Quote:
Originally Posted by dissentowner
Not the same thing. The law clearly states that a server cannot be held responsible if an individual uploads copyrighted material, that is on the individual and Youtube does state in it's user agreement that you are not to do that even though people do. Now if it cost money to join or watch Youtube content they would be in big trouble but technically Youtube/Google have done everything the law requires them to and Viacom really has no case against them.
|
Doesnt that case law more apply to public non profit servers? I thought one of the case laws in the states had to do with some sort of file sharing network on a Uni computer system. That makes sense because the Uni isnt profiting.
As soon as google monitized Youtube, that changed from public server to private Server. Youtube at any time could prevent uploads from users who arent confirmed and can therefor be prosecuted. When they allow anonymous accounts to be created IMO they are helping to facilitate the activities because its profitable to Youtube but more importantly google which is the one that has the money.
Will be interesting to see the arguments, I hope they wont be closed.