Case Study #2

Viacom vs. YouTube

For this case study I chose to focus on the Viacom vs. YouTube court case. This case exemplifies many of the ethical & legal issues we discussed in class. Viacom filed a $1 billion dollar lawsuit against YouTube in march 2007. Viacom claimed that YouTube was intentionally hosting and profiting from pirated material. According to Viacom, YouTube has a responsibility to take down all pirated material. YouTube, which is owned by google claimed that the content on the website is protected by the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

During the court case, which took place in June 2010, both sides presented very damaging evidence. Viacom showed e-mails, which demonstrated that YouTube and google executives had knowledge of pirated videos being on the website and did not intend to take any action to remove the videos until they received cease and desist requests.  Viacom tried to prove that YouTube should not be protected under the safe harbor provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act because YouTube was intentionally hosting illegal content in order to make as much money as possible from the website. Google claimed that Viacom had hired numerous marketing firms to upload videos of shows from Viacom owned television networks as a marketing effort. According to google, Viacom would have marketing firms distort the quality of the television clips in order to give the impression that the television clips had been recorded by viewers. This was a way to prevent the television clips from being traced back to Viacom.

While both sides presented strong evidence, ultimately the district court ruled in favor of Google’s request for summary judgment. U.S. District Judge Louis L. Stanton, who delivered the decision stated that when YouTube was given notices about copyrighted material it removed the content from the site and therefore, “it is thus protected from liability’ under a provision in the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.” Judge Stanton further supported the court decision by stating “it was against the DMCA’s purpose to hold YouTube legally liable for every video uploaded on the website – some 20 hours of video every minute – even if they might have had a general idea that the site was being used to violate copyright laws.” In December 2010 Viacom filed an appeal in a federal appeals court in New York.   According to the article, “Viacom replays copyright claims in YouTube appeal” the appeal will not happen until at least next summer.

This is an incredibly important court case, which will have a drastic impact on the future of modern technology. The district court decision protected distributors, such as YouTube from being guilty of copyright infringement unless the distributor was intentionally  hosting copyrighted material. According to the article “What the Viacom vs. YouTube Verdict Means for Copyright Law” the Viacom vs. YouTube decision “put the onus on content producers – not distributors like YouTube – to police the Internet and seek out when their copyright material is being illegally uploaded.” If Viacom wins the appeals court case Internet based content will experience a drastic change. The countless number of video sharing websites will never be same. The public will not have access to the content that everyone has become accustomed to viewing for free. I understand that companies such as Viacom need to make a profit and that the internet has greatly impacted its profit margin, but if Viacom is willing to work out a licensing agreement with Youtube both companies would benefit and both companies would be able to serve the needs of the  general public to the best of their ability. 

Sources:

Arcamona, Rob. "What the Viacom vs. YouTube Verdict Means for Copyright Law."  Media Shift: Your Guide to the Digital Revolution. PBS.org, 2 July 2010. Web. 2 Mar. 2011. <http://www.pbs.org/mediashift/2010/07/what-the-viacom-vs-youtube-verdict-means-for-copyright-law183.html

Lieberman, David. "The juicy details behind the Viacom-YouTube lawsuit." USA Today 19 Mar. 2010

Pham, Alex, and Meg James. "Judge rules against Viacom in copyright suit against  YouTube." Los Angeles Times 23 June 2010

"Viacom replays copyright claims in YouTube appeal." New York Post 3 Dec. 2010