I'm surprised that the Sun-Times is linking to material that violates NBC's copyrights - especially when NBC is in a high-profile dispute with YouTube / Google on the subject.
Joe, you allude that the Sun-Times is doing something wrong, but they are not. YouTube/Google is innocent until proven guilty, my friend. Yes, there is a high-profile dispute between YouTube/Google and many major networks, but the courts have not yet decided that YouTube violates any copywrights, so the Sun-Times can certainly use links to YouTube material. Besides, the Coyote Tribute is funny.
YouTube specifically instructs its users as follows: "Do not upload copyrighted material for which you don't own the rights or have permission from the owner."
Some users, it's obvious, ignore that instruction.
Google clearly recognizes the rights of copyright owners and isn't disputing them. It's only disputing whether it can be held liable for a genuine inability to police its users' actions promptly and thoroughly. They have conceded that they have no right to display this material when the copyright owner objects. They've conceded guilt, and are only disputing liability.
If the Sun-Times were objecting to another site's display of S-T copyrighted material, would you adopt the same "innocent until proven guilty" approach?
But hey, what's a little copyright infringement when the material's funny.
Konkol note: There was no uploading of content on my part. It's a link to an existing website. There's no law against that.
I'm surprised that the Sun-Times is linking to material that violates NBC's copyrights - especially when NBC is in a high-profile dispute with YouTube / Google on the subject.
Joe, you allude that the Sun-Times is doing something wrong, but they are not. YouTube/Google is innocent until proven guilty, my friend. Yes, there is a high-profile dispute between YouTube/Google and many major networks, but the courts have not yet decided that YouTube violates any copywrights, so the Sun-Times can certainly use links to YouTube material. Besides, the Coyote Tribute is funny.
A curious position, Mark. Very curious.
YouTube specifically instructs its users as follows: "Do not upload copyrighted material for which you don't own the rights or have permission from the owner."
Some users, it's obvious, ignore that instruction.
Google clearly recognizes the rights of copyright owners and isn't disputing them. It's only disputing whether it can be held liable for a genuine inability to police its users' actions promptly and thoroughly. They have conceded that they have no right to display this material when the copyright owner objects. They've conceded guilt, and are only disputing liability.
If the Sun-Times were objecting to another site's display of S-T copyrighted material, would you adopt the same "innocent until proven guilty" approach?
But hey, what's a little copyright infringement when the material's funny.
Konkol note: There was no uploading of content on my part. It's a link to an existing website. There's no law against that.