I think youtube is very convenient for users. For example, after we heard a copyrighted music on the street, we can hear the music again by youtube. If we may buy the music’s CD by hearing the music again, this can be a kind of advertisement. Also, Google has been suited by Viacom, but I think the function of youtube is slightly similar to the time-shifting in Sony case if the copyrighted work is the TV program broadcasted for free. Of course, there is a difference between Sony and Google . While a user used Sony’s VTR at home in Sony, in Google, the copyrighted work was uploaded on the Internet which everyone can watch.
On the contrary, Viacom has to protect its own copyrights. Here, I think it is important for Viacom to insist the copyrights without impairing the feeling of the public. At first, I think Viacom needs to research what situation the public demand. Next, I think Viacom should insist copyright infringement about not all copyrighted work but a part of copyrighted work. For example, I think a whole movie uploaded on youtube is illegal. However, when a drama is uploaded on the TV program site which broadcasts the drama, that is, the drama can be watched by everyone for free, I think the drama uploaded on youtube is not illegal.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment