4 ms·

Youtube has done a decent job of filtering out copyrighted material (or even making sure certain videos are sold -- not distributed for free). I'm not sure why

Youtube has done a decent job of filtering out copyrighted material (or even making sure certain videos are sold -- not distributed for free). I'm not sure why this can't be managed in a similar way. The people in the article mention they had patents, etc. This would be easy to prove to corporations like Amazon and eBay. I'm also surprised the US based companies distributing the goods aren't getting their pants sued off in court.

icebraining 9y ago
Digital goods are different from physical ones. The first-sale doctrine means the seller doesn't need any licenses (patent or otherwise) to sell the product. They still can't counterfeit, but you have to show that the product is counterfeit, not just that the seller is "unauthorized" like in copyright. Amazon could still refuse to list those products, of course, but it's not a legal obligation.
ilamont 9y ago
Youtube has done a decent job of filtering out copyrighted material I think it depends on what types of copyrighted material are involved. Music piracy is rampant and artists/publishers get little love from Google (https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/apr/15/music-industry-youtube-video-streaming-royalties https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/apr/15/music-indus...). As a small publisher, I can also tell you our copyrighted materials regularly find their way onto YouTube (and Google SERPs) with links to torrents or other unauthorized sites. Filing a DMCA to get them taken down is a PITA, and YouTube/Google is not proactive about handling the problem.
cracell 9y ago
If you a profiting from it, why stop it? That said I think in the long term Amazon's brand could be being damaged by this more by more than they are profiting. But who knows. They must be very aware of the problem and either working on a solution or purposely just letting it go for now.
- r00fus 9y ago
  Consider me cynical, but I think it's far more likely, given Amazon's power, that the company convinces their consumers that counterfeits are "status quo". US consumers exist for their masters, not the other way around. Where else will they go to buy?

icebraining 9y ago

Digital goods are different from physical ones. The first-sale doctrine means the seller doesn't need any licenses (patent or otherwise) to sell the product. They still can't counterfeit, but you have to show that the product is counterfeit, not just that the seller is "unauthorized" like in copyright. Amazon could still refuse to list those products, of course, but it's not a legal obligation.

ilamont 9y ago

Youtube has done a decent job of filtering out copyrighted material I think it depends on what types of copyrighted material are involved. Music piracy is rampant and artists/publishers get little love from Google (https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/apr/15/music-industry-youtube-video-streaming-royalties https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/apr/15/music-indus...). As a small publisher, I can also tell you our copyrighted materials regularly find their way onto YouTube (and Google SERPs) with links to torrents or other unauthorized sites. Filing a DMCA to get them taken down is a PITA, and YouTube/Google is not proactive about handling the problem.

cracell 9y ago

If you a profiting from it, why stop it? That said I think in the long term Amazon's brand could be being damaged by this more by more than they are profiting. But who knows. They must be very aware of the problem and either working on a solution or purposely just letting it go for now.

r00fus 9y ago
Consider me cynical, but I think it's far more likely, given Amazon's power, that the company convinces their consumers that counterfeits are "status quo". US consumers exist for their masters, not the other way around. Where else will they go to buy?