If Viacom wins the lawsuit, this will be the beginning of the end. The non-monetary implications of the outcome if this will be as important. IMO.

I hope so.

__________________

An unwavering defender of those I see worth protecting.

"promote the general welfare, not provide the general welfare"

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Correct. I've never been a fan of You Tube, that site has always frustatred me. I always use Google Video when I can. Finally a well designed interface, and I can dwnload to my iPod. There are also many portions of movies on YouTube. I found a clip of Casino Royale's very cool opening credits, which I'm sure would send MGM and Sony into a fit.

__________________
T

How does Viacom come up with that number? Gimme a break!

Ahh, they showed you how they came up with the number based on estimated copyright infractions.

Viacom claims that YouTube has displayed nearly 160,000 unauthorized video clips from its cable networks, which also include Comedy Central, VH1 and Nickelodeon.

9.5 million users year....do some multiplication and estimated how much revenue was lost by sales of legal media.

__________________

An unwavering defender of those I see worth protecting.

"promote the general welfare, not provide the general welfare"

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

This lawsuit is nothing like the Napster stuff. YouTube is not providing you access to material that you would otherwise have to purchase, like music. While a tech-saavy person might be able to record some of the YouTube stuff, most, not all, is a replay of stuff that people get for free and watch online.

I have a problem believe the damages that Viacom is alleging. Do people cancel their cable TV because they can watch the Daily Show in YouTube every day? I don't think so. YouTube is definitely doing some stuff they shouldn't be doing, but there is also a benefit to the Viacoms of the world they they get from some of this stuff. How many funny clips have we posted on these forums that might alert a person to a funny show they have never watched? How many new Daily Show or Colbert Report viewers are there because of this new outlet? Hard to say. In any event, this will be an interesting fight.

__________________
-----

-'13 E93 M3 Cab, Interlagos Blue, Carbon Black leather, DCT, all options, and fun, endless fun!
-'13 X5 35i M-Sport, Carbon Black & Cinnamon, Dinan Stage 2!
-'15 Toyota Sienna Limited Premium AWD, Silver & Grey, Nav & BluRay, and less lame than the 2011 it replaced
-'07 Mini Cab S, Laser Blue, 6sp, endless fun that ended (sold)
-'04 X5 4.4i, loaded, loved, modded and sold

I agree with the above statement, I fail to see how their income is really lost, and 1billion is a bit much

__________________
The Present:
2014 Audi Q5 TDI Prestige
The Past:
2013 Lexus GS350
2013 VW Golf TDI
2007 BMW X5 4.8i LOADED & Loved
2009 VW Jetta
2008 VW Touareg VR6
2005 BMW X5 3.0i
2005 BMW Z4 3.0i
2004 BMW X5 3.0i
2003 BMW 325i
2000 Ford Explorer Eddie Bauer 4x4

It's a principle fight as much as it is about money.

YouTube was bought for a gazillion dollars and who provides a lot of its content? Network/cable TV does. Network/cable TV that pays a lot of money to a lot of people to produce and market and air those programs, and they ain't getting a dime from YouTube for providing programming.

__________________
JV

What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know...it's what we know for sure that just ain't so

In cases involving copyright infringement, you do not have to prove damages. As the owner of a music publishing company, I've been involved in a few such cases. The copyright law provides that you can set your own rates on the use of your intelectual property. Even if your rates are unreasonable, that is your right.

So when suing for copyright infringement, you do not have to justify your damages. Of course, a jury would ultimately decide how much you get, although such cases rarely go to trial, and this case will most likely be settled.

__________________


my experience on X5world when I spend too much
time posting in political threads in the lounge...