tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-236802872026-02-05T08:06:21.642-05:00Search engines and copyright issues.Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger145125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23680287.post-91939106324971953232007-11-10T09:36:00.000-05:002007-11-10T09:39:58.218-05:00

Google at the pumpmay be a boon for drivers,but won't help this guy.

Unknownnoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23680287.post-90400902157590461692007-11-02T10:30:00.000-04:002007-11-02T11:32:04.205-04:00

In October, YouTube finally unveiled its anti-piracy filter that it began testing over the summer. While the move can be seen as a response to both the Viacom lawsuit and as an appeasement to content partners, the parties in the Viacom and Premiere League lawsuits are unimpressed. Shortly after YouTube announced its filtering technology, an alliance of major media companies (CBS, Dailymation,

Unknownnoreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23680287.post-31298058065870117512007-11-01T14:49:00.000-04:002007-11-01T15:04:40.673-04:00

William wrote in to provide a link to a video of a symposium on the Viacom v. YouTube case, sponsored by Santa Clara High Tech Law Institute. The speakers (Fred von Lohman, Tyler Ochoa, Mindy Morton, and Jenny Lynn Cox) provide in depth coverage of the lawsuit, DMCA 512 and the state of the law in this area, and the policy questions raised by the suit. There's pretty much nothing that the group

Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23680287.post-33451017832892187832007-10-29T12:48:00.000-04:002007-10-29T13:44:31.702-04:00

While everyone knows about Viacom's billion dollar lawsuit against YouTube and it's encore, the class action initiated by the Premier League, it should be remembered that LA cameraman Robert Tur's lawsuit against the site was filed first and has been chugging along and is likely to be decided first. Well, at least until last week when Tur got his lawsuit voluntarily dismissed so he can join the

Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23680287.post-15032238561170515102007-08-13T17:36:00.000-04:002007-08-13T18:12:59.397-04:00

According to court documents, YouTube is asking to depose both Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert in its defense against Viacom's $1 billion lawsuit. What's interesting about this is that Stewart is already on the record in support of YouTube and that Colbert has embraced YouTube and the whole ethos of video sharing/editing to engage his hardcore fans.Assuming they are actually deposed (no

Unknownnoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23680287.post-73063551366924326342007-06-13T13:49:00.001-04:002007-06-13T13:59:42.058-04:00

Fear not, the lack of new posts recently is not a sign that this blog is done with, now that I've graduated from law school, nor that Google's legal problems have magically been solved. The Tur, Viacom, and Premiere League suits against YouTube continue to chug along, but there are also some new ones. There was a new development in the Perfect10 case too. Book Search has added more libraries (

Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23680287.post-20749665802552202642007-05-07T12:20:00.000-04:002007-05-07T12:44:57.040-04:00

In the District Court in LA, Viacom and NBC have asked for permission to file amicus briefs for Robert Tur, the video journalist suing YouTube over footage from the Rodney King riots. ZDNet thinks it a sign that NBC may be readying its own suit against YouTube, though NBC's ambiguous relationship with YouTube suggests that the network may just wait out the legal storm. After all, there are

Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23680287.post-53824430222934569792007-05-04T18:52:00.000-04:002007-05-04T19:02:22.645-04:00

This is already turning into a real riot. With the Premier League and Bourne Co. suing YouTube/Google over unauthorized clips (read complaint), it also turns out that their lawyers, Proskauer Rose LLP and Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, have started YouTubeClassAction.com (registered back in March) whereby you can keep up to date with the case and even sign-on as a plaintiff in the

Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23680287.post-54182403394160777582007-05-04T18:42:00.000-04:002007-05-04T18:49:23.919-04:00

Here's the complaint in the proposed class action Premier League and Bourne Co. v YouTube and Google. Have yet to fully unpack it but, no joke, it seeks certification as a class action against Google and YouTube with the English Premier League and Bourne Co. (a NY music publishing company) as lead plaintiffs.

Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23680287.post-71212701540619922962007-05-04T17:32:00.000-04:002007-05-04T17:53:43.338-04:00

Looks like the English Premier League is now suing YouTube over the posting of unauthorized clips, having filed suit today in the Southern District of New York. I have yet to find a copy of the complaint online, but all the reports cite the complaint as accusing YouTube of encouraging massive copyright infringement, resulting in the loss of valuable content. One report even says that the League

Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23680287.post-65017859114925172042007-05-03T13:11:00.000-04:002007-05-03T13:59:49.747-04:00

To recap, Google was sued last year for copyright infringement by Copiepresse, which represents several Belgian newspapers, over Google News links to newspaper articles. Copiepresse sued in March 2006 after Google debuted a Belgian version of Google News. Google originally failed to respond to the lawsuit, so in September 2006, the judge ruled in favor of Copiepresse and ordered Google to

Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23680287.post-82505274905887560892007-04-30T22:25:00.000-04:002007-04-30T22:31:52.527-04:00

Google filed its answer to Viacom's copyright lawsuit against YouTube (read here). Nothing all that surprising as Google denies all of Viacom's allegations of wrongdoing. According to ZDNet, which has more on Google's response, the next date of note is a scheduling conference on July 27.

Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23680287.post-70571347052925028552007-04-25T18:56:00.000-04:002007-04-25T19:17:02.143-04:00

Not a copyright suit, but interesting nonetheless. Looks like a NJ contractor is suing Google for indexing and displaying critical comments about him from the Rip-Off Report (a clearinghouse for consumer complaints). According to 27B/6, when you search for the contractor's firm it is the first result, but the negative comments from Rip-Off Report is number two. After he asked that the page be

Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23680287.post-20007399987022999572007-04-24T11:01:00.000-04:002007-04-24T11:09:32.955-04:00

It's no secret that some Guantanamo Bay detainees are subjected to sessions of disorientingly loud rock music as a way to break their spirits. The question remains whether torture qualifies as a fair use under the Copyright Act. Could an artist sue for infringement if they disapprove of their music being used this way? Should they be paid royalties by the interrogators?If I were a law

Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23680287.post-4808143152455796442007-04-23T18:06:00.000-04:002007-04-23T18:30:31.818-04:00

Viacom has settled with the EFF over a lawsuit claiming that Viacom was sending improper takedown notices. In particular, Viacom had a MoveOn.org video parodying The Colbert Report and several politicians removed from YouTube. The EFF promptly sued, charging that Viacom was misusing the DMCA.In order to prevent errant takedown letters, Viacom says that it will manually review questionable

Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23680287.post-5521081082683105942007-04-16T10:33:00.000-04:002007-04-16T16:42:45.257-04:00

In my last post I linked to a summary from a Fordham conference where lawyers from Viacom and Google/YouTube presented their arguments at a panel. Those into these kinds of things know the arguments on both sides, but it's still nice to see these guys commenting on the thing in public. Notably, the summary says this about Alex MacGillivray (the GooTube rep) and his response to the accusation

Unknownnoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23680287.post-25117506821001481912007-04-16T10:16:00.000-04:002007-04-16T10:21:25.337-04:00

Lawyers for Google/YouTube and Viacom speak out on the lawsuit at Fordham International Intellectual Property Law & Policy conference. Prof. Lee from OSU has the scoop at The Utube Blog.

Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23680287.post-4442279881136568642007-04-10T21:18:00.000-04:002007-04-10T21:28:27.811-04:00

Wired has a an interview with Google CEO Eric Schmidt that's worth a read. In it he discusses the Viacom lawsuit:Wired: Viacom’s argument is that you’re not working hard enough to keep infringing clips off of YouTube. Schmidt: Well, if they would look at the law, they’d understand that under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, there’s a shared responsibility. The law says that the copyright

Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23680287.post-58013381405296572512007-04-02T15:00:00.000-04:002007-04-02T15:22:06.728-04:00

The online tablature business was effectively shut down this past summer as the Music Publishers Association and the Harry Fox Agency under copyright claims that they had the exclusive rights to reproduce music online. Online tablature is back now as the copyright dilemma has been solved. Musicnotes, the largest publisher of sheet music that also purchased MxTabs a while back, has struck a

Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23680287.post-88054736987013314262007-03-30T13:12:00.000-04:002007-03-30T13:17:32.477-04:00

GoogleWatch reports that Google has filed for an extension to reply to Viacom's copyright infringement lawsuit. This means that Google's response is due sometime before May 2. GoogleWatch says the extension was needed because Google has yet to retain counsel.

Unknownnoreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23680287.post-50408540563827653882007-03-29T19:04:00.000-04:002007-03-29T19:21:04.288-04:00

Last week Viacom took its dispute with YouTube to the court of public opinion, having an OpEd by its head counsel published in WaPo. Not to be outdone, Google has responded in kind with a letter to the editor, calling the lawsuit "an attack on the way people communicate on the Web and on the platforms that allow people to make the Internet their own." More:Viacom is attempting to rewrite

Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23680287.post-42885180248677056702007-03-26T12:58:00.000-04:002007-03-26T13:38:33.493-04:00

Viacom's head lawyer, Michael Fricklas, has an editorial in WaPo saying that YouTube is a leech making money off of other people's intellectual property:Google and YouTube wouldn't be here if not for investment in software and technologies spurred by patent and copyright laws. It's time they respected them.Nice to see Viacom's head counsel's thoughts on the issue, though Fricklas is obviously not

Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23680287.post-81836273005318058052007-03-23T10:29:00.000-04:002007-03-23T10:39:41.325-04:00

"Basically, we're talking about whether its illegal to watch me discussing the legality of you watching me on the Daily Show if you're watching it on YouTube. Maybe I'm on YouTube right now. You watching me on YouTube?"

Unknownnoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23680287.post-90328154300867821352007-03-22T17:19:00.000-04:002007-03-22T19:22:58.225-04:00

A recent story described how a doctor was upset that YouTube restricted access to his videos instructing women how to give themselves breast exams to users 18 years of age and older. It is, after all, surprisingly difficult to find porn on YouTube and this makes clear that YouTube has some sort of filtering system to handle such videos. One of Viacom's complaints is why YouTube can't do for

Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23680287.post-77694089649877211722007-03-20T20:37:00.000-04:002007-03-20T20:58:05.578-04:00

The KinderStart case against Google over search rankings has been dismissed as frivolous and the KinderStart attorney will face sanctions requiring him to pay some of Google's legal fees. The amount has yet to be determined. The case was originally dismissed last year, but the company was given a chance to try again. This goes towards setting the standard that you can't sue a search engine

Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0