Microsoft takes on the free world (CNN) [LWN.net]

Microsoft takes on the free world (CNN)

Posted May 14, 2007 10:39 UTC (Mon) by briangmaddox (subscriber, #39279)
In reply to: Microsoft takes on the free world (CNN) by NigelK
Parent article: Microsoft takes on the free world (CNN)

You mean the Viacom lawsuit? If so, I'd argue that Viacom does NOT have a case. Viacom was one of the companies that pushed hard to get the DMCA passed. When Google gets DMCA takedowns, they comply. What Viacom wants is for Google to spend their time and money to do Viacom's work for them. I'm sorry, but Viacom got the law they wanted (at the expense of people's legal rights like make backups of certain media). All Google legally has to do is remove videos when they get a takedown notice. Although if you want to do away with things like safe harbor then Verizon would be involved and fight on Google's side :)

THAT's what is not being reported fairly. What normally gets reported is that Google is helping piracy by hosting these videos. No one seems to remember that Viacom is complaining about having to follow the law they helped pass.

(Log in to post comments)

Microsoft takes on the free world (CNN)

Posted May 14, 2007 11:59 UTC (Mon) by NigelK (guest, #42083) [Link]

My bad, Viacom it is. And, yes, some of Viacom's behaviour stinks, but I don't think GooTube is whiter-than-white here, either. This case really is two pigs fighting in the mud and, IMHO, could go either way - both sides make good points.

Microsoft takes on the free world (CNN)

Posted May 14, 2007 20:31 UTC (Mon) by hummassa (subscriber, #307) [Link]

I'm sorry, but I think you are wrong:

> some of Viacom's behaviour stinks, but I don't think GooTube is
> whiter-than-white here, either. This case really is two pigs fighting
> in the mud

no, GooTube is whiter-than-white alright. why? because they are only the
enablers of a _whole_ _awful_ _lot_ of video-communications. Suing them
because some user put up one of Viacom's films is like suing the phone
company if I connect my answering machine to my CD player and put it to
play Metallica. In the latter case, Metallica should/could sue _me_ for
the unauthorized public performance of their work; in the former, Viacom
should/could sue _the_ _user_ for the unauthorized public performance (or
copy) of their work. But GooTube has *absolutely* *nothing* to do with
it. The work of policing all of GooTube to see if users are not
infringing my copyrights is _my_ work, not GooTube's. Period. Once I see
someone doing something murky, I alert GooTube and they put the offending
video down at once. So, yes, they are whiter than white.