PDA

View Full Version : Boycott Viacom


-Beat-
07-11-2008, 02:30 PM
I did a search and found nothing, but if there is another thread, please close this one.

update Viacom on Tuesday slapped YouTube and parent company Google with a lawsuit, accusing the wildly popular video-sharing site of "massive intentional copyright infringement" and seeking more than $1 billion in damages.

The complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, contends that nearly 160,000 unauthorized clips of Viacom's entertainment programming have been available on YouTube and that these clips have been viewed more than 1.5 billion times. (PDF: Viacom's complaint.)

Viacom, an entertainment giant that owns Paramount Pictures, DreamWorks and a number of cable channels, said it has also asked the court for an injunction to halt the alleged copyright infringement.

"YouTube appropriates the value of creative content on a massive scale for YouTube's benefit without payment or license," Viacom said in its complaint. "YouTube's brazen disregard of the intellectual-property laws fundamentally threatens not just plaintiffs but the economic underpinnings of one of the most important sectors of the United States economy."

The lawsuit represents a serious escalation in the conflict with YouTube, and it is also the most significant legal challenge over intellectual-property rights to video sharing's No. 1 site. But some industry observers doubt that this will embolden other entertainment companies to mount their own court challenges.

Google downplayed the legal challenge and extolled the benefits to content creators that it sees in YouTube.

"We have not received the lawsuit but are confident that YouTube has respected the legal rights of copyright holders and believe the courts will agree," Google said in a statement. "YouTube is great for users and offers real opportunities to rights holders: the opportunity to interact with users; to promote their content to a young and growing audience; and to tap into the online-advertising market. We will certainly not let this suit become a distraction to the continuing growth and strong performance of YouTube and its ability to attract more users (and) more traffic, and (to) build a stronger community."

Google, which acquired YouTube last October for $1.65 billion, recognized the possibility that the video site would one day be forced to wage lengthy court battles. The company has reportedly set aside a sum of money to fund legal costs.

Meanwhile, Google has successfully negotiated licensing deals with many entertainment companies, including Warner Music Group, CBS and most recently, the BBC.
"This is Viacom and Google in a negotiation that hasn't gone so smoothly...Viacom is just really turning up the heat."
--Edward Naughton, partner, Holland & Knight

Some advocacy groups suggested that the "fair use" doctrine of copyright law, which allows the noncommercial reproduction of works for purposes like criticism, comment, news reporting and research, should protect YouTube users that post short clips or mainstream-media works.

"Simply (defining material as) 'unauthorized' does not make its use illegal," Gigi Sohn, president of the advocacy group Public Knowledge, said in a statement.

"I don't think this is the start of a whole series of litigation," said Edward Naughton, intellectual-property partner at Holland & Knight. "I think this is Viacom and Google in a negotiation that hasn't gone so smoothly, so it has gone to litigation...Viacom is just really turning up the heat."

Although legitimate copyright concerns come into play, Viacom's action is "probably about a large company that would prefer the old status quo, where they had most of the control (over their content distribution), and they didn't cede it to companies like YouTube and Google," said Jeffrey Lindgren, an intellectual-property lawyer at Morgan Miller Blair in San Francisco.

"I would expect some (suits from other companies to) follow," he added, "but I don't know (that) this is really going to lead to the onslaught that is the end of Google and YouTube."

Tech-related YouTube clips
Viacom isn't the only entertainment conglomerate yet to partner with the Google division. Some executives have been very critical of YouTube's practices, including Jeff Zucker, the CEO of NBC.

An NBC Universal representative declined to comment Tuesday on whether the company has plans for litigation against YouTube similar to that of Viacom. Twentieth Century Fox Film spokesman Chris Alexander, meanwhile, said the Viacom complaint is far more sweeping than any action his company has pursued against the video-sharing site.

Earlier this year, the News Corp. unit subpoenaed YouTube for the identities of two users who had allegedly posted as-yet-unaired episodes of the popular show 24 because it was "interested in protecting full episodes of our series that we have yet to monetize," he said.

