Viacom-YouTube secrets to be exposed in lawsuit, page 1

privacy

Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 2 times

Topic started on 17-3-2010 @ 07:59 PM by wycky

Viacom-YouTube secrets to be exposed in lawsuit

www.google.com

SAN FRANCISCO — A legal tussle pitting media conglomerate Viacom Inc. against online video leader YouTube is about to get dirtier as a federal judge prepares to release documents that will expose their secrets and other confidential information.

(visit the link for the full news article)

reply posted on 17-3-2010 @ 07:59 PM by wycky

This looks interesting, i would like to see what dirty secrets are exposed for YouTube / Google.

The evidence is expected to provide insights into the early strategies of YouTube co-founders Chad Hurley and Steve Chen and how they responded to copyright complaints that quickly accumulated a few months after the Web site's 2005 debut. The documents also could reveal whether other media suitors, including Viacom, tried to buy YouTube before getting trumped by Google Inc., which acquired YouTube for $1.76 billion in 2007.

www.google.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

reply posted on 17-3-2010 @ 08:04 PM by Zanti Misfit

" Viacom alledges that YouTube built its early success by rampantly infringing on copyrights. YouTube maintains it follows the copyright laws governing the Internet. "

Thats the Whole Case there in a " Nut Shell " . Burden Of Proof is on Viacom here .............Good Luck Judge ! .......

[edit on 17-3-2010 by Zanti Misfit]

reply posted on 17-3-2010 @ 08:06 PM by undo

reply to post by wycky

you have any thoughts on it? i think you're supposed to comment your view on the material, otherwise, you're just advertising that particular news site.

reply posted on 17-3-2010 @ 08:17 PM by Zanti Misfit

reply to post by undo

" This looks interesting, i would like to see what dirty secrets are exposed for YouTube / Google. "

His views on this Story are selfexplainatory here IMO . Since the Case has not been Decided yet , what would there be futher to talk about ? .................STAY TUNED ..................

reply posted on 17-3-2010 @ 08:54 PM by undo

reply to post by Zanti Misfit

oh i missed that. lol dunno how i did either cause i double checked to be sure. i was like... hmm, wonder what the op thinks about it. lol

reply posted on 17-3-2010 @ 09:19 PM by Nventual

Originally posted by Zanti Misfit
" Viacom alledges that YouTube built its early success by rampantly infringing on copyrights. YouTube maintains it follows the copyright laws governing the Internet. "

Thats the Whole Case there in a " Nut Shell " . Burden Of Proof is on Viacom here .............Good Luck Judge ! .......

[edit on 17-3-2010 by Zanti Misfit]

I think Viacom is right though.
Before Google bought Youtube it was a place to go to for licensed music and movies, tv series, etc. There wasn't much user-produced content.

reply posted on 17-3-2010 @ 09:33 PM by Zanti Misfit

reply to post by undo

" This looks interesting, i would like to see what dirty secrets are exposed for YouTube / Google. "

He sounds just like a Window Shopper to me . ................Move Along Now Sir ..................

[edit on 17-3-2010 by Zanti Misfit]

reply posted on 17-3-2010 @ 09:44 PM by Zanti Misfit

reply to post by Nventual

The question Now seems to be if Copyrights by Viacom are still Legally binding according to the Law , and weither or not that their representatives can prove that is the present case in a Court of Law . If so , Youtube Would be Libel for Copyright Infrindgment , and subject to Settlement Fines to that effect . Like I said , Good Luck " Judge " on this one .............

[edit on 17-3-2010 by Zanti Misfit]

reply posted on 17-3-2010 @ 10:20 PM by Nventual

I studied law at school but that was common or statutory law or something (I didn't pay much attention.. lol) so I don't really know who has a better case here.

Do you reckon Google knew this might happen years ago when they purchased Youtube?

[edit on 17/3/10 by Nventual]

reply posted on 17-3-2010 @ 10:25 PM by wycky

As Zanti Misfit said the story its pretty self explanatory, i found the story interesting, its the first i have ever heard of it, and i thought i would share it with fellow ATS's.
I'm sure there are a few people here who would be interested to see what dirt these 2 companies throw at each other.

reply posted on 18-3-2010 @ 12:30 AM by KyleOrtonArmy

Damn! I misconstrued the title as though Youtube's secrets would actually have light shed on them. The ones about partner meetings, pre-written scripts, censorship of alternative views, destroying and deletion of hundreds of accounts, etc etc.

Is this thread really about the unlicensed content they housed in 2005 before Google even owned them?

Shame!

reply posted on 18-3-2010 @ 12:42 AM by Brotherman

You tube will come out on top simple reason?.... when the judge goes home he probably will ask his/her kids if they ever heard of either. when the judge in NY comes to find his kid has used You tube and never heard of viacom there probably will be a rift and anyone on here can argue me as much as they want but I will say that a judge is JUST as infallible as me and you I have never seen viacom utilize anything that would promote copyrighted material or real information on a plane that is easy or just plain for the simple minded people that inhabit planet earth You Tube is a household name and that is undeniable and viacom sorry about your loss but you lost

reply posted on 18-3-2010 @ 12:49 AM by Brotherman

reply to post by KyleOrtonArmy

yeah but then again you have a Malcom X avatar and he was a pawn him and his nation of Islam. Credibilty does not lie on your avatar I will admit but I will say if segregation of anything is what you believe I cannot knock a belief or faith simply because it is a belief or faith:
Faith a belief in something you cannot prove

however Viacom will probably lose this one, Why? because your kids know youtube if you have tehm if not your neighbors kids but despite that the judges or thier clerks kids use it and if that isnt enough then I believe(faith) rests in people like you to say otherwise

reply posted on 18-3-2010 @ 01:06 AM by K J Gunderson

Originally posted by Brotherman
reply to post by KyleOrtonArmy

yeah but then again you have a Malcom X avatar and he was a pawn him and his nation of Islam. Credibilty does not lie on your avatar I will admit but I will say if segregation of anything is what you believe I cannot knock a belief or faith simply because it is a belief or faith:
Faith a belief in something you cannot prove

however Viacom will probably lose this one, Why? because your kids know youtube if you have tehm if not your neighbors kids but despite that the judges or thier clerks kids use it and if that isnt enough then I believe(faith) rests in people like you to say otherwise

Unfortunately for the judge's kids or his neighbors kids, without Comedy Central, Logo, BET, Spike, TV Land, Nick@Nite, Nickelodeon, TeenNick, Nick Jr., MTV, VH1, MTV2, CMT, and Palladia, most of the crap those kids watch will not exist to upload to youtube. Gosh, I wonder if those kids have heard of any of those channels?

[edit on 18-3-2010 by K J Gunderson]

Pages: ^^TOP^^