YouTube Fires Back At Viacom

NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "As we say in the legal profession, 'issue has been joined' in Viacom v. YouTube. In its answer to Viacom's complaint (PDF), filed Friday, YouTube says Viacom's lawsuit is intended to 'challenge... the protections of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act ("DMCA") that Congress enacted a decade ago to encourage the development of services like YouTube.' It goes on to say that the suit 'threatens the way hundreds of millions of people legitimately exchange information, news, entertainment, and political and artistic expression.'"

Comments

Re:Viacom's case

[compro01]

Yes, but they're not a Delaware corporation. they're a limited liability company located in Delaware. Differant things.

Re:The best part was left out...

[NewYorkCountryLawyer]

I don't think you should generalize based on ONE trial. Especially one that even the Judge has recognized was conducted in a flawed manner.

Re:Too bad

[slarrg]

The TV company web sites are the absolute worst. Often I want to know something simple, like when new episodes of Heroes will start. I go NBC's site and wade through page after page of useless crap and Flash animation that has no use whatsoever and there is not one word about when new episodes start.

Their sites are always Flash-infested design disasters with absolutely no useful content linking to a schedule that has no information. I'm really not sure who goes to these sites.

(512(c)(1)(B)), also (512(c)(1)(A)(2))

[Software Geek]

Viacom alleges in their complaint that YouTube receives a financial benefit directly attributable to infringing activity (via add revenue generated from the infringing material)

Also, they allege that infringing activity is apparent, given YouTube's ability to filter out other things (pr0n and the copyrighted material of it's partners.)

Each of these allegations appears to be directed at voiding the safe harbor provision in the law.

Here are the relevant parts of the safe harbor provision (512(c)(1))

(1) In general. - A service provider shall not be liable for monetary relief, or, except as provided in subsection (j), for injunctive or other equitable relief, for infringement of copyright by reason of the storage at the direction of a user of material that resides on a system or network controlled or operated by or for the service provider, if the service provider -
(A)(i) does not have actual knowledge that the material or an activity using the material on the system or network is infringing;
(ii) in the absence of such actual knowledge, is not aware of facts or circumstances from which infringing activity is apparent; or
(B) does not receive a financial benefit directly attributable to the infringing activity, in a case in which the service provider has the right and ability to control such activity; and