"We take protection of our copyrights very seriously, and we look at them on a case-by-case basis," Alexander said, but he added that he was unaware of any companywide policy governing clips, as opposed to entire episodes, posted to video-sharing sites.

Viacom last month caused a stir by demanding that YouTube remove 100,000 infringing clips. Some observers shrugged, calling it a negotiating tactic by Viacom and predicted that the two would eventually become partners.

Nonetheless, Viacom says in its complaint that YouTube failed to prevent its users from posting pirated material to the site. San Bruno, Calif.-based YouTube will remove clips that feature unauthorized material only after it receives a takedown notice from the copyright holder, Viacom said.

This, many entertainment executives say, is unfair. YouTube's policy, which the company says complies with copyright law, forces many of the biggest studios to devote time and money toward policing someone else's site. Often, no sooner than a company asks YouTube to take down a clip, users post a new version of the same clip.

"YouTube has deliberately chosen not to take reasonable precautions to deter the rampant infringement on its site," Viacom said in its complaint. "Because YouTube directly profits from the availability of popular infringing works on its site, it has decided to shift the burden entirely onto copyright owners to monitor the YouTube site on a daily or hourly basis to detect infringing videos.

A source inside Viacom said the company would likely have not filed suit, had it not repeatedly found clips that it had already asked to be taken down.

"More and more of the company's resources are going to this," the source said. "The company basically is paying for an entire new department to watch YouTube."

Google lawyers said they are relying on a 1998 law called the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) to shield them from liability. One provision of that statute generally says companies are off the hook if they remove copyrighted content promptly when it is brought to their attention.

Internet services may only benefit from that so-called "safe harbor" if they also meet a four-pronged test. Those conditions include not being "aware of facts or circumstances from which infringing activity is apparent" and not receiving "financial benefit directly attributable to the infringing activity."

Viacom in its complaint argues Google and YouTube do not qualify for that relief, but Glenn Brown, an in-house product counsel for the merged companies, said he was confident their actions were on solid legal ground. "We meet those requirements and go above and beyond them in helping content providers identify copyright infringements," he said in a telephone interview Tuesday afternoon.

YouTube was also expected late last year to release a technology that would automatically weed out copyright content from the site. NBC's Zucker and others in Hollywood have accused the company of dragging its feet. Viacom said that only when an agreement is reached will YouTube begin safeguarding an entertainment company's copyright property.

"YouTube has deliberately withheld the application of available copyright protection measures in order to coerce rights holders to grant it licenses on favorable terms," according to the complaint.

If you've used Youtube, Viacom wants to sue you. (http://news.cnet.com/Viacom-sues-Google-over-YouTube-clips/2100-1030_3-6166668.html?hhTest=1) I know I am not the only one enraged by this dumb ass company trying to fuck its customers. They went from saying that Youtube videos would promote their TV programs and movies to saying that they wanted a little bit of the profit to saying that it is not much money, and now they want to sue every single person that has watched even a second of their content on youtube. They are even ignoring the fact that copyrighted material can be used for many purposes. What a load of shit.

Here's one of the many reaction videos. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJbCWJNQUYI)

Given the recent news of Konami suing Viacom, I hope Konami wins, because Viacom are a bunch of hypocrites.

Dirt Mc Girt
07-11-2008, 02:52 PM
south park owned media companies IMO

http://youtube.com/watch?v=VqkN8XsYtJI

kempobot
07-11-2008, 07:09 PM
south park owned media companies IMO

http://youtube.com/watch?v=VqkN8XsYtJI

lol. viacom owns comedy central...

Shinkuu Tatsumaki
07-11-2008, 07:22 PM
I use viacom as my firearm and let the lyrics split you,
who do you rely upon, to shoot shells at leviathon,
i'm dealin with the higher form,
fuck if you care if how i write a poem,
the only fox that i loved was the red one,
only black man that fox loved is in jail or a dead one,

fistoftheryustar
07-11-2008, 07:42 PM
they took away ren and stimpy, rugrats, and rocko from being put on youtube...burn those bastards

GeoG2
07-11-2008, 07:44 PM
Viacom can suck a diseased dick.

igotalottastuff
07-11-2008, 07:58 PM
My god that guy sounds like a nerd stuck in his basement that doesn't want his parents to know he tries to look up porn on youtube.

