Additional response to Anonymous Coward: One of the briefs supporting Viacom was by Stuart Brotman et al., and argued that tort law's "least cost provider" principle should be applied to YouTube. Brotman's brief is here: http://mbarclay.suekayton.com/IPDuckDocs/2010-12-10_Brief_of_Amici_Curiae_Stuart_Brotman_et_a l.pdf
Professor Carrier shows why Brotman's analysis should not apply in DMCA-type situations. YouTube's brief, and many of the amicus briefs, discussed other issues in the case.
On the post: New RIAA Evidence Comes To Light: Napster Killed Kerosene Too!
XKCD on correlation vs. causation
http://xkcd.com/552/
On the post: Why Arguing That Google Is In The Best Position To Stop Infringement Is Wrong
What prompted Prof. Carrier's brief
http://mbarclay.suekayton.com/IPDuckDocs/2010-12-10_Brief_of_Amici_Curiae_Stuart_Brotman_et_a l.pdf
Professor Carrier shows why Brotman's analysis should not apply in DMCA-type situations. YouTube's brief, and many of the amicus briefs, discussed other issues in the case.
On the post: Obama Nominates Former Top RIAA Lawyer To Be Solicitor General
**Lead** lawyer on Viacom v. YouTube
http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/new-york/nysdce/1:2007cv02103/302164/1/
I wonder whose side the SG's office will take when that case hits the Supreme Court?
Next >>