30 Jun
2010
30 Jun
'10
3:44 a.m.
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 4:55 PM, Paul Davis <paul(a)linuxaudiosystems.com> wrote:
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 3:18 PM, Mark Knecht
<markknecht(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Thanks for the clarifications. Saves me the hassle of reading it
myself. (But not the responsibility for understanding it!)
Cheers,
Mark
YouTube is an interesting case. I didn't read
what the decision was
but I hear they won a judgment against (I think) Viacom a few days ago
allowing them to keep posting stuff, or at least to leave it online if
someone else posts it.
this is a bit inaccurate. the ruling said that as long as YT can
demonstrate that they respond effectively to legitimate take-down
notices, they are not guilty of copyright infringement just because
somebody posted something that they should not have. the court ruled
that YT have demonstrated this, at least in the case of Viacom's
alleged abuses.