AdverseSolutions
07-11-2008, 09:47 PM
Isn't this news hella old?

I do agree though fuck Viacom.

Fuzzy_Snugs
07-11-2008, 09:59 PM
they took away ren and stimpy, rugrats, and rocko from being put on youtube...burn those bastards

Oh, fuck Viacom...

ckrazy
07-11-2008, 10:08 PM
Viacome owns t.v .... you might as well boycott t.v I hate them but no point in boycotting them. Even though 90% of their shows are stupid they still have shows I watch. ( the other 10%)

ThePurpleBunny
07-11-2008, 10:09 PM
they took away ren and stimpy, rugrats, and rocko from being put on youtube...burn those bastards

... What?! Those sons of bitches!

FurryCurry
07-11-2008, 10:38 PM
Why should I be mad at a company for getting their shows taken off of youtube?

That's like finding your stuff after you've been robbed at a warehouse and the warehouse owner told you that couldn't have that shit back. I'd be up in arms too.


But to go as far as suing Youtube/Google. I hope their case falls a part so that no precedent is set. Youtube has tons of videos to weed out everyday so I don't like how Viacom is basically blaming them for user submitted content. Google can't control that shit. They deal with it as it comes up.

So, in short, it's not wrong that Viacom wants their property taken down from Youtube but it is wrong to sue Google/Youtube for something that they can not control. And Google hasn't even owned Youtube for that long.

maxx
07-11-2008, 10:43 PM
i dunno how they can claim intentionally doing it on purpose. i can see them claiming that their fucking up on some degree...hence why google and youtube merged in the first place cuz they got madd lawsuits.

but to claim its on purpose is to say they have first hand knowledge of the buisness practices of google/youtube.

pherai
07-12-2008, 02:27 AM
It's funny my girlfriend was just telling me about this, and yeah, its very silly. Viacom is huge, and was unwilling to try to adapt to the changing market. So many other networks have directly competed with youtube by streaming their shows for free, yet there was bound to be a cumbersome conglomerate who would just sit back thinking their product was immortal, and would sue anyone who would prove them otherwise.

epp1e
07-12-2008, 03:13 AM
So I guess that's two companies with names starting with "Via" that's full of stiffs.

white shadow
07-12-2008, 07:29 AM
Viacom owns around half of the channels on tv. Boycotting them is like trying to avoid a Toyota Camry on the road.

Dragonsend
07-12-2008, 08:47 AM
I can understand why viacom is upset though i don't agree with them. They need to come to terms with each other. It is a changing world. Plus I think it does help them in a good way by promoting their programming.

However when you sign up for you tube don't they ask you not upload copyrighted material? Also don't they disclaim responsibility for their user uploads? I might be wrong but seems like I read that somewhere when I signed up. It has been a few years. Seems like those statements would help protect them from such suits. They don't do much about the moderation of copyrighted material but it'd honestly be hard to do anything with the massive number of users uploading everyday. It'd be like 1 babysitter trying to watch 100 children at once!

Viacom owns around half of the channels on tv. Boycotting them is like trying to avoid a Toyota Camry on the road.

Exactly.

Hopefully they will come to an agreement so I'll just sit back and watch as there is really nothing you can do but hope for the best. Google and Youtube.. I'll be cheering for ya!

Dataika
07-12-2008, 09:27 AM
That's like finding your stuff after you've been robbed at a warehouse and the warehouse owner told you that couldn't have that shit back. I'd be up in arms too.


Not exactly. It's more like you sold someone a movie then they turned around and let all of their friends see the movie. Not exactly the same thing.

fistoftheryustar
07-12-2008, 10:50 AM
Right? Has anyone else tried to look up on youtube, some old school nick shows from your long lost childhood and then bam it says "This has been taken down by Viacom Inc."

Not only do you hate that a company would take those clips down, but they even give you the company name to aim your hate at.

They bought those shows in hopes to make a profit on DVD sales, but some shows they havent even made a DVD for yet. Viacom's got to burn