Is It Copyright Infringement To Embed An Infringing YouTube Video On Your Blog?
from the questions,-questions,-questions dept
While there has been a great deal of discussion (and a few lawsuits) concerning the legality of YouTube hosting infringing videos, one question where we haven't seen very much discussion is the legal liability for people who embed infringing YouTube videos on their sites. One of the great features of YouTube was that each video provided a line of HTML that would allow you to embed the video directly into your site -- exactly as we've done a few times. However, is that act -- of putting the HTML embed code on your site -- copyright infringement if the video is infringing? After all, the actual video is still hosted by YouTube. The person who uploaded it is someone entirely different. All you've done is put a single line of HTML on your page -- but it's not hard to see how some might see that as infringing. In fact, we may have an example of exactly that. Ronald Lewis let us know about a typical cease-and-desist letter he received from a lawyer because he had some blog posts that embedded YouTube videos of musician Michael McDonald. Lewis didn't upload the videos. He's not hosting the videos. He simply put a single line of HTML (provided by YouTube for this specific purpose) on his website, and it would then display the video. There are plenty of other questions raised by this as well, such as whether or not the videos really infringe, why a lawyer would want to stop someone from promoting the music of someone (since it's unlikely that anyone would stop buying music because they saw a video on YouTube). There's also the fact that Lewis claims he's been friends with McDonald for a decade to make the whole situation awkward. But, honestly, the much more interesting (and rarely discussed) question concerns the liability of those who embed infringing videos. My guess is that it won't be long before we start seeing a lot more threats and lawsuits over embedded videos from bloggers who have no idea they're putting themselves at risk simply for putting a line of code into a blog post.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Update A Worn Out Cliche
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Update A Worn Out Cliche
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The obvious answer is maybe.
As usual the rights listed in the Constitution are only protected by the quality of the layers hired to defend those rights.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That said, even though that's not getting at the source of the problem, I am a firm believer in placing responsibility on individuals. If achieving that means scaring them to make sure they aren't posting links to content they shouldn't, so be it. I hate how our society constantly defers responsibility to another party: "simply put a single line of HTML"
Again, I don't think that doing this is necessarily the best way to go about it, but I'm not totally against it, either.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Another step
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It makes no sence though becuase it would be much easier for a copyright holder to take down the infringing copy from youtube then the many blogs that may have embedded it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This is the hard way
It makes no sence though becuase it would be much easier for a copyright holder to take down the infringing copy from youtube then the many blogs that may have embedded it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I saw a site earlier which had full episodes of a show on, they were embed from another site, with a disclaimer underneath "we don't host them on our servers" ... guilty!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
There is precedent on this
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Thank you
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Thank you
Are these videos actually infringing ie unauthorized?
Why wasnt a DMCA takedown sent to youTube?
Suggestion
Call Michael and tell him what is going on.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Is a "tiny" line of HTML code infringing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Duey
It would seem that the persistent practise of aiming for the people that highlight that the content is available, rather than asking the source to remove it is a waste of everyone's time... Except the lawyers, of course :)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Just got hit for an infinging link
The text of the notice is as follows.
BayTSP, Inc. ("BayTSP") swears under penalty of perjury that Lionsgate Films has authorized BayTSP to act as its non-exclusive agent for copyright infringement notification. BayTSP's search of the protocol listed below has detected infringements of Lionsgate Films copyright interests on your IP addresses as detailed in the attached report.
BayTSP has reasonable good faith belief that Lionsgate Films, its agents, or the law does not authorize use of the material in the manner complained of in the attached report. The information provided herein is accurate to the best of our knowledge. Therefore, this letter is an official notification to effect removal of the detected infringement listed in the attached report. The Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, the Universal Copyright Convention, as well as bilateral treaties with other countries allow for protection of client's copyrighted work even beyond U.S. borders. The attached documentation specifies the exact location of the infringement.
We hereby request that you immediately remove or block access to the infringing material, as specified in the copyright laws, and insure the user refrains from using or sharing with others Lionsgate Films materials in the future.
