Youtube slapped with first copyright lawsuit

MoMeNToUs CeLTiC · Post by **MoMeNToUs CeLTiC** » Sat Jul 22, 2006 7:08 am

But important nonetheless?

http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/153...headlines=true

YouTube Slapped With First Copyright Lawsuit For Video Posted Without Permission

07.19.2006 4:33 PM EDT

Suit claims Web site encourages copyright infringement; YouTube says charge 'without merit.'

If Robert Tur has his way, the future of how we waste time at work could be forever altered.

Last Friday, in a federal district court in California, Tur — a journalist who owns the Los Angeles News Service — filed suit against

YouTube Inc., charging that the video-sharing site encourages copyright infringement by hosting footage from users who have failed to secure the necessary clearances from the videos' owners.

It's the first-ever copyright lawsuit filed against YouTube, and, if successful, it could open the floodgates for similar suits against the site.

At the heart of the matter is footage Tur shot during the L.A. riots in April 1992 — specifically the now-famous images of trucker Reginald Denny being beaten by several men. Tur shot the footage from a helicopter, and although it was seen across the world, it was broadcast by news agencies that obtained rights from his L.A. News Service.

YouTube's policy is to prohibit the uploading of copyrighted material that hasn't been granted the proper permission, and the site vigorously removes videos that violate that rule (see " 'Such A Pity': YouTube Pulls Homemade Weezer Video"). The site has maintained in the past that it is not responsible for material that violates copyright law.

But according to Tur's lawyer, Francis Pizzulli, that's not the case. Pizzulli said the suit is supported by the Supreme Court's 2005 decision in the MGM v. Grokster case, in which the court ruled that P2P file-sharing sites could be sued for inducing copyright infringement.

"This is even more of a clear-cut case than the Grokster decision, because [YouTube] has a central server to collect and store data; they package it and categorize it with titles and listings," Pizzulli said. "This is all indicative of a Web site taking an active role in copyright infringement. They are not, as they claim to be, merely an Internet service provider."

A spokesperson for YouTube had no comment on the suit, but did send a statement to MTV News that reads, in part:

"Mr. Tur's lawsuit is without merit. YouTube is a service provider that complies with all the provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, and therefore is entitled to the full protections of the safe-harbor provisions of the Act. ... Immediately upon receiving notice of [Tur's] complaint, we removed all of the plaintiff's video clips that we were able to locate, and it is our intention to work with Mr. Tur ... to remove any unauthorized works from our site."

As of Wednesday morning (July 19), a search for the terms "Reginald Denny," "Reginald" or "Denny" resulted in no videos. But a search for "L.A. riot" turned up several videos, including the footage Tur shot of Denny. And according to Pizzulli, that's where the problem lies — something he refers to in the suit as "a murky moving target."

"It's interesting that [YouTube] emphasize that they removed all the videos that they could find. Because Mr. Tur — and several other journalists — have still been able to locate other copies of it," Pizzulli said. "Depending on what tags you enter in the search function, you can still uncover versions of the Reginald Denny video. And while YouTube removing all the videos they could find does answer the 'now' issue, it does not answer how they plan on compensating him for past violations, and how they plan on preventing this from happening in the future."

Tur is seeking compensation to the tune of $150,000 for each uploaded submission, though Pizzulli said that Tur does not plan to go after the individuals who posted the video. No date has yet been set for the hearing.

— James Montgomery

requiett · Post by **requiett** » Sat Jul 22, 2006 7:12 am

MTV is a reliable and respectable source of news.

MoMeNToUs CeLTiC · Post by **MoMeNToUs CeLTiC** » Sat Jul 22, 2006 7:25 am

*Looks for edit button*

http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/153669 ... tory.jhtml

YouTube · Post by **Kionon** » Sat Jul 22, 2006 7:58 am

Way to be late on the uptake. I announced this days ago.

oceanangel2you · Post by **oceanangel2you** » Sat Jul 22, 2006 8:04 am

I know people here dont like youtube, but this is not good news to me, it could turn into the Metallica v/s Napster and effect all of us as far as being able to use music that we did not create, to create animated films, I have fell inlove with music I have never heard of and groups because of these types of films, to me it is just more advertisement for them, I do not see why they have to make a big deal, I know this was about a news clip but as one said, if they win it will open up doors for all the others, just does not sound good at all to me

devilmaykickass · Post by **devilmaykickass** » Sat Jul 22, 2006 9:14 am

Wow, that's pathetic. I hope that guy loses for being an idiot.

Gox777 · Post by **Gox777** » Sat Jul 22, 2006 10:39 am

Meh.
Anyone else up for joining the pirate party?
http://www.pirate-party.us/

devilmaykickass · Post by **devilmaykickass** » Sat Jul 22, 2006 12:50 pm

Gox777 wrote:Meh.
Anyone else up for joining the pirate party?
http://www.pirate-party.us/

Not really. If I wanted to be part of a gigantic band of idiots who cause a bunch of problems, I could be a democrat or a republican, seeing as it would take even less effort.

PyscoPill · Post by **PyscoPill** » Mon Jul 24, 2006 6:10 am

Sp what now. Will get sued and go down or will they continue their criminal ways?