« Privacy Summary: Consumers Don't Care--If You Tell Them | Main | Advertisers Fleeing TV, Radio for Internet, etc. »

March 13, 2007



Henry, right again.
Another buying opportunity.

Royal Farros

There's a bigger reason why this lawsuit is silly: The law.

Good post in Business 2.0 here:

"There's one thing missing from most coverage of Viacom's $1 billion lawsuit against Google and YouTube: the law. Sure, there's copyrighted material on YouTube. But Google (GOOG) employees didn't put it there; YouTube's users did. And whether Viacom's (VIA) lawyers like it or not, user-stolen content is treated differently under the law of the land.

The Digital Millennium Copyright Act is pretty clear on this: The operator of an Internet service is not responsible for the content its users post, save for taking it offline when it receives a "takedown" notice from a copyright holder." "


That portion of the DMCA is going to be overturned pretty shortly. It basically allows inifinite piracy for profit, as long as your corporate office isn't the one uploading the pirated material.

But anyway, the whole Youtube purchase was a fraud from the beginning. It was designed to give Sequoia a 500 million dollar "thank you" from the Google execs.

Sequoia invested 11 million into youtube, then 6 months later they instructed Google to purchase youtube for an insane valuation.

Last month sequoia filed to sell every single share of Google they got in the purchase, and the founders of YouTube themselves filed to sell all their shares too. By now, the shares have been sold.

Google never intended for Youtube to withstand any sorts of lawsuits- it was all just a scam to give sequoia 500 million dollars in instant profits.

Back in the mania days, public companies bought tiny private companies for insane valuations every single day. The one commonality was the VCs or even execs at the large public companies made equity investments in the small companies a few weeks before the buyout.

It was the biggest "open" secret of the day.


I encourage readers to look at the business2.0 blog above. It really does point out the absurdity of Viacom's actions.


Victor perma bull.

incidently i saved the business 2.0 from last year where it proclaims google "the smartest company of course." and has a segment "google as god".

i think alot of people will get a kick out it one day.

Neal S. Lachman

The Business 2.0 article make it sound like we could start a new Napster tomorrow. If only things were so easy.


Google's been pretty savvy about when they settle and when they fight. Seems to me like Google picks fights it has a good chance of winning so they can establish solid case law in areas that are important to Google's future.

It's not just about winning the case at hand -- it's about setting favorable precedents for future disputes.

Google followed the law, and promptly removed infringing content when they got the takedown notice so there's little downside for Google. If Viacom wanted press coverage, they've got it -- but this press coverage will just make Viacom look greedy and anti-consumer to their audience.

This case should strengthen precedent, make Viacom into a pariah, and burnish Google's image among young, influential consumers. Win, win, win for Google.


Just to give credit where it's due, my thoughts on Google picking fights to set legal precedent certainly isn't original with me. Here's an interview with the EFF's Fred von Lohmann, which is where I probably heard this first.


I'm glad somebody is standing up to google because they're so powerful. It's tough to start an internet business with google around. The Viacom's and Google's need to leave room for those of us that want to start our own internet business.


... and where is Microsoft in ALL this. We've got a 900lb gorilla who is either taking comfort in the idea that it is IT as far a operating systems software/the software space with cash to spare ala when the going gets tough buy your competitor and shut him down(Starbucks) OR, or you've an animal whose hands is tied by anti-competitive judgements and rulings vis-a-vis a bruising browser battle. (cont'd... )

By the way 'Has ANY-body heard a sliver of media news about Netscape these days? not to mention the founder who whipped out the internet innovation of the century!? Before the buyout rumor floated about Nokia, 'What about the PALM?' In the eyes of the media reporting world they've been clearly written out of existence!!

... So what's the 900-lb Gorilla contemplating doing besides propping up and an ip-lawyer in the attendance taking world... "HERE!!"??
Has the the 'Business is War' ideology & landscape made avail to it
a 1-step solution that will extricate it from the laggard race of the search/internet space??

Hypothetical: Don't be surprise if that 1-step has eroded into a 2-process. Buy e-bay and everything else will fall line. Provided execution is flawless!

Google/yhoo search "invest_mavin"

I can truely take solace in the fact that I've absolutely stopped getting frivolous calls to re-finance my mortgage!


One the matter of Google...

in Google's eyes...

As far as Google is concern 'Google IS GOD!'

The Politically Correct phrase of the day in Business

'The Synchronization of Global Markets.'

Mike Lynn

Just some observations. And I will admit I can't quantify or validate all this so consider it for just what I said it was...observations.

If you spend any amount of time on YouTube, it seems that an inordiantely large portion of the posted content is junk....lots of it is amateurish...and a lot of it borders on or points towards porn and porn domain names and urls...another problem that parents and the like will eventually catch on to and then Google/YouTuube will be dealing with something a whole lot scarier than Viacom...but I digress.

I suspect that a lot of the quality and viewed content is pirated material(s).

Most interesting to me though is that this seems to be where the situation remains. Pirated content just keeps on coming and YouTube acts the innocent and pulls it down slowly and begrudgingly.

And, what if Viacom is only the tip of the iceberg? What if more big media content suppliers come after YouTube?

Finally, YouTube is not unique (no surprise)...just first and big...VERY BIG...and backed by Google. But in a medium where you can come out of nowhere and knock the giant off his pedestal (remember Google and Microsoft?), why doesn't anyone seriously believe that Google could get caught in the same trap?

Just some random thoughts and observations. But I am not as enamored with Google, their YouTube purchase or YouTube itself, as others appear to be.

Thanks for allowing me the opportunity to put these thoughts out there...comments???

Mike Lynn
Elephants Can't Dance
Marketing & Communications Consultant


...and a lot of it borders on or points towards porn and porn domain names and urls..

well, we know where you hangout on YT, Mike. :)


Anyone who hangs out on youtube has no life.

I doubt it is possible to go to youtube without resulting in time wasted.


toshiba satellite p205 battery

Account Deleted

thanks admin good post


Account Deleted

thanks admin good post
Temizlik ┼čirketleri Temizlik ┼čirketleri Sohbet Sohbet odalar─▒


Viacom is not going to win this lawsuit. They will not out do google. Google is such a strong company.
jacksonville beach cosmetic dentist

The comments to this entry are closed.