Further, we believe that the entire Internet community benefits when these matters are resolved cooperatively. We urge you to take immediate action to stop this infringing activity We appreciate your efforts toward this common goal.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
copyright infringement
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: copyright infringement
What do you think the press is!? They take information relayed to them from a source and deliver it to the public every day. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to conclude that information could be misrepresented or exaggerated (which it usually is). The whole idea of maintaining an ethical and moral system went out the window decades ago with the press & media's behavior. I'm not saying I agree with it but if you're going to raise a stink on this front it seems a little odd other fronts are allowed. Many words in the english language leave much room for further interpretation. In my personal opinion this is the governments fault for not properly educating or further elaborating on certain subjects they warn about. The cost of incarceration or enforcement in comparison to simply educating the public is a no brainer but yet still this system remains. And they cry about a massive deficit & yet don't stop to consider where much of the hidden cost comes from. It would be a lot cheaper & easier to simply deploy programs which proactively firewalled traffic both in & out that violated these rules instead of crying about the result. My God it's like leaving a fork on the ground near an outlet then complaining about how the child was able to get hurt. "Do not tell me it can't be done!" ~Franklin D. Roosevelt
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
People sure get into a fuss about sites that host rapidshare link; yet rapidshare hosts all the files.
Corporations are too aggressive in their greed for every single penny and continue to push people away from actually wanting to legally give them money. It's not the artist you want to protect; it's your big company. People don't like big companies being in the news every day acting like a spoiled kid to get every single thing in the room. Do those assholes that make the decisions have any artistic talent? NO.. so go f yourself you are worthless to me; the artist can have money for being creative; you can go f off. Oh you have the artist on contract? For what? So you can make money off other people because you have no desirable talents of your own?
If companies wanted to b e publics favorite; they would embrace technology; embrace the speed of the internet; and change their business models instead of desperately holding on to their clueless thought process that who knows where they get it from. Companies need the 25-35 generation to save their companies and get rid of the 60 year old geezers that completely ruin the internet creditability with heavy users.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
a line of html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
please stop visting my websight, your not allowed :P
ps, please remove that LARGE stick up your ass, i belive it is hindering your ability to think and medically speaking, that cant be good.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I would not want the video of my children to be shown on some adult porn site, as I would not be able to regulate what content is appearing next to my video, or the adds that my video is promoting.. SO Of course it should be against the law,, The real question should be is Where is the law?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Of course
You are trying to argue that you are not guilty of possession of stolen property because you didn't steal the TV... you merely purchased it off the back of the pickup truck in the grocery store parking lot.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not quite CyberNorris.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not quite CyberNorris.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Not quite CyberNorris.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Honestly, I think it shouldn't make a difference. It makes more sense to send a cease & desist to the origin as opposed to all the copies. One letter stops *all* the people linking to it. Plus infringement requires knowing and willing intent to infringe. it's *way* too easy to say you thought it was fine because it was on youtube and then use the argument, "why didn't they just send a dmca request to youtube?"
They might send letters to those random people though because maybe its not infringing and they just assume that YouTube or the like would see through it and ignore it whereas individuals may be more likely to crack immediately and without a fight.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The real crime
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Death of 2.0
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Why Post to YouTube?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Don't be afraid of this BS
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
How can we decide a video as unlawful
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
it depends on the artist
i am an artist too, i want my works to be see and heard, but i don't want it to be pirated .
to my knowledge, i think most youtubers are faithful fans and they want others to see how great eg. jeff beck, mahavishnu orchestra ,etc... is.
i see only a couple where he ACTUALLY advertises in his video that he is selling the stuff.
one reader said it best. the quality is passable, who would pay for that ? i see youtube as a preview for the videos i would want to buy. that what has been happening for me , since i found youtube, i have been buying dvd of the artists i like.
they wouldn't have earn my sale had it not been for youtube.
bottom line once again, ask the artist. if she is against youtube, then make it known in her website to the effect of PLEASE DO NOT SUPPORT YOUTUBE.
then, as a fan, i will know this, and will do my part to report an infringement.
i think most artists are not that petty.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Tube Charts
that my site is kind of infringeing
what do you think?
www.tube-charts.com
regards
Thomas
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
http://www.smashhitdisplays.com
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
@springer
What do you think the press is!? They take information relayed to them from a source and deliver it to the public every day. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to conclude that information could be misrepresented or exaggerated (which it usually is). The whole idea of maintaining an ethical and moral system went out the window decades ago with the press & media's behavior. I'm not saying I agree with it but if you're going to raise a stink on this front it seems a little odd other fronts are allowed. Many words in the english language leave much room for further interpretation. In my personal opinion this is the governments fault for not properly educating or further elaborating on certain subjects they warn about. The cost of incarceration or enforcement in comparison to simply educating the public is a no brainer but yet still this system remains. And they cry about a massive deficit & yet don't stop to consider where much of the hidden cost comes from. It would be a lot cheaper & easier to simply deploy programs which proactively firewalled traffic both in & out that violated these rules instead of crying about the result. My God it's like leaving a fork on the ground near an outlet then complaining about how the child was able to get hurt. "Do not tell me it can't be done!" ~Franklin D. Roosevelt
[ link to this | view in chronology ]