4 ms·

which means anyone embedding a disputed video on a page with adsense then is profiting from it?

migrantgeek 15y ago
Yes, if someone is taking works from others without permission and posting it on a website where they make a profit, they should be fined and possibly jailed if they are repeat offenders. The law just gives companies more ammunition in the event of a case where someone is actually stealing content. There are sites that do nothing but stream movies and music for profit without giving anything to the content owner. They are clearly criminals. It's up to the court system to determine if the company has a case or not. I commented to note that the sky isn't falling and bloggers won't be thrown in jail by the thousands. Common sense will prevail in the end although some battles will have to be fought out in courts to set precedents. Nothing new here IMHO.
- ahamlett 15y ago
  The court will say "OK you embedded a YouTube video that was copyrighted and made $2500 or more from advertisements so yes you have broken this new law". The court will only decide if a blogger has met all the requirements of this new law. If they have, and millions have, then they will be guilty of a felony. No matter if they get the least possible punishment that is still a felony! Even if someone is found innocent they will still have paid thousands of dollars to defend themselves! I don't trust courts to be just. The time I had to deal with a judge in court I was not treated fairly and was presumed guilty. Therefore, please don't tell me the courts will determine a fair and just outcome. Judges and the court system are just a bunch of disconnected old people who you hope to never have to deal with.
  - ctdonath 15y ago
    Another twist: what if the >$2500 profit was unintentional? Not a stupid question. I once posted an AP photo on my website. Just a minor "fair use" thing for a few friends. Longer story short: within hours, DrudgeReport.com linked to it, AP lawyers threatened me, and traffic was so heavy I couldn't even access my own website to remove the pic. Had I adwords or some such to generate a few measly dollars to offset pocket-change costs, and rendered the image as a video instead (sensible for the content) the sudden attention could have easily generated a felony-inducing profit. Unintended consequences indeed.
- jerf 15y ago
  "Yes, if someone is taking works from others without permission and posting it on a website where they make a profit, they should be fined and possibly jailed if they are repeat offenders." What was wrong with this being a civil matter? We have ways of providing redress that aren't "sticking someone in jail", which is just fantastically expensive in a number of ways. "Common sense will prevail in the end" Evidence?
- magicalist 15y ago
  "Common sense will prevail in the end although some battles will have to be fought out in courts to set precedents" seriously? first, there's certainly no evidence that common sense will prevail. second, why on earth would you want costly and lengthy legal battles (including very real consequences for whoever is at the center of them) to find common sense when you could write it into law in the first place??

Yes, if someone is taking works from others without permission and posting it on a website where they make a profit, they should be fined and possibly jailed if they are repeat offenders. The law just gives companies more ammunition in the event of a case where someone is actually stealing content. There are sites that do nothing but stream movies and music for profit without giving anything to the content owner. They are clearly criminals. It's up to the court system to determine if the company has a case or not. I commented to note that the sky isn't falling and bloggers won't be thrown in jail by the thousands. Common sense will prevail in the end although some battles will have to be fought out in courts to set precedents. Nothing new here IMHO.

ahamlett 15y ago
The court will say "OK you embedded a YouTube video that was copyrighted and made $2500 or more from advertisements so yes you have broken this new law". The court will only decide if a blogger has met all the requirements of this new law. If they have, and millions have, then they will be guilty of a felony. No matter if they get the least possible punishment that is still a felony! Even if someone is found innocent they will still have paid thousands of dollars to defend themselves! I don't trust courts to be just. The time I had to deal with a judge in court I was not treated fairly and was presumed guilty. Therefore, please don't tell me the courts will determine a fair and just outcome. Judges and the court system are just a bunch of disconnected old people who you hope to never have to deal with.
- ctdonath 15y ago
  Another twist: what if the >$2500 profit was unintentional? Not a stupid question. I once posted an AP photo on my website. Just a minor "fair use" thing for a few friends. Longer story short: within hours, DrudgeReport.com linked to it, AP lawyers threatened me, and traffic was so heavy I couldn't even access my own website to remove the pic. Had I adwords or some such to generate a few measly dollars to offset pocket-change costs, and rendered the image as a video instead (sensible for the content) the sudden attention could have easily generated a felony-inducing profit. Unintended consequences indeed.
jerf 15y ago
"Yes, if someone is taking works from others without permission and posting it on a website where they make a profit, they should be fined and possibly jailed if they are repeat offenders." What was wrong with this being a civil matter? We have ways of providing redress that aren't "sticking someone in jail", which is just fantastically expensive in a number of ways. "Common sense will prevail in the end" Evidence?
magicalist 15y ago
"Common sense will prevail in the end although some battles will have to be fought out in courts to set precedents" seriously? first, there's certainly no evidence that common sense will prevail. second, why on earth would you want costly and lengthy legal battles (including very real consequences for whoever is at the center of them) to find common sense when you could write it into law in the first place??