NBC lines up against YouTube in copyright case

NBC Universal and Viacom have come out against YouTube in a legal case that could help to determine whether the video-sharing site is culpable for copyright violations committed by users.

On Friday, NBC Universal and Viacom filed a request with the U.S. District Court in Los Angeles asking that they be allowed to file a friends-of-the court brief in support of journalist Robert Tur, according to a copy of the request obtained by CNET News.com.

Tur, a Los Angeles-area news reporter, accused YouTube of copyright infringement in a lawsuit last summer. Tur said in his suit that footage he shot of the 1992 Los Angeles riots appeared repeatedly on the video-sharing site.

Google, which acquired YouTube last October for $1.65 billion, has filed a summary judgment asking that Tur's suit be dismissed, according to court documents. NBC and Viacom want the opportunity to argue against dismissing the case.

"Any ruling on YouTube's motion will have far-reaching ramifications for the owners of video content," NBC and Viacom said in their filing. "And especially for content owners such as Viacom and NBCU, whose works have been copied, displayed, and performed and disseminated by YouTube and others without their authorization."

A YouTube representative could not be reached early Sunday morning.

Tur's case is important because it could help to establish whether YouTube is protected under the Safe Harbor provision of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). The provision protects a Web site from liability for users' actions, as long as the site's operator fulfills specific requirements such as removing infringing material once notified by rights holders.

Should Tur lose, it could set a potentially harmful legal precedent to Viacom and other media companies that believe YouTube poses a threat to their video assets.

In March, Viacom filed a $1 billion lawsuit against Google alleging that YouTube was responsible for "tens of thousands" of copyright violations. The most recent complaint against YouTube came Friday, when England's most prestigious soccer league and an independent music publisher filed a class action suit against YouTube.

The Football Association Premier League and the music publisher, Bourne, allege in their suit, filed in U.S. District Court in Manhattan, that YouTube is participating in widespread copyright infringement. The complaint doesn't specify damages and seeks class action status.

[w9lvm]

YOUTUBE RIGHTS

I do not think YOUTUBE has the right to have copyrighted material on it's site! Google owns YOUTUBE to make money so let them spend some of their millions on FILTERS! GOOGLE is getting to be just like the rest of the companies in this world! IT IS ALL ABOUT MONEY AND THE HECK WITH PEOPLES RIGHTS!

[hack311]

Check your capslock

YouTube(Google) is not the issue, it is just the medium for video. Hold the users responsible instead.

[Bombastic42]

Rights and wrongs

I doubt Google claims they have the right to have copyrighted material on its site. However it's a matter of practicality. <br /><br />Making filters of any kind (other than ones that reject ALL content), will still allow copyrighted material to be posted without permission. How do you propose to filter out content? It's not an easy "technical" fix.<br /><br />And why should Google be held responsible for the violations of others? As long as they take the items down when notified.<br /><br />It's as if someone hides stolen goods in your backyard, does that make you a criminal by default?

[missingamerica]

Sigh...this is just competition via lawyers...

Managed content vs. unmanaged content...and since those providing 100% managed content are losing eviewers to YouTube, turn the lawyers loose.<br /><br />It is funny - all of these U.S. Chamber of Commerce-type corporations hang together to rant and rave about the use of the law against them by individuals who have had their health or their right to life "infringed" upon. <br /><br />But where are all of those corporate voices screaming for damage limitations and award ceilings when one of their fellow corporations siezes an opportunity to impair a competitor's ability to compete by claiming their "intellectual rights" have been infringed upon?

[appledogx--2008]

The old models are giving way

There are new models of doing things; models not yet well <br />defined, but definitely at odds with the traditional ways of doing <br />things. Lawyers only defend what is set in stone currently.<br /><br />Laws that support creativity have turned into laws that stifle it; <br />they only serve to fatten lawyers and certain corporate leeches. <br />Of course we need ways to protect creativity, but the traditional <br />models have failed to respond to rapidly changing modern <br />society. Before something realistic comes out of this all, <br />corporations will sweat blood and lawyers. Hopefully in the end, <br />society will win.

[Renegade Knight]

They should be laughed out of court.

From a copyright perspective:<br /><br />Youtube and other internet sites should not be held liable for User posted content than say, a library is held liable for the content of it's books.<br /><br />Librarys and Websites that aggregate content generatet by others have in commen that they build communities around the ease of access to infrmation.<br /><br />It should end there. Courts need to start realizing this.