1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Embedding videos not considered copyright infringement effect

Discussion in 'YouTube' started by closedCaption, Aug 5, 2012.

  1. closedCaption

    closedCaption Regular Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2011
    Messages:
    289
    Likes Received:
    111
    Hi all,

    if I missed a category, please move thread somewhere else, but this one is the most related to it (I think).

    There is an article on Ars Technica called "MPAA "embedding is infringement" theory rejected by court", which basically states that sites embedding videos from original content providers are not doing any copyright violation. What is confusing for me, and I guess others too, doesn't this decision suddenly legalize all live program streaming sites, since they only embed stream from another provider? What do you guys think?
     
  2. steelballs

    steelballs BANNED BANNED

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2008
    Messages:
    1,832
    Likes Received:
    4,562
    More on this here

    news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57485976-38/embedding-copyright-infringing-video-is-not-a-crime-court-rules/

    Embedding copyright-infringing video is not a crime, court rules

    Appeals judge Richard Posner says MyVidster, a social video bookmarking site sued by Flava Works, doesn't encourage swapping and thus doesn't embolden infringement.
    Zack Whittaker
    by Zack Whittaker
    August 3, 2012 2:45 AM PDT

    Embedding a copyright-infringing video on another Web site is not illegal, a court ruled yesterday.

    Judge Richard Posner ruled at the U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals that MyVidster, a social video bookmarking site, did not infringe the copyright of Flava Works, a porn production company, when it embedded copyright-infringing versions of Flava Works content from third-party Web sites.

    The decision overturned a preliminary injunction from 2011, imposed by a lower court after Flava Works filed suit against MyVidster in 2010.

    According to the Appeals Court ruling, MyVidster "doesn't touch the data stream" and therefore doesn't host the infringing video, but links to versions hosted elsewhere on the Web.

    MyVidster was "not encouraging swapping, which in turn encourages infringement," the ruling said:

    Read the full to see all
     
  3. closedCaption

    closedCaption Regular Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2011
    Messages:
    289
    Likes Received:
    111
    So according to this quote "MyVidster doesn't touch the data stream", you are allowed to show third-party streams on your site without any problems?
     
  4. steelballs

    steelballs BANNED BANNED

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2008
    Messages:
    1,832
    Likes Received:
    4,562
    I am not a lawyer but I do have enough experience to know that how one court adjudicates does not mean that all courts will be the same!

    In fact I would go so far as to say nearly all the 50 states in the USA will view a case like this very differently in each location

    Meaning that sometimes the prosecution will get thrown out and then a conviction will be handed down in another town or city

    It is often a legal lottery with these type of ambiguations - 'Embedding copyright-infringing video'
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  5. closedCaption

    closedCaption Regular Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2011
    Messages:
    289
    Likes Received:
    111
    Thanks for clarification. However, once it becomes precedent it will be good enough for most cases.