Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

YouTube Granted Safe Harbor From Viacom

Posted by timothy on from the can't-they-all-merge-and-then-shut-up? dept.

eldavojohn writes "It's an old case, but there was an interesting development today when a judge ruled that YouTube is protected from Viacom by the safe harbor provisions of the DMCA, since YouTube helps rights owners manage their rights online and works cooperatively with entities like Viacom. Google's calling it a victory, but I'm not sure if Viacom will take this without a fight."

10 of 107 comments (clear)

  1. Youtube may be safe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    But viewers of Viacom remain at great risk.

  2. Not Sure? by value_added · · Score: 5, Informative

    From a randomly selected article

    We believe that this ruling by the lower court is fundamentally flawed and contrary to the language of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act," Viacom said in a statement. "We intend to seek to have these issues before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit as soon as possible."

    1. Re:Not Sure? by mwvdlee · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Seems like Viacom would prefer to have the power to force companies to do it's dirty work AND sue them afterwards.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    2. Re:Not Sure? by AnEducatedNegro · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Could this have anything to do with it?

      aEN

  3. Re:About time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    If slashdot comments are the inane ramblings of semi-literate retards... then I don't know what words remain to accurately describe youtube comments.

  4. Re:About time by MozeeToby · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Or better yet, stop trying to sue your potential customers and instead offer a cheap, high quality, DRM free, and above all legal download option and actually make money off of it instead of losing money in litigation costs. Personally, I very rarely download things that I can legally acquire some other way, but if there was an option for unlimited downloads of the things I watch for a fair (think ~$5 per month) cost I'd jump all over that and kiss my cable subscription goodbye.

  5. Good by Adrian+Lopez · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Not only should YouTube not be liable for what its users choose to post online, YouTube shouldn't even have to provide copyright holders with any special tools for handling infringing content.

    If we as citizens are required to live with the DMCA's restrictions, it is only fair that courts give Viacom no special treatment either. Google's only responsibility is to take down infringing content when properly requested to do so by copyright holders. As long as it continues to do that according to the terms of the DMCA, YouTube should not be expected to do anything more. Viacom should consider itself lucky that YouTube goes beyond the DMCA's requirements and provides them tools such as content detection and a streamlined process for getting rid of allegedly infringing content -- they are not entitled to any of that under the law.

    --
    "In prison you just have to shut your eyes and take it. Here you have to shut your eyes and give it."
  6. Viacom violating their own IP by interkin3tic · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I can't understand most of the PDF posted there, anything in there about how Viacom uploaded their own material so they could bust youtube for it? It would be nice if that bit of douchebaggery came back to screw them over, though I expect that's too much to ask from justice.

    1. Re:Viacom violating their own IP by FrostDust · · Score: 5, Informative

      Summary judgment means the judge sided in favor of Google based on their DMCA argument alone, before the full trial began. Other aspects of this case, such as Viacom uploading their own stuff, or Google's internal emails, weren't considered in the scope of this.

      While some may have wanted to see them held responsible for their "douchebaggery," I feel this is a better result. This strongly affirms the use of the DMCA's Safe Harbor as defense against copyright infringement, instead of mucking it up with other details.

  7. The best bit! by The+Good+Jim · · Score: 5, Informative

    From the Guardian...

    "Most embarrassingly for Viacom, court documents revealed in in March that at the same time that it was suing Google and YouTube, Viacom was itself uploading its content in secret and trying to make it look stolen - so that people would be more interested in it.

    One excerpt from the documents filed by YouTube was particularly notable for the embarrassment caused: "Viacom's efforts to disguise its promotional use of YouTube worked so well that even its own employees could not keep track of everything it was posting or leaving up on the site. As a result, on countless occasions Viacom demanded the removal of clips that it had uploaded to YouTube, only to return later to sheepishly ask for their reinstatement. In fact, some of the very clips that Viacom is suing us over were actually uploaded by Viacom itself."

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2010/jun/23/youtube-wins-viacom-lawsuit

    So Viacom were being pretty dodgy about IP in the first place, then complaining!