MPAA Says Embedding Illegal Video is Copyright Infringement

Started by AnCap Dave, April 14, 2012, 02:27:24 PM

Previous topic - Next topic
Source

QuoteResponding to a recent copyright case making its way through the Seventh Circuit court, the MPAA has issued a brief supporting a judges ruling that merely embedding a video that infringes on copyright is as bad as hosting it, even if a person didn't upload the video. Huh?

Back in 2010, porn studio Flava Works filed an infringement complaint against video hosting site myVidster for harboring illegal videos that users had uploaded. Last summer, a judge ruled in favor of Flava Works and upheld an injunction against myVidster. Now the case is making its way through the appeals court.

Enter the MPAA.

The Hollywood consortium argues that those who embed can use embeds of illegally-uploaded videos to draw traffic to their sites and generate ad revenues with no repercussions. Here's their stance on the matter, which was posted by Ars Technica:

Quote"Although there is nothing inherently insidious about embedded links, this technique is very commonly used to operate infringing internet video sites," the organization writes. "Pirate sites can offer extensive libraries of popular copyrighted content without any hosting costs to store content, bandwidth costs to deliver the content, and of course licensing costs to legitimately acquire the content."

And sure, while the fallout from this case would likely affect pirate enterprises more than the average internet user, how might this law affect us in 5, 10 or 15 years? Will we all be forbidden from embedding old music videos and awesome movie clips?

Fuck the MPAA and fuck Chris Dodd.

Quote from: D on April 14, 2012, 02:27:24 PM
Source

And sure, while the fallout from this case would likely affect pirate enterprises more than the average internet user, how might this law affect us in 5, 10 or 15 years? Will we all be forbidden from embedding old music videos and awesome movie clips?

Fuck the MPAA and fuck Chris Dodd.

I'm surprised nobody as assassinated this bastard.

Chris Dodd that is.
Meh

Quote from: Ibrahim90 on April 14, 2012, 03:02:25 PM
I'm surprised nobody as assassinated this bastard.

Chris Dodd that is.

The fact that him and Lieberman were the Senators of Connecticut simultaneously at one point embarrasses me.

Quote from: D on April 14, 2012, 03:06:29 PM
The fact that him and Lieberman were the Senators of Connecticut simultaneously at one point embarrasses me.

my condolences.
Meh

Wasn't a nephew of Liberman involved in a scam where they took the artwork of other people and sold it as prints on a site called  love4art or something of the like, while claiming it to be theirs? I thought it would be funny in the connection with the copyright thing.