Mark Cuban's Wrong: Porn Filtering On YouTube Doesn't Mean It Loses Safe Harbors

from the porn-ain't-copyright-infringement dept

Mark Cuban has a weird obsession with trying to convince people that YouTube is illegal, despite plenty of evidence to the contrary. His latest discussion on the topic is a real stretch. In response to the bad ruling that gives YouTube log files to Viacom, Cuban is saying that Viacom can now wipe out Google’s DMCA safe harbors by showing that the company filters porn.

This is simply incorrect. The DMCA safe harbors do not claim that if you filter any material you must filter it all. Filtering out porn is a different beast than filtering out infringing content. You can tell that porn is porn simply by looking at it. But you cannot tell if content is infringing just by looking at it. It could be put up there on purpose by those who own the copyright. It could be fair use. It’s not as simple as just saying that because YouTube removes porn it loses its safe harbor provisions. Also, while not specifically concerning the DMCA, other lawsuits involving the similar safe harbors in the CDA have found that intervening with content on a site does not mean that the safe harbors go away. Having knowledge that some content is porn is quite different than having knowledge of what content is infringing on someone’s copyright.

Filed Under: , , , ,
Companies: google, viacom, youtube

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Mark Cuban's Wrong: Porn Filtering On YouTube Doesn't Mean It Loses Safe Harbors”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
29 Comments
Brooks says:

Re: Re:

Um, what in the world? Are you saying that because that scene is on YouTube, YouTube allows porn, and that therefore… I’m not sure what? Or are you saying that because that scene *isn’t* on YouTube, that YouTube filters things in addition to porn, and that therefore Cuban’s DMCA argument holds more water than TechDirt indicated?

Or were you off on a wild tangent, musing on the whole “I know it when I see it” definition of porn, completely disconnected from the article at hand? If so, the concept you’re missing is called “context” — just because a scene is pornographic doesn’t mean the movie containing the scene is. Likewise in that a porn flick that has a scene with fully clothed people doesn’t instantly become not-porn.

Jason says:

Re: Re: Re:

I don’t know that I disagree with your position, but your supporting point that context separates art from porn doesn’t seem to apply to a 00:01:28 clip on YouTube.

As far as the context argument goes, it’s really more, “I know it when I don’t see it.” YouTube would have a strong tendency toward making porn out of art.

I can sort of see where there’s significant detail and the implication of a broader relevant story even within a truncated clip. However, the effect for the porn-consumer watching this truncated art is just that it’s much easier to suspend reality and get more realistic kicks.

David says:

Re: Re: Re:

Losing the apostrophe would lead to ‘Mark Cubans Wrong’. Which doesn’t make any sense. It’s a contraction for ‘Mark Cuban is Wrong’. I don’t know if it’s allowed to contract a phrase like that, but if not then losing the apostrophe makes it worse. Should be ‘Mark Cuban is Wrong’ in that case.

evgen says:

Filtering infringing content is less of a value judgement than filtering porn

An additional problem faced by this simplistic version of Justice Stewart’s dissent regarding obscenity [“I’ll know it when I see it”, Miller v. California] is that “pornography”, similar to “obscenity”, is a a sort of value judgement. Are Mapplethorpe’s pictures pornography or art? Try defining “pornography” in a phrasing that is without ambiguity and you can see how it is actually easier to define copyright-infringing content than to define pornography.

Grammar Nazi says:

Mark Cuban's wrong because he's wrong

Does that help?
It’s not so hard to learn correct use of the apostrophe, is it?
Its use is determined by its context (note that the apostrophe is NOT used in the possessive form of “it”).

eg
My grandfather’s dead – my grandfather is dead – he’d better be because we buried him yesterday.
My grandfather’s cat’s dead – the cat of my grandfather is dead – we put him in the coffin with my grandfather so he’s (“he has”) probably suffocated by now.

ryan says:

Mark Cuban has an axe to grind

Mark Cuban has an axe to grind with youtube. Those who have been following him for a while have noticed him pooping on Youtube for nearly 2 years now.

I think ultimately he’s highly jealous of youtube – his ‘broadcast.com’ got bought for big bucks, but it was a total waste of money on Yahoo’s part. The site doesn’t exist, it’s brand went nowhere and was ultimately a real failure, despite the huge cashout that for some reason makes Mark Cuban a “learned commentator”.

v8o$i(c;e12/ says:

Mark Cuban is pretty much a running gag, especially here in dallas, silenced only by our shame in having him as a resident and owner of the mavs. He is a shining example of how money does NOT equate class. Or maturity. Or even hygiene, for that matter. His opinions of YouTube would be far less concerning, were it not for his ability to finance a public display of his ranting and whining. He’s just angry because someone posted footage there of him soiling himself.

steveking says:

YouTubeRobot.com today announces YouTube Robot 2.0, a tool that enables you to download video from YouTube.com onto your PC, convert it to various formats to watch it when you are on the road on mobile devices like mobile phone, iPod, iPhone, Pocket PC, PSP, or Zune.

YouTube Robot allows you to search for videos using keywords or browse video by category, author, channel, language, tags, etc. When you find something noteworthy, you can preview the video right in YouTube Robot and then download it onto the hard disk drive. The speed, at which you will be downloading, is very high: up to 5 times faster than other software when you download a single file and up to 4 times faster when you download multiple files at a time.

Manual download is not the only option with YouTube Robot. You may as well schedule the download and conversion tasks to be executed automatically, even when you are not around. Downloading is followed by conversion to the format of your choice and uploading videos to a mobile device (if needed). For example, you can plug in iPod, select the video, go to bed, and when you wake up next morning, your iPod will be ready to play new YouTube videos.

Product page: http://www.youtuberobot.com
Direct download link: http://www.youtuberobot.com/download/utuberobot.exe
web-site: http://www.youtuberobot.com
E-mail: support@youtuberobot.com

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Ctrl-Alt-Speech

A weekly news podcast from
Mike Masnick & Ben Whitelaw

Subscribe now to Ctrl-Alt-Speech »
Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...