AnimeGalleries [dot] Net | AnimeWallpapers [dot] Com | AnimeLyrics [dot] Com | AnimePedia [dot] Com | AnimeGlobe [dot] Com |
In the Internet, which everyone can use, no matter how strict policies are, someone is bound to break the rules. For sites that allow downloads without purchasing the rights, those people clearly broke rules. They can't make excuses. But there are other sites like YouTube which, even with constant deletion of copyrighted materials, can't avoid it altogether. By compromise, I meant that the company in question can be arranged to either be a part of the company suing it, or providing services, equal to the damage done. It's more like, if you can't beat them, join them. Or have them join you.Great, so when someone comes into your house and steals your stuff, you'd like them to just get a "comprimise/warning" right? You don't get your stuff back, they just get a warning, "don't go do that again OK?" You are failing to realize that its NO DIFFERENT THAN THAT. Just because its a bigger company, just means that what is stolen is a larger amount.
Its the providers responsibility to monitor the content on their sites. END OF STORY. You're absolving YouTube from their own responsibility. Its their JOB to avoid it all together. They accepted the responsibility of that by putting their disclaimer on there, and by opening their site. "we're so big we can't deal with it all" well then you should either get more help, shrink, or deal with the reprocussions. They choose door number 3, therefore anything that comes they choose to deal with. This isn't that easy, any "services" That they would provide to a large corporation like Viacom wouldn't even be a penny in the bucket to lost wages due to people NOT buying the DVD's, or watching it on TV. Do you realize that there is MASSIVE lost revenue if people don't watch the episodes on TV and rather watch it on YouTube? The amount of money made on commercials, which if no one is watching the show won't buy air time during it, and sponsorships, which won't pay money to sponsor a show if the medium its being played on isn't getting viewers, is where most of their income is coming from. There is more to this than you think.
Viacom is doing what they SHOULD do... they have every right to do it and are IN THE RIGHT in doing so. The real world isn't sunshine, rainbows and daisys. These people are fighting for their livelihood, and they'll fight tooth and nail to get what they rightfully deserve. Welcome to capitalism, its not nice, its not pretty, but it works.
A simple kiss can warm an entire body
I will say one thing.
It's YouTube's fault for not moderating the videos and making sure no copyrighted material is being hosted without adequate permission form the original owners.
: The Game. You just lost it. :
My signature was so old it broke. RIP signature.
In any case. I don't see them winning 1 billion dollars. A settlement seems more logical. But I don't find 1 billion dollars to be WORTH THAT. I'm sorry but it's not. If someone came in my house and stole my things, I wouldn't SUE for 1 Billion dollars, I'd sue to get ONLY my stuff back, and any damage they would have caused TO my stuff.
That's the problem with today's world, everyone is trying to make an easy buck. I don't find it okay to sue for that amount of money for something like this. What I'm trying to say is, the punishment needs to fit the crime, and it's NOT. I think it's wrong for someone to say "Well, I got my stuff back.. But I'm sueing you for an extra 2 million dollars, JUST BECAUSE you took it". No, that's immoral and being greedy.
Plain put.
That's not what Viacom is doing. YouTube refuses to take down everything Viacom is asking them to. (Which would be ALL of Viacoms property) YouTube took down the major things (i.e full episodes, etc), but they are refusing to take down the rest. Which is the whole reason Viacom is sueing in the first place.
i won't tell you that i love you
K I S S OR H U G YOU
cuz i'm bluffin with my muffin
i'm not lyin', i'm just stunnin with myLOVE glue gunnincan't read my POKER FACE
Okay understood. This is why I think they should be in court, having youtube remove ALL of their property. Not sueing for a billion dollars. AND if you want to get technical, or down to the nitty gritty, they can sue for money as well, but how to calculate it? They can sue for whatever amount of lost revenue, that's more logical, but how to prove it, or even determine the amount of profit they lost? Because I find it hard to believe they lost 1 billion dollars in profits.
I guess people are misunderstanding what I'm saying. I am in complete agreement with Viacom saying it's WRONG to steal property. It IS indeed. But not to the extent of 1 billion dollars.
Last edited by Piper; 03-14-2007 at 01:18 PM.
Last edited by DuckyInMyTrucky; 03-14-2007 at 02:49 PM.
I'm as graceful as a gazelle galloping over glistening green grass with it's head on fire.
Anything you want to say to me? PM me.
I posted this story on another forum, and thought Id share one of the responses given:
Originally Posted by OnyxSparrow
.-.
(o.o)
|=|
__|__
//.=|=.\\
// .=|=. \\
\\ .=|=. //
\\(_=_)//
(:| |: )
|| ||
() ()
|| ||
|| ||
==' '==
Honestly, if Viacoms licensed material is being used they should get paid. It's buisiness. As much as you may love it YouTube is also a buisiness. They don't do it for free or out of the kindness of their hearts. They do it to make money and a lot of the money that they make comes partially from the fact that many people watch licensed and copy written material on their site.
