their primetime January 14 premiere on the Fox broadcast network, which spread four hourlong episodes of the hit drama over two consecutive nights. Fox became aware the episodes were on YouTube on January 8, according to the subpoena."
At most they might get a free hotmail account, then go bug hotmail to release the identity for that email address (which is probably fake info to)
Yeah, and even if they track it back to an IP address, the guy probably did it from an open wireless access point. At least, if he was smart he did.
The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
If he posted the commercials, would they still care?
-- if you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine
Sorry, I read your comment but I'm not quite sure I'm following. I popped open the Wikipedia entry on the subject and it noted that "it does not guarantee to people the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures conducted by private citizens or organizations" but only those from the government.
Further, IANAL, but doesn't the search seem specific (we want the information for this _one_ fellow here) and contain probable cause (his name uploaded copyrighted material)?
Sorry, I'm interested in the issue, but I'm not quite sure I see how this ties in to the 4th amendment, would you mind clarifying what you meant?
This is a slam dunk subpoena of an individual who grossly violated copyright laws, and probably (once his identity is confirmed) trade secret laws.
Dollars to Doughnuts says that Google's laywers took one look at the subpoena and went "Here you go"
Test your net with Netalyzr
I think 24 is a profoundly disturbing show. I think in this 'terrorism is war' mentality, whre people think anything goes, and anything works, 24 has convinced america that torture can work.
Lets just put it this way, Mossad gave up on torture. If they can't make it work, no one can.
The show, in too many different ways, albeit technological, chronological, sociological, etc. has parted ways with the bounds of reality so much that the show has become uninteresting to watch because it lacks any plausibility any more.
The artistic license given to Hollywood (and now, New York) is so vast that I've stopped watching CSI regularly for similar reasons. I mean, these guys can pull a good DNA sample off of dog poop and trace it back through the Miami-Dade Humane Society's database on any canine that's passed through a vetrinary's office within a 100 mile radius. Or, my favorite, reading and enhancing the license plate off a car, at night, parked almost perpendicular to the camera view, from an ATM camera recording.
Anyway, it's obvious that the offender had inside access to the shows, as commented on many times previously. A copyright issue? Likely. But it's more like an issue of confidential insider information leaked before it was supposed to go public. The information in this case, was the episodes.
Seeing as the episodes in question were the ones made available on DVD the following Tuesday, I'd think the most logical leak would be somewhere in the chain responsible for getting the DVDs made and to the stores in time.
Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
I'm not sure how relevant this is in the era of HD feeds, maybe they send them by HD/4DTV.
There is plenty of C band equipment to be had. I was practically given my 10ft dish. Some folks let you take theirs if you'll take it out of their yard. The setup's a little hard but it's paid for now.
They are very popular in rural areas and the service plans are still cheap. I like the fact that I can just buy the channels that I want for a very low annual fee - I get all the channels I want for less than a single month's cable fee.
I really don't think it's worth hunting them down, there are so many satellites to check and so many channels on each. I've never found anything worthwhile by doing random checks.
Not stolen. Nothing has been removed from possession of its owner.
Infringing.
Actually, "stealing" is correct term.
You infringe the copyright of a published work.
You steal an unpublished work.
If you haven't published something, you still own it entirely, with all rights of ownership...not just the rights of copy and distribution. If someone makes a copy of your unpublished manuscript, you have lost something real and valuable: the right of introduction. You can no longer monetize the debut of your work, for that right was stolen.