First  Prev  1  2  3  4  Next  Last
Youtube hit with lawsuit?
12285 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M
Offline
Posted 3/15/07
Lol they had it coming. The orginal owners knew it would happen and left with 1.7 billion dollars.
4565 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / somewhere in silence
Offline
Posted 3/15/07
companies are such babies like they are losing money if anything their shows get more fans, thanks to google they should be paying youtube for their services not taking them to court...corprate assholes
1231 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / F / Las Vegas
Offline
Posted 3/15/07
dang.
almost everything is being taken off.
Well, at least the good stuff like Goong, Goong S, and I heard that they're taking off Hana Yori Dango too sometime soon.
kyu
1109 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 3/15/07

lilprince wrote:

companies are such babies like they are losing money if anything their shows get more fans, thanks to google they should be paying youtube for their services not taking them to court...corprate assholes


all they would be getting is publicity, not necessarily money. Instead of people buying copies of their DVD's (where they get money), people would prefer watching their shows on youtube for free.
5418 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Toronto
Offline
Posted 3/15/07
They can only rant about stuff...I'm predicting that all of those vids will be reuploaded under a codename.
553 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / driftin in cybers...
Offline
Posted 3/15/07
youtube > video.google.com
nuff said
1311 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / F / Texxass
Offline
Posted 3/15/07
ah, my poor youtube. :'[
i'm so happy i found crunchyroll ahaha.
1546 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / Martian / Estonia
Offline
Posted 3/15/07
well i think Viacom cant do shit, i mean Youtube does no upload that stuff itself, thus they are not liable, and don´t they have some kind of warning not to upload copywritten stuff, also when someone draws their attention to something like that, they immediately remove it, Viacom has no case, same thing as with Isohunt.
Posted 3/15/07

Arrtos_Tarne wrote:

Viacom can kiss my ass.


What he said.......
5986 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / lazing in England
Offline
Posted 3/15/07

lilprince wrote:

companies are such babies like they are losing money if anything their shows get more fans, thanks to google they should be paying youtube for their services not taking them to court...corprate assholes
They ARE losing money because Google is making loads of money off their products without paying anything to them.

You buy a new car on repayment scheme and pay for petrol, but I take your car and drive it around, then lend it to friends who drive it around. All the while, you're still paying for petrol and the car repayments. Very basic, but same principles.

Not only that --- Fewer TV viewers -> lower interest from advertisers (higher ratings, more advertising money to come; lower ratings, less ad money to come) -> smaller income -> smaller budget for the TV production -> even fewer viewers -> much lower interest from advertisers -> even smaller income -> budget cuts or axe the TV production. This means no more YouTube uploadings of the said TV production, eh.

So - in a long run Google is doing for no one but itself, and viewers - at YouTube AND TV - lose out in the end.

5418 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Toronto
Offline
Posted 3/15/07
Well that is true...I myself barely watch TV except for the Raptors game...
2341 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M / Foxwoods
Offline
Posted 3/15/07
Sux to be them
26310 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
33 / F / California
Offline
Posted 3/15/07
Hmm. . .I can careless. . .If these companies are adammit about it they should have started an online stream site for their music vids or dramas. . .By paying a reasonable amount of money each month the said viewers would be able to stream unlimited amount of time through the said companies catalogs. . .Just like cable or satelite. So like for example they start something like CR and everyone who wants to stream should pay for the amount of time they stream. . .Then there would be no lawsuits. . .If the companies put out the service like youtube then people would demand it. . .thus, that said all videos are uploaded by people like us. . .they can't go after Youtube for this. . .as long as google can list and show what they have done to filter out the license stuff then there is no case.
58645 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Boston
Offline
Posted 3/15/07

Dularc wrote:

well i think Viacom cant do shit, i mean Youtube does no upload that stuff itself, thus they are not liable, and don´t they have some kind of warning not to upload copywritten stuff, also when someone draws their attention to something like that, they immediately remove it, Viacom has no case, same thing as with Isohunt.


This is quite the misconception. Youtube and every other internet site will always be liable for providing the general public with copyrighted material. In fact if you've ever watched an American movie every single one is prefaced by a legal warning about sharing that particular movie with other people. It is very illegal and even if a single person does it the fine can be as hefty at half a million dollars. Then take a multi-billion dollar company like Google and think about the consequences. Youtube didn't have any issues before because the companies didn't think they were worth pursuing. Everyone knew one of the main hang ups of Google buying them was the lawsuits they would have to deal with as a result of the copyrighted material. At any rate any given company has a very good case and on top of that even if they are uploaded under aliases Youtube is still responsible for monitoring their content. If you don't believe that why don't they have porn or other explicit material on their site?
5986 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / lazing in England
Offline
Posted 3/15/07
^^ Paid subscription video streaming sites VS. free membership video streaming sites...?

Man, it's like kicking a kitten.

They could make money from selling advertising space on their own free membership streaming sites (e.g. you're assigned a specific DNS-based key number to log on), but do they see the picture that big? Nah.

They can and will go after YouTube, even if YouTube claims it has a fliter in place. YouTube will have to prove that it's not encouraging piracy, copyright infringements, etc. while justifying its decision not to seek permission as well as making payments to these companies in the first place.

From these companies' POV, YouTube is knowingly a party to illegal activities. Like pretending not seeing your friends giving away stolen goods to other people in your own home.

What differs YouTube from CR somewhat is how each makes its money as well as utilising their sites. CR relies on donations and micro-scale advertisements while YouTube makes money from major advertisements, promotions and blah blah as well as functions of Google search engine and rankings.

I've been a real boring fuck tonight. Sorry about that.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.