Viacom has a legit beef. They are not the only large, evil, money hungry corporate entity. Google bought YouTube for 1.76 billion so Viacom trying to get a billion is not something I see as a big deal. I am almost certain that Google probably made their initial investment back from all the add revenue. The problem for YouTube would be if other major companies followed Viacoms lead with similar law suits.
Sig By "The Notorious M.A.C."
He pwns your souls!!!
"Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure. It is our light, not our darkness, that most frightens us."
- Timo Cruz in "Coach Carter" (2005)
Youtube should be sued for copyright, I agree with that much, but it probably more logical(and more pleasing financially) if they gave Youtube rights but make them pay for it. They could possibly make more cash that way.
I personally like Youtube but dislike it to. They got rid of a show I wanted to see and banned the person who uploaded it. It might have been the violence in it(because there are more perverse shows than it). Either way everyone will find more sights to watch their junk anyway, so it doesn't make a huge difference.
I guess well just have to wait for the birth of a new free video site after youtube.
I don't download, I use youtube for silly videos that never make it to T.V, and I'll miss it if it goes. I'm also not sure how much youtube affects whos going to buy things like anime/movies etc, I really think those who were going to buy it are always going to buy it and those who weren't never will, with or without youtube.
A MaruDashi Creation
What I'm surprised at is that Viacom hasn't gone after the IP addresses of the worst offenders to sue the people that posted the videos in the first place the way the RIAA did a few yrs back. Since in the terms of of agreement with YouTube users do agree to not post copyrighted material without permission. And what Viacom is suing YouTube for is clear copyright violation.
I'm not saying YT has no responsibly, however it is hard to catch it all. And they are at fault for not removing it all when asked to do so.
The answer is quite simple really, "Bob the internet user" who enjoys uploading clips from MTV to youtube can't be sued for $1 billion. Google can.
When Youtube was run by individuals it wasn't worth sueing even though the copyrighted content was probably higher than it is now under Google's control. This is why I think youtube will fail under Google, they can't continue to run it in the same way as it's previous owners did.
Oh true about that. But I wasn't talking about that. I know Nick is a good television station. ^^' I personally love spongebob.
And as for staying on topic, If Viacom does win, and more suits follow, either really strict rules and regulations will be put on youtube, or yes, they will most likely shut the site down. x.X; Don't get me wrong, I LOVE youtube. I find some of the cutest AMVs on there all the time, and its a good laugh. I'm not out to say VIACOM IS RIGHT. I am on Googles side. ^^'
Sebastian is my new waifu. >w<!!
Chronic WoW Player. ♥
As far as sueing individuals goes, it's pointless to do so.
There is no way of knowing which user has purchased the video and decided to display them that way or if they downloaded them from somewhere else. They would have to go to THOUSANDS of "directors" and other video displayers and ASK every one of them. There are literally THOUSANDS of viewers/downloaders/uploaders on YouTube that Viacom is sueing them for. There is no way to get to that many people in a reasonable amount of time and efficiently.
YOUTUBE is the one that disobeyed the law AND Viacom by refusing to do as Viacom asked. YouTube is, believe it or not, responsible for the material on it's own website. And they are in a HUGE violation, not to mention being brats about taking things down that don't belong to them OR the people who put it up.
I don't understand what's so hard to understand about what I've said. o_O People are seeming to think that what I'm saying is opinion, but it's not- It's fact.
i won't tell you that i love you
K I S S OR H U G YOU
cuz i'm bluffin with my muffin
i'm not lyin', i'm just stunnin with myLOVE glue gunnincan't read my POKER FACE
I'm surprised Viacom hasn't gone sueing people for posting the stuff, judging by how out-of-hand this is getting if they're trying to sue for that amount of money.
And to what Piper said - you're right. It can be (and probably is) misunderstood in a lot of ways in contetx of what Viacom is asking Google and YouTube to do, and $1 billion is, agreeably, way too much over the cost of the issue at hand. These days, money makes, or breaks, the world, because there's too much of it and too many people wanting it all to themselves.
I have openly disliked YouTube for a long time now, and I, in my honest opinion, will explain how much I laughed at the TV when I heard what Google had bought.
Last night on a team-speak program I use, a clan-mate came on who had known me for over a month on there, and blatantly (and with a very puzzled voice) asked "who the hell is Mac?". I was laughing for five minutes. Much the same as I was when I heard Google had bought YouTube.
Google was fine before buying 'Tube, but I feel that since being bought YouTube will, as is being very obvious in what Viacom are attempting, go straight down the drain and Google will be eventually forced to sell, allowing YouTube to (eventually) return to the state it was in before Google bought it with much of the material on the website being ignored.
: The Game. You just lost it. :
My signature was so old it broke. RIP signature.
Suing the individuals who upload the videos would do no good. The lawyer fees for each individual case would probably end up being more than what they can get from the suits. Pay a million in lawyers fees and win $300.00 lol.
Sig By "The Notorious M.A.C."
He pwns your souls!!!
"Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure. It is our light, not our darkness, that most frightens us."
- Timo Cruz in "Coach Carter" (2005)
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks