In this case, it seems difficult to me that YouTube can rebut the Viacom’s argument that YouTube has the actual knowledge or circumferential knowledge of infringing activity.
Furthermore, but for contents of Viacom or other contents providers, YouTube could not have enjoyed current prosperity because the value of each advertisement on the website highly depends on the number of viewers. In other words, YouTube skipped the effort of acquiring recognition by ignoring unauthorized popular contents. It seems unreasonable to conclude that YouTube does not receive a direct financial benefit from these contents.
On the other hand, it is beyond doubt that YouTube itself is a convenient tool for public to disseminate information. I believe that the solution that the service provider must distribute a part of its advertising revenue by unauthorized copyrighted materials to the copyright owner will be the best.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment