DC Tom Posted July 26, 2010 Share Posted July 26, 2010 But somebody threw a cup at Ron Artest!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted July 26, 2010 Share Posted July 26, 2010 This guy needs to represent groups and go against YouTube. YouTube is like an organized crime group. To request them to remove copyrighted material you must send them written requests in the mail, citing the copyright, etc. Howard Stern had paid people to have his material pulled for a while until Sirius made a deal with Google to allow for a Sirius Channel. Google and by extension YouTube is the Walmart of the internet and forces business to lose money. While I like YouTube and see it's value I do not believe that it is fair that copyrighted material be posted over and over agian. It is clear they make deals with some groups. The NFL has tons of people scouring the internet and they go after YouTube often, yet smaller groups, networks and other sources are ripped off daily. Showing a 5 second clip of any broadcast production is illegal. My point, this guy is a jerk. He is going after individuals who while in the wrong make for easier prey than the major copy right violators on the internet. If he would like to use my post here for references, please check out the following sites. And, for those who did not know, pornography cannot be copyrighted, only the names of actors and actresses. Ebaumsworld, YouTube, CollegeSlackers, Break, Bored, Perez Hilton, etc etc. All infringe on copyrights multiple times daily. Even TV infringes on itself all the time. ET, TMZ, Access Hollywood, news programs, Fox News, CNN, etc all take copyrighted material and post it on their networks. Technically, that is illegal on the Copyright Act. Copyrights, while seemingly old fashioned, are still important and relevant in our time. This a-hole is just a John Edwards type bigot... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ieatcrayonz Posted July 26, 2010 Share Posted July 26, 2010 Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. It's not theft, it's copyright infringement. Why do people have such a hard time understanding that...? And in fact, copyright infringement has (I believe) a penalty of up to $150,000/instance, whereas theft is MUCH lower. You'd be better off breaking into Best Buy and stealing the CD than you would be following the link to the copyable CD in your example. The penalty is bigger because when you steal the copyable CD you can steal it thousands of times. When you steal the physical CD you are only stealing one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts