Takedown Notice Process Working For YouTube

from the so-where's-the-issue? dept

For all the talk of how YouTube (or now, Google) would be sued for millions (if not billions) over copyrighted works, it seems that very few people looking at the discussion have looked at the actual law, or the process involved here. Despite the many, many problems of the DMCA, it does protect service providers from being liable for copyright infringement as part of the content that their users post, so long as they follow a notice and takedown process. As the press reported widely last week, YouTube correctly follows this process, so as soon as anyone alerts them to infringing content, they take it down. So, it's hard to see how YouTube/Google is guilty of infringement there. There's also a second issue -- which is that even if the infringing content is there, it should be the liability of those who uploaded it, not YouTube/Google for hosting it. That's why it's actually good (if stupid) to see a British football (soccer) league warn the site that was uploading videos of goals to YouTube rather than just going after YouTube/Google itself. As for why it's stupid, it seems like putting the videos of goals up online on a popular site like YouTube is likely to generate more interest in the sport and the live videos of it, but that's their own business decision to make.
Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • identicon
    mousepaw, 23 Oct 2006 @ 2:45am

    Agree

    Aren't all these things covered in the EULA, privacy agreement, terms etc., of most websites?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Terrific BaBooM, 23 Oct 2006 @ 4:33am

    Stoopidity

    Well, I am either incredibly dumb or a lot smarter than these lawyer types.

    If someone pastes a poster up on my wall, am I at fault for having a wall there, or (just maybe) is the flyposter accountable?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Mark Desmet, 23 Oct 2006 @ 5:37am

    Giving Business Some

    Most important part, "...it is their decision to make..". Yes, it is, and the sooner businesses that can't see the writing on the wall fail, the better off we are.
    It will then be our duty to make sure the governments (speaking of bad business) don't bail them out, as they have in the past: Cars, Telcos, Steel et cetera..

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Bob, 23 Oct 2006 @ 6:04am

    Copyright

    If I understand correctly they're threating to sue over someone posting video of someone making a goal from a camera owned by the poster? What are they copying? real life? Doesn't seem to me copyright applies. Maybe breach of contract when they entered into a contractual agrreement when they bought the ticket, but not copyright infringement.
    Anybody know the law on this?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Wally, 23 Oct 2006 @ 7:35am

      Re: Copyright

      In the situation you describe, copyright does not apply.

      I believe they were copies of goals either available on another site or D/L from TV/Video. Which IS copyright infringement.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Sam (Liverpool FC Supporter, English Premier FOOTB, 23 Oct 2006 @ 7:58am

        Re: Re: Copyright

        How can this not be copyright infringment?
        Where do u think they got the goals from. They are from the TV! Any Premier league footage has to be licenced, because it is owened by the Premier league. You couldn't just take a snippet from a TV program and post it online without permission, because it belongs to someone else.
        I don't even think (don't hold me to this though) that you are allowed to take video recording equipment into the stadiums, just normal camera's.

        Get a grip guys, think things through!

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 23 Oct 2006 @ 8:02am

      Re: Copyright

      thats not even what this article is about, folks. he's using that example as the soccer team doing the correct thing. going after the poster, not youtube.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 23 Oct 2006 @ 8:16am

    Ii know most US sports have the "copying or rebroadcasting w/o the specific consent of {broadcasting company} and/or {sport league} is prohibited"

    plus, i'm not sure, but i think distributing movies of the game, as taken by fans, would fall under this category. you pay for the ticket, not the rights to show.

    but in all likelyhood, the situiation is where the usere uploaded a clip ripped from a TV broadcast. that's illegal.

    but it is nice to see a company go after the correct "criminal"

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    n00b, 23 Oct 2006 @ 8:33am

    YouTube has no liability for hosting illegal content? Dude, what's wrong with you?

    Then again, at least you finally acknowledge that it's the content owner's right to decide what to do with their content, so maybe there's hope for you yet.

    But if you and Mark Desmet think that people will lose interest in Premier League football because they can't watch illegal videos of the goals, that's just dumb.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Bill Malcolm, 26 Dec 2006 @ 11:00am

    posting of copyrighted material

    There must harm of lost revenue, such as if
    Chevy used Ford's logo

    other wise it seems to me they are getting great promotion.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Make this the First Word or Last Word. No thanks. (get credits or sign in to see balance)    
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Close

Add A Reply

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Make this the First Word or Last Word. No thanks. (get credits or sign in to see balance)    
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Insider Shop - Show Your Support!

Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Recent Stories

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it
Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.