31–40 of 43 posts
If Google wanted to make a big stink out of this, they could decide not to offer YouTube in Germany at all, citing the country's royalty laws as a reason it cannot operate viably there.
Could Youtube just silence the videos? Sometimes I just want to see some cool flying robots and the full video is disabled, because the creator decided to include some background music.
[inflammatory comment] So following that logic car manufacturers are responsible for all the car accidents in history; its their users, they should check that the person is able and fit to use their service (car). It just makes me mad. It's just a bad precedent.
I'd argue that car manufacturers are indeed part responsible for car accidents.
If Google wanted to make a big stink out of this, they could decide not to offer YouTube in Germany at all, citing the country's royalty laws as a reason it cannot operate viably there.
A stink? Shut down your business in the 4th biggest international market? Lose millions in revenue? Think those German clone crazy brothers wouldn't release DieTube.de the next day? Lose your dominant market share overnight. Good luck on still being the CEO the next day!
It's possible the millions in revenue is not enough to make up for the huge fines and extra work required to do the filtering .
Wow, this precedent covers much more than YouTube. If German courts will hold any such service accountable for what the users post, pretty much all widely used services are susceptible to suing.
Germany doesn't understand the internet from what I've seen. They're the country that legally requires you to post your full name, address and telephone number on your website. (search for "Impressum")
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You make it seem a lot easier than it is. Youtube has tons of content, not specifically German, that I wager lots of Germans would like to watch. But your point comes across, all the same. It'd be really nice, if all the big tech companies could band together in favor of internet protection. I'm sure if Google, Wikipedia, Twitter, and Facebook (just to name a few) would say "we won't operate in any country that filte…
Internet protection? You actually mean a copyrightless internet. That's never actually existed or everyone would still be using KaZaA. YouTube got greedy, they got slapped. Good for Germany for actually doing this to an American monopoly. Big deal. YouTube lied for too long about it being able too expensive to filter content. But now suddenly they can do it! And that now coincides almost exactly with when they starte…
You're telling me that your reaction would be, "you're right. We got greedy. Good for you for forcing us to police what millions of people are doing on our open forum."
No, you damned-well wouldn't. If you ran a taxi company, you wouldn't jump at the responsibility to ensure your fares aren't visiting prostitutes or high on drugs. If you built houses, you would not leap at the duty to ensure they weren't bought with drug money. Because that's not your problem. You aren't doing anything wrong; your customers are.
It's an ancient principle of common law that an individual (or corporation, now that we're playing that game) cannot be punished for the actions of another. This ruling, and your argument, violates that principle. You want to force a company to spend its shareholders' money on stopping other people from doing bad things, and there is quite simply no moral justification for such an edict.
If Google wanted to make a big stink out of this, they could decide not to offer YouTube in Germany at all, citing the country's royalty laws as a reason it cannot operate viably there.
Otherwise the local offices would be made liable for the main youtube.com.
I thought that they already did this automatically? I uploaded a video I took from my old apartment, because I lived behind a club* you could hear music and Youtube automatically detected it on upload. Here's the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WOANhQ9nQYk and the message I see via my account: ""Hi Friend", musical composition administered by: EMI Music Publishing. Your video is still available worldwide. In so…
I thought that they already did this automatically? I uploaded a video I took from my old apartment, because I lived behind a club* you could hear music and Youtube automatically detected it on upload. Here's the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WOANhQ9nQYk and the message I see via my account: ""Hi Friend", musical composition administered by: EMI Music Publishing. Your video is still available worldwide. In so…
Interesting. Is that why BBC and Channel 4 stuff seems to live on YouTube much longer than you would think? Because it's blocked in the UK?