My comments on Viacom v.s. You Tube

Under Article 512 of DMCA, ISP shall not be liable to any person for any copyright infringement if it takes down infringing internet contents upon receipt of a proper notice of the violation from copyright owner. Today, there exist vast numbers of internet users in the world and enormous internet contents are uploaded on websites such as You Tube by them everyday. Even now, monitoring websites to find illegal uploading is heavy burden for a copyright owner. If illegal contents are uploaded at a much faster rate than now, taking down illegal contents on a timely basis might become difficult for ISPs. I think, in light of the internet technology at the time of infringement, ISP should adopt the proper way of management in order to prevent copyright infringement (e.c. notice system, filtering system, removal system). When ISP neglects proper management, it could be liable as a direct or indirect infringer regardless of fulfillment of the conditions for safe harbor provision.

Although Congress says nothing about whether passive ISPs should ever be held strictly liable as direct infringers or whether plaintiffs suing ISPs should instead proceed under contributory theories (CoStar Group, Inc. v. LoopNet, Inc., 373 F.3d 544), courts should decide proactively what kind of criteria are required to admit ISP’s direct liability or contributory liability for violations of copyright committed using their systems.