YouTube vs. Viacom The Battle Explained
In which Hank argues with Hank about the Viacom v YouTube lawsuit. Important points:
1. Yes, YouTube knew that copyrighted clips were being uploaded.
2. Viacom once tried to buy YouTube
3. Viacom's Spike.com steals videos from independent video creators constantly.
4. Viacom wants YouTube to manually approve every video on the site, which would destroy YouTube
In my opinion, YouTube should pay some reparations to Viacom based on the
amount of views on content owned by Viacom. YouTube should continue to
develop it's Content ID system, which has proved to be better at
identifying copyrighted material than manual identification.
Viacom should drop the suit, and settle out of court for something like $3 CPM of views on copyrighted clips.
1. Yes, YouTube knew that copyrighted clips were being uploaded.
2. Viacom once tried to buy YouTube
3. Viacom's Spike.com steals videos from independent video creators constantly.
4. Viacom wants YouTube to manually approve every video on the site, which would destroy YouTube
In my opinion, YouTube should pay some reparations to Viacom based on the
amount of views on content owned by Viacom. YouTube should continue to
develop it's Content ID system, which has proved to be better at
identifying copyrighted material than manual identification.
Viacom should drop the suit, and settle out of court for something like $3 CPM of views on copyrighted clips.
Comment
-
Comment by Bryan Rosander, FL on June 8, 2010 at 1:56pm -
I hope Hank eventually answers the original question though. It wouldn't take that long.
-
Comment by Michael Travis Salyers on June 7, 2010 at 5:38pm -
YouTube should only pay them for ad revenue from the ads on there videos from 06 till 07 or 08.
© 2013 Created by Hank Green.
Powered by
You need to be a member of Nerdfighters to add comments!
Join Nerdfighters