Viacom Still Can't Figure Out Which Video Clips Actually Infringed On YouTube
from the doesn't-that-say-something dept
As we get ready to see more details about the filings from both Viacom and Google in the YouTube fight, Eric Goldman notes that Viacom has dropped another 187 videos from its complaint. This isn’t the first time either. Late last year, Viacom dropped a bunch of videos from the lawsuit after realizing that many had been uploaded by Viacom employees. As Goldman notes, the fact that it’s taken Viacom three years to even realize that some of these videos don’t belong in the lawsuit is incredibly telling. If it takes Viacom three years to realize that such videos may or may not infringe, how is it reasonable to expect Google/YouTube to be able to make snap judgments and automatically know what infringes on all the videos uploaded to its site? Viacom, of course, is just claiming that it’s removing these 187 videos to “streamline” the issues. However, considering that there are 63,000 videos involved in the lawsuit, it’s not like this makes any difference at all. Basically, Viacom knows that it has highly questionable claims on those videos it’s trying to drop from the case — which proves the point. Even Viacom has no idea what is and is not infringing, despite having three years to figure it out. Yet it thinks that the law should require a third party to know immediately?
Filed Under: copyright, videos
Companies: google, viacom, youtube
Comments on “Viacom Still Can't Figure Out Which Video Clips Actually Infringed On YouTube”
moron in a hurry test
Viacom gives new meaning to the moron in a hurry test
Re: moron in a hurry test
I enjoy this comment immensely.
Viacom!? D:
These are also the same people that bought out Neopets and kinda ruined some unique things about it…
187 people at Viacom are definitely not getting their holiday bonus this year
It’s not that hard to work out.
Re: Re:
“It’s not that hard to work out.”
So Viacom’s just really, really slow and stupid then?
Re: Re: Re:
Oh, is that what he meant? I thought he was saying that It’s not that hard to work out that Viacom’s just really, really slow and stupid.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Maybe he was just making an off topic remark that we could all stand to get to the gym more often?
i know lets do a test. take 63,000 m&ms touch 100 of them. mix them all together and tell me which ones are the 100 you touched. sony has no more luck at it then you would.
Re: Re:
Fail analogy is fail.
M&M’s have no identifying markers. Copyright’s entire POINT is identifying markers.
However, you did manage to adequately express the point of the article for us, even with a rather miserably bad analogy (which I think was trying to argue for Viacom, not against them). If I can’t figure out which videos I own, how the hell do I have any right to expect someone else to?
Re: Re: Re:
actually, its not a failed analogy. change to decaf & relax a bit. a bit simplistic if anything… but not fail.
if you think he was trying to support viacom in his analogy (or sony as he stated) then i think maybe you need to think about it a bit harder.
next time you claim fail on someone elses post, try to not push the exact same idea using completely different words. its kind of in bad taste.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Aside from the number, what parallels here do you see?
Re: Re: Re:
“If I can’t figure out which videos I own, how the hell do I have any right to expect someone else to? entire POINT is identifying markers.”
You Fail miserably! This is about the videos not having identifying marks. Its about Viacoms employees uploading some of these videos with corporate authorization. Then coming back later and saying “they shouldnt be there and its google – youtubes fault they should have know which are infringing”. How does google – youTube determine which videos were uploaded legitamately?
About the m&m’s “fail” again after he touches them they do have identifying marks, they are called finger prints.
Which Video Clips Actually Infringed On YouTube
THEY ALL DO!!!!!!!
Re: Which Video Clips Actually Infringed On YouTube
These kids today, they’re watching with the YouTube videos of their friends and such, why, back in my day, kids were forced to watch just three channels and the commercials!
These kids today have no respect for the legacy industries of the last century. It’s not fair! We’re going to sue someone!
The world changed and we can’t and that’s not fair!
If my math...
does not fail me it will take them a little bit more than a 1000 years to recognize that they are completely wrong.
By the way I’m terrible at math so don’t check it too much.
I’d like to take the job as the 3rd party reviewer. Since I won’t know what is/isn’t a violation, I’ll call Viacom whenever a new video is uploaded (about 1 million per day) and ask them to verify it.
I’ll charge $500 per video review/call. I’m sure I can make some good cash before they give up.