Viacom loses their case against Google/YouTube

Viacom loses their case against Google/YouTube

Summary: This long running case has been an interesting one to watch -- it was a passionate fight for both parties. Today, Viacom lost their battle in their pursuit to sue Google for copyright infringement.

SHARE:

This long running case has been an interesting one to watch -- it was a passionate fight for both parties. Today, Viacom lost their battle in their pursuit to sue Google for copyright infringement. Not only was it a huge loss for Viacom, but on the other side of the fence, it was a huge win for the internet.

Today, the court granted our motion for summary judgment in Viacom’s lawsuit with YouTube. This means that the court has decided that YouTube is protected by the safe harbor of the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA) against claims of copyright infringement. The decision follows established judicial consensus that online services like YouTube are protected when they work cooperatively with copyright holders to help them manage their rights online.

Google can now operate YouTube without fear of being sued, as long as they work with content creators to remove copyright violations when requested to. This is basically reinforces what the DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) was created to do.

Topics: Social Enterprise, Google

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

7 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • RE: Viacom loses their case against Google/YouTube

    As long as YouTube respects Viacom's requests to remove the material that is Viacom's property, I don't see a problem. Given the thousands of videos uploaded to YouTube daily, I think it would be impossible for YouTube to be expected to be proactive and review each one for copyright infringment.
    bobeld@...
    • RE: Viacom loses their case against Google/YouTube

      @bobeld@... So... if you receive stolen property, then you are protected as long as you stop showing it to others if the owner comes to you and asks you to stop?<br><br>This puts the onus of identifying the property onto the owner. Are you going to tell any interested "owner" of property that you might receive about each and every item you receive so that they can identify if it might belong to them?<br><br>One would think that the identification process could be automated. Surely there are image processing algorithms that could identify content based on a set of markers provided by content owners. Some form of fuzzy matching could identify the content, even if it had been altered, as long as the basic elements are present.<br><br>Could Google/YouTube and industry collaborate on developing such a process? It would be most effective if it could be used as part of the submission process; not to block submissions, but to notify owners if the content scores above a nominal value.<br><br>Alternatively, owners could run such a process on new postings to help them identify content that has a high probability of being theirs.
      pwatson
      • RE: Viacom loses their case against Google/YouTube

        @pwatson The problem with your viewpoint is that you choose to ignore that there is a distinction between an individual knowingly receiving stolen property, and service delivering stolen property.

        By your standards, UPS and FedEx would be liable for receiving stolen property if someone put stolen goods in a box and tried to ship the box.

        Rick
        rick@...
      • RE: Viacom loses their case against Google/YouTube

        _
        @pwatson <br><i>So... if you receive stolen property, then you are protected as long as you stop showing it to others if the owner comes to you and asks you to stop?</i><br><br>Can you prove that they <b>knowingly</b> received it? That kind of burden would be on Viacom, now wouldn't it...<br><br>Or are you a total slave to content providers and think every accusation they make is correct without due process? <br><br><i>This puts the onus of identifying the property onto the owner. Are you going to tell any interested "owner" of property that you might receive about each and every item you receive so that they can identify if it might belong to them?</i><br><br>No, it's actually up to Viacom to police YouTube's website if they're that paranoid about their alleged clips being shown. If Viacom wants it taken down, YouTube will probably comply. Why should YouTube be a policeman for Viacom?<br><br> Thank God the court decided that it wasn't YouTube's job to kiss Viacom's ass
        ubiquitous one
      • @ Rick: . . .

        And UPS, the USPS and the like would also be liable if someone decided to ship illegal drugs that way, too, according to Mr. Watson . . .
        JLHenry
  • RE: Viacom loses their case against Google/YouTube

    Reminds me of online schools that have web-based applications for checking assignments for plagiarism...good thoughts!
    daytonohiousa
  • RE: Viacom loses their case against Google/YouTube

    Great News! It puts the onus of copyright infringement on the owners to find out if they're being infringed upon as opposed to having sites like You Tube employ the onerous task of having it done before being posted. A major win for the internet!
    x00x