Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
<i><b>Online Extra</i></b>Court Torpedoes Viacom's Lawsuit Against YouTube
Viacom failed again to persuade a U.S. district judge to let it proceed with its massive copyright infringement suit against YouTube and parent company Google. Viacom alleged that YouTube knowingly lets its users post clips from copyrighted Viacom shows and movies; YouTube countered that copyrighted material was posted without its knowledge, and that it deleted clips as soon as it discovered that they were suspect.
In the latest ruling, Judge Louis Stanton of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment. Viacom International Inc. v. YouTube Inc. 07 Civ. 2103. District Judge Stanton had granted the defendants' previous motion for summary judgment in 2010, finding that YouTube was protected by the safe harbor provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), which shields parties that quickly remove infringing material. But a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reversed Judge Stanton's ruling in 2012. Viacom International Inc. v. YouTube Inc. 676 F.3d 19 (2d Cir. 2012). The panel directed Stanton to examine whether YouTube was aware that around 77,000 specific clips were infringing.
Hearing the case for the second time, Judge Stanton found that it was up to copyright owners such as Viacom ' and not YouTube ' to show that specific clips were infringing. According to the judge, '[P]laintiffs lack proof that YouTube had knowledge or awareness of specific infringement,' and as a result, YouTube was still protected by the DMCA's safe harbor provisions. Viacom announced it planned to appeal.
'”Brian Zabcik, The American Lawyer
'
'
Viacom failed again to persuade a U.S. district judge to let it proceed with its massive copyright infringement suit against YouTube and parent company
In the latest ruling, Judge Louis Stanton of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of
Hearing the case for the second time, Judge Stanton found that it was up to copyright owners such as Viacom ' and not YouTube ' to show that specific clips were infringing. According to the judge, '[P]laintiffs lack proof that YouTube had knowledge or awareness of specific infringement,' and as a result, YouTube was still protected by the DMCA's safe harbor provisions. Viacom announced it planned to appeal.
'”Brian Zabcik, The American Lawyer
'
'
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?