Is Viacom Doing To Independent Content Creators In 2010 What It Says YouTube Did To Viacom In 2006?
from the questions,-questions... dept
Igor Zevaka was the first of a few of you to point to John Green's video where he discusses the Viacom/YouTube lawsuit with a bit of a twist, highlighting the fact that Viacom is making money off of amatuer content, without the rights to do so. Viacom owns Spike.com (a subsidiary of MTV), into which it folded iFilm.com, home of all sorts of amateur content, including content such as a Jonathan Coulton video that has a clear Creative Commons license -- but only for non-commercial use. However, on Spike.com... it's covered in ads sold by Viacom. So, Green wants to know, has Viacom paid Coulton?Either way, it would be interesting to see if anyone has more evidence that Viacom properties are improperly monetizing CC non-commercially-licensed videos. That would seem like a relevant point in the ongoing lawsuit...
![Hide This Hide this](https://ii.techdirt.com/s/t/i/topclose.png)
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
Filed Under: copyright, culture, jonathon coulton, spike, user generated videos
Companies: google, spike, viacom, youtube
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
In this case, Viacom has written permission from Coulton to use his copyrighted works, as long as they don't use it commercially. They used it commercially, thus violating his copyright and their agreement.
They should pay up, just like they want all other infringers to do.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Its slowly coming back to bite them on the behind. Its really fun to watch, knowing full well what the trends are and from that what the future holds for them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
whilst creative commons may not be in the constitution but copyright, which is what creative commons needs to work, is in the constitution.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
There's a caption in the vid at around 2:25 that says it's been taken down.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
you have to track how the videos were obtained, and if ifilm has any way to know who submitted them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: o rly
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: o rly
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: o rly
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Why does ifilm not have super natural powers which would enable them to know who submitted the content and whether the subby did indeed own the copyright? It is their responsibility to ensure this is the case and futhermore ifilm should be held accountable for their indiscretion. Seems they just steal stuff from others with the sole purpose of tirning a profit from it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
remember, ifilm was a short movie and video production site created by a movie producer type, not a slash and burn copyright violationhaus.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
viacom and cc
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: viacom and cc
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: viacom and cc
(would have been better 2-3 mins shorter :) )
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: viacom and cc
It would be fun if Google blocked them for violation of TOS.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Oops
[ link to this | view in chronology ]