CREATIVITY 3.0

A PLACE FOR DIALOGUE, LINGS AND FURTHER DISCUSSION FOR THE UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON SCHOOL OF LAW IP INNOVATIONS CLASS - E589 - SPRING 2011. TAUGHT BY STEVE DAVIS. PLEASE POST AND COMMENT FREELY.

Sunday, May 8, 2011

A respond of the Youtube case

As a business website, Youtube has to pursue the profit maximization. I think it is impossible to order a searching engineer website to get all the licenses of the copyright works that posted on their site. It is time-consuming and costly. So I’d like to give these website some advises(may be some suggestion is wrong on the view of law, but I think it is feasible):
1. Try to distinguish the user’s own original “user generated” video content and “un- user generated” copyrighted works.
2. As that “user generated” video, when the users upload the video, they ought to sign a contract to license the website saving and distributing their works.
3. As that “un- user generated” copyrighted works, I think there are many ways to do. First, website can order the users to get the licenses of the copyright owners. If not, website should prohibit the upload to prevent the infringement of the copyright. Second, base on the principle of fair use, website can post the link of the video(website cannot save the videos) with a notice of the limitation of the purpose of the use and prohibit the download of these copyright works. Third, website can weight the balance of the business profit and infringement remedy to dicide whether post these copyright works without license( this is not a analusis of the law, but it sufficient in the analysis of the economy).
4. Snippets-post. To deal with some important and profitable videos, website also can has many ways. First, website can get the license of these videos and just post snippets online, if the user want to get the whole vedio, they should pay to the website. Second, just post a very short snippet as a search outcome and provide the link of copyright owners for users.

No comments:

Post a Comment