Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackamooka
This is true. However, what most people fail to realize is that this is a precedent set in Viacom vs. Google and just because Google can get away with using DMCA to shield itself against punitive damages does not necessarily mean that some fucktard running a porn tube can get away with it also. Somebody just needs to step up to the fucking plate.
In addition, the judge in Viacom vs. Google did not take statutory damages off the table, that has yet to be determined. No precedent has been set, which means that program owners could still sue for statutory damages. The only reason this shit is still legal is because no one is fighting to make it illegal. Yes, what they are doing is perfectly legal at the moment, but let's call a fucking spade a spade. What they are doing is exploiting a legal loophole to rob this industry blind so they can line their pockets.
|
you do realize that viacom hasn't yet gone thru all the evidence yet
they still could prove that youtube employees themselves uploaded the content.
Of course it is possible that the evidence will prove that viacom employees or agents uploaded the content, which under the DMCA would make viacom responsible for 100% of the legal expenses of youtube including any business loses due to the bad publicity.
they are willing to risk a lot of money to try and CHANGE the law.
personally i think it is stupid since it so easy to exploit the traffic source if you know how.