Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirty Dane
Why would content hosted on youtube.com servers be different from hosted on hackers.com?
If the content is the same and re-distributed the same way, the law and judges shouldn't distinguish between the two. Because this is about embedding, not placement.
|
It's different because youtube has DFP implemented and they also have repeat infringer policy, that's why if you're a copyright holder you're in complete control of what's happening on youtube your copyrighted content wise (if you care of course). Hackers (illegal tube) will most likely implement nothing of the above, and their uploaders will just keep posting your video no matter how many times it was removed by you.
It is also a huge difference between a mostly non-infringing site where an occasional copyrighted clip slips through every now and then, and get's dealt with quickly. And some mostly infringing site where an occasional non-infringing clip slips through - that's pretty much different story, and courts are usually perfectly capable of telling one type of sites from another.
For the second type of sites tubes like youtube are not really suitable as a source of embeds, because copyright holders will just block all of their clips there probably without even bothering of trying to contant the site itself. They'll have nothing to post in no time because YT will not allow them to reupload. But an illegal tube, that doesn't block anything and doesn't ban anyone, well, that's a good source of embeds for those who intend to infringe of a regular basic.