|
|
Posted by PTravel on 12/05/06 17:27
"Colin B" <Colin B@cb.org> wrote in message news:45753623$1@clear.net.nz...
>
> "PTravel" <ptravel@travelersvideo.com> wrote in message
> news:_EXch.10189$yf7.3856@newssvr21.news.prodigy.net...
>>
>> "Colin B" <Colin B@cb.org> wrote in message
>> news:4573e69e$1@clear.net.nz...
>>> Now that it's easy to put your digital photographs and movies on to a
>>> video sharing site, such as "youtube", the question of whether copyright
>>> infringements really harm the copyright holders is now a hot topic. See,
>>> for example, the article titled:
>>>
>>> Youtube copyright infringements are not all bad for the copyright
>>> holders?
>>>
>>> http://fredhere.blogspot.com/
>>>
>>> What do you think of the arguments in this blog? Should copyright
>>> holders take a broad view and tolerate copyright infringements on
>>> youtube as is suggested in this blog?
>>>
>>> See also the youtube site: http://www.youtube.com/
>>
>> Copyright is an exclusive right, meaning the reserved rights are owned,
>> entirely, by the copyright owner. It doesn't matter whether
>> infringements are "not all bad" or not -- copyright is, by definition, a
>> right to exclude. Your argument is pointless as it would mean, among
>> other things, amending the Constitution and ignoring several hundred
>> years of intellectual property jurisprudence.
>
> Nevertheless, in practice, it seems that copyright holders are taking a
> broad view because there are a HUGE number of what must surely be illegal
> copies of video clips from DVDs, TV shows etc. on youtube. Youtube seems
> to place the responsibility on the people uploading the videos to
> truthfully declare that permission has been obtained from the legal
> copyright holders. Although the copyright holders must know that their
> legal rights are constantly being infringed on this site, a lot of them
> seem to choose to do nothing about it. This may indicate that they are not
> really concerned about low quality video extracts from their work
> appearing on youtube because of the advertising value of these clips to
> the millions of people who visit this site. Why else could such huge
> numbers of "illegal" video clips not be deleted from youtube? Unless of
> course, people genuinely have received permission from the copyright
> holders to upload limited extracts from their work on to youtube.
Federal law exempts websites like Youtube from liability for infringing
material uploaded by their users without their knowledge. Once notified of
infringement Youtube has an obligation to delete the infringing material or
face liability. What would you have the content owners do? Sue every
single person who uploads infringing material, one at a time? The content
owners notify Youtube, per statute, and the infringement is removed.
I would suspect that a considerable number of infringements are undetected
by the content owners. It is not their responsibility to monitor Youtube's
daily uploads. That does not mean, either logically or legally, that
content owners have consented to the infringement.
>
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|