Comments on: Viacom-YouTube lawsuit major legal test

By: dude

dude — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 04:38:50 +0000

i would sell my google stocks if i had some

By: cali-love

cali-love — Thu, 24 May 2007 19:18:45 +0000

I don’t think it’s youtube’s fault that user’s are putting copyright stuff on the internet for other user’s. If they can’t put it on youtube, there are plenty of other video sites to upload on… veoh, idkwtf, metacafe… so in the end, copyrighted videos will still regardless, be on the internet for people to download. Filter or no filter, people will find a way around it. There really is no solution to this so called problem. What they should look into and spend their time on is how to make it so their shit doesn’t get copied. Our technology is so advance, why doesn’t viacom spend a billion and find a solution to their own problems rather than blaming other smaller companies for a loophole in their own system.

By: thedetroitchannel

thedetroitchannel — Wed, 14 Mar 2007 03:48:25 +0000

you sure about that?

you can see how bringing napster “to heal” really invigorated the recording industry.

By: flotsam

flotsam — Wed, 14 Mar 2007 03:01:36 +0000

remember Napster. Brought to heal by law and law suits as will YouTube/Google.

By: Jake

Jake — Tue, 13 Mar 2007 20:22:52 +0000

Youtube is working on content filtering software because it knows that it will be sued into oblivion if it doesn’t have new, effective filters in place soon. Courts take into account the goals and objectives of a company that does certain actions. That being said, if this ever does make it to a court they will likely see that youtube is doing its best to keep up with the law and the company’s customers and that youtube’s battle against the speed of technological development (or as Viacom calls it, “massive intentional
copyright infringement”) is not worth one billion dollars.

The real questions should be: why did Youtube promise to have new filtering software in place by the beginning of the year and why hasn’t the company been able to meet that promise?

By: Jason

Jason — Tue, 13 Mar 2007 17:35:04 +0000

Yeah, you almost hate to make a precedent in case law on this one. Everyone makes more money if there are no real rules.

By: Cory

Cory — Tue, 13 Mar 2007 17:11:25 +0000

Perhaps, but if they settle, they avoid the widespread ramifications of a judgement if it goes against them.

By: invitedmedia

invitedmedia — Tue, 13 Mar 2007 15:36:24 +0000

sorry, but since the court often moves in decades rather than days it will serve youtube NOT to settle before it winds its way through the courts.