If the real crime is sharing, technically speaking, then all that participate in the crime of sharing are culpable, this includes ISPs, uploaders, and content hosts in the direct line of fire.
I don't like IP, but legally speaking, is Youtube "most complicit"? What exactly is Viacom charging?
Viacom has partial content ownership, yes? So, the more Viacom squirms, the more they lay waste to the argument that copyright law is (functionally and intentionally) to protect the creators.
In this case it can only be seen to protect the intermediary party -- what do you think the artists say about this? I'm sure they're appalled with the new Youtube policies. Many of you have already seen this
Slashdot Mirror
If the real crime is sharing, technically speaking, then all that participate in the crime of sharing are culpable, this includes ISPs, uploaders, and content hosts in the direct line of fire.
I don't like IP, but legally speaking, is Youtube "most complicit"? What exactly is Viacom charging?
Viacom has partial content ownership, yes? So, the more Viacom squirms, the more they lay waste to the argument that copyright law is (functionally and intentionally) to protect the creators.
In this case it can only be seen to protect the intermediary party -- what do you think the artists say about this? I'm sure they're appalled with the new Youtube policies. Many of you have already seen this
.