Well, this case took place around July of 2009. It is also one of many cases involving YouTube and the issue of copyright infringement. It obviously addresses what we have discussed in Media Law class, but I also find it funny that YouTube dodged a bullet based on technicality of the law.
So, here it is:
It looks like there was some footage of a Premier Football League game on YouTube, and of course the group suing wanted punitive damages. However, because the footage of the Premier Football League was considered "foreign works", they were NOT covered by United States Copyright Law. The judge that made the ruling also mentioned that the Copyright Act "bars statutory damages for all foreign and domestic works not timely registered" (Sandoval).
It is a clear that one of the main uses of YouTube is taking copies of other people's work and uploading them on this website, which is kind of how I came up with part of the title for this post "YouTube, You Take...". And it only makes it okay if the copyright owner actually does the post, they grant permission by exercising the exclusive rights of copyright ownership and/or the copyright expires and becomes "public domain".
I guess it would be fair to say that for future references, anyone who may have to sue a company such as YouTube needs to make sure they are covered in whatever court of law they choose to take their case. It seems that sometimes the evidence is just not enough.
Any thoughts? Check out the link:
Article: "Judge sides with You Tube on several copyright issues" By Greg Sandoval
No comments:
Post a Comment