Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google Video Blasted Over Piracy Claims

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the mine-no-mine-no-nmine dept.

Stony Stevenson writes "A US-based copyright watchdog has sunk its teeth into Google by sending a report alleging copyright violations on Google Video to members of Congress. The National Legal and Policy Center (NLPC) researched the extent of copyrighted material being hosted on Google Video earlier this summer and released a Top 50 list of apparently copyrighted movies. But, in the latest spot-check of Google Video conducted from 10 to 18 September, the NLPC claims to have discovered 300 additional instances of apparently copyrighted films, including over 60 movies released this year. This is despite Google's claim that it respects the rights of copyright holders, and provides tools to help identify and remove copyrighted intellectual property from the site."

10 of 103 comments (clear)

  1. And NPLC has no stake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If they did, they'd file DMCA complaints. They're just trying to get some publicity (And thus funding), so good work Slashdot.

    1. Re:And NPLC has no stake by eonlabs · · Score: 5, Insightful

      In the same breath, that's 300 out of how many videos. I'd say if they only found 300, 60 released this year, that google video is doing a really good job at keeping copyrighted stuff OFF of the site.

      --
      I wouldn't consider the mad hatter mad. Just reality impaired. He sure can make a mean cup of tea.
  2. Well... by Twisted64 · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...it seems like the tools doing the identifying of copyrighted content are working.

    --
    Consciousness is a myth. Trust me.
  3. The only tool needed by speaker+of+the+truth · · Score: 4, Informative

    The only tool needed is a DMCA takedown notice. They're cheap and easy to use, and companies like Google have a policy of always responding in the affirmative to them. Thankfully there's another cheap and easy response to them which is a counter-DMCA notice and it forces companies like Google to put the work back up (or at least allow the person to put it back up). The original company and/or person can do nothing except take the infringer to court, and Google is allowed to continue on as business allows.

    With the law so bent towards media companies, you would think they'd stop bitching when companies like Google comply with the draconian laws.

    --
    Using openSUSE instead of Windows since 9th of October, 2007 and liking it.
    1. Re:The only tool needed by russotto · · Score: 4, Informative

      With the law so bent towards media companies, you would think they'd stop bitching when companies like Google comply with the draconian laws.


      You may have noticed that the copyright cartel is not happy with their own law (the DMCA) and is now pushing for ISPs to actively censor the net on behalf of copyright holders. They are complaining the law is too biased towards ISPs.
  4. Why Congress? by sxltrex · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Aren't there already laws protecting copyright? Is Congress really responsible for enforcement? This reminds me so much of a child running to mommy every time another kid takes their toy or calls them a name.

    1. Re:Why Congress? by MontyApollo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Congress is responsible for writing and funding laws though, and by going to congress the group in effect is saying that current laws are insufficient or not properly enforced. It's about policy, not about the specific cases of infringement. This group does not own the copyrights; they are just promoting a particular policy like any political group does.

  5. Re:DMCA requirements by MontyApollo · · Score: 4, Informative

    I'm not sure, but someone said you have to be a stakeholder to invoke the DMCA process. The watchdog group doesn't own any of the copyrights in question, so they cannot invoke the DMCA process.

  6. Almost everything is copyright by El_Muerte_TDS · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... unless it has been explicitly released in public domain or was created before Mickey Mouse was created.
    The difference is having permission to distribute copyrighted material.
    Does Google Video contain copyrighted material? Of course it does, but is the copyright violated is the important question. That question can only be answered by the copyright holder.

  7. Not the only tool they'll want by huckamania · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Eventually they will ask for protection on the desktop. Before everyone starts calling me a dunce or troll, I understand how impossible that will be. I'm just saying that they will eventually ask for some sort of legal remedy to suppress peoples ability to circumvent their copyrights. I'm pretty sure that the congress will give it to them.

    If it can happen in Germany, sigh...