In the beginging, the length of uploaded videoclip on YouTube is unlimited, therefore, sometimes we can see full episode of TV programs at one click. After the TV progames owners' protest, the length is reduced to less than 10 minutes. In addition to the length deduction, Youtube tried to build busisness connection with entertainment industry to keep those cilps not liabele for copyright infringement. YouTube, moreover, tried to fit itslef under the protection of safe harbor, such as take-down notice, terminating repeat infringers, and designating an agent. All the measures is to secure a position that YouTube does its best to avoid copyright infringement.
Perhaps others will counterargue that YouTube doesn't estabilsh good filtering system to screen uploaded clips, comparing YouTube to the Napster and Gorkster. As far as the content is concerned, the P2P file sharing is quite different from YouTube's. The contents of P2P file sharing are almost unauthorized copyrighted works, however, some contents of YouTube are original. So the staple doctrine might be applicable to YouTube as well.
The holding of Sony case is to balance the technology advancement and copyright protection. I wish the result of Youtube dispute could reach the same balance.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment