Joined: 23 Sep 2006
Posts: 1088
|
|
Cover your ass sort of discussion. I think it's about time somebody do a serious look at this, just so at least somebody can pull a quick one when the time come.
---------------------
Safe harbor provision, at least blogspot/google is covered.
http://www.slate.com/id/2152264/
Should YouTube worry about lawsuits from media companies? Not really, wrote Columbia law professor Tim Wu. How so? In the '90s, he wrote at Slate, the Bell companies lobbied against Hollywood's requested reforms. The result was the Online Copyright Liability Limitation Act, part of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998. Section 512 (c), he claims, is the Magna Carta of Web 2.0 because it provides web companies a safe harbor. Copyright content hosted unknowingly by those companies falls under "tolerated use," a cousin of "fair use." Further, it gives media companies the dual benefits of exposure and control (in the form of "notice and take down" requests). (Read article at Slate)
|
_________________
Motel de Moka -{o}- Bricolage Fantasy -{o}- [url=] [/url] |
|
|
