Comments on: UMG threatens YouTube http://www.p2pnet.net/story/9863 p2pnet.net offers not-your-lamescream news on movies music digital media P2P peer-to-peer TV television file sharing freedom of speech open source product news Wifi mobiles company Tue, 02 Dec 2008 05:33:45 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.1 By: Reader's Write http://www.p2pnet.net/story/9863#comment-119946 Reader's Write Sun, 17 Sep 2006 07:36:40 +0000 http://www.p2pnet.net/story/9863#comment-119946 Negotiate. Labels say you're not negotiating in good faith. They file a lawsuit. Uninformed Judge finds them guilty of Infringment, awards them $25K per infringment resulting in billions of $$$ of debt. Universal offer to buy YouTube for about 10 cents on the dollar. They take it over and put it under in record time. Meanwhile deleting all the files, copyrighted and original, thereby eliminating any potential competition. Negotiate. Labels say you’re not negotiating in good faith. They file a lawsuit. Uninformed Judge finds them guilty of Infringment, awards them $25K per infringment resulting in billions of $$$ of debt. Universal offer to buy YouTube for about 10 cents on the dollar. They take it over and put it under in record time. Meanwhile deleting all the files, copyrighted and original, thereby eliminating any potential competition.

]]> By: Reader's Write http://www.p2pnet.net/story/9863#comment-119770 Reader's Write Fri, 15 Sep 2006 05:36:15 +0000 http://www.p2pnet.net/story/9863#comment-119770 This is why copyright owners lobbied so hard for "inducement" legislation and the vague "inducement" Grokster test. Whereas it's easy for a company like YouTube to defend against "contributory" copyright infringement by using the DMCA safe harbor, or proving they didn't know about users' infringement, it's very very hard to prove it hasn't vaguely "induced" copyright infringement in some way. The logical consequence of this, of course, is that it becomes very very easy to allege inducement. Copyright owners can threaten to pull competitors into a giant litigation money pit with only the barest puff of "evidence." Investors, watch for a booming new market in selling settlements thanks to inducement. Copyright owners will be reaping in all those new profits. This is why copyright owners lobbied so hard for “inducement” legislation and the vague “inducement” Grokster test. Whereas it’s easy for a company like YouTube to defend against “contributory” copyright infringement by using the DMCA safe harbor, or proving they didn’t know about users’ infringement, it’s very very hard to prove it hasn’t vaguely “induced” copyright infringement in some way.

The logical consequence of this, of course, is that it becomes very very easy to allege inducement. Copyright owners can threaten to pull competitors into a giant litigation money pit with only the barest puff of “evidence.”

Investors, watch for a booming new market in selling settlements thanks to inducement. Copyright owners will be reaping in all those new profits.

]]> By: Reader's Write http://www.p2pnet.net/story/9863#comment-119767 Reader's Write Fri, 15 Sep 2006 04:54:03 +0000 http://www.p2pnet.net/story/9863#comment-119767 i am amazed youtube still have their head above water... i am amazed youtube still have their head above water…

]]>