Case Study 10.4 Google and Youtube Together
1. In your view and experience on YouTube, will typical YouTube viewers accept advertising while watching the videos?
As a YouTube user, advertising is a pain and I try to avoid it whenever possible, but it could be much worse and is generally non-intrusive as possible. Some videos provide a flash overlay at the bottom of the video that displays an advertisement similar to the Google ad words advertisements that appear when using Google for searching. This flash overlay can even be closed as soon as it appears. The advertisement does not hinder the viewer from being able to watch their video immediately. The text in the case study mentions how most viewers are dissatisfied with having to watch an advertisement before viewing the requested video, and over half will exit without watching the video in response to having to watch the ad (Laudon & Traver, 2009, p. 698)
2. What responsibility does YouTube have in removing copyrighted material from its site? YouTube claims it is in compliance with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which requires owners of content to notify Web sites when their copyrights are infringed. Why is it a good solution for YouTube but a poor solution for copyright owners?
In MGM v. Grokster the Supreme Court said that some of the main reasons for finding the peer-to-peer site Grokster liable were that it did not sufficiently police infringement when they were responsible for doing so, and the owners of the site continued to receive a financial benefit from the infringing material in the form of ad revenue. YouTube does remove copyrighted materials from its website as an act to avoid being the target of a copyright infringement lawsuit. In a more recent lawsuit, Viacom claimed that YouTube was knowingly using its copyrighted materials to earn revenue from advertising and from driving customers to its site (Mackrell, 2010). The judge found in YouTube’s favor, and noted that their current system for removing media that infringed on
As a YouTube user, advertising is a pain and I try to avoid it whenever possible, but it could be much worse and is generally non-intrusive as possible. Some videos provide a flash overlay at the bottom of the video that displays an advertisement similar to the Google ad words advertisements that appear when using Google for searching. This flash overlay can even be closed as soon as it appears. The advertisement does not hinder the viewer from being able to watch their video immediately. The text in the case study mentions how most viewers are dissatisfied with having to watch an advertisement before viewing the requested video, and over half will exit without watching the video in response to having to watch the ad (Laudon & Traver, 2009, p. 698)
2. What responsibility does YouTube have in removing copyrighted material from its site? YouTube claims it is in compliance with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which requires owners of content to notify Web sites when their copyrights are infringed. Why is it a good solution for YouTube but a poor solution for copyright owners?
In MGM v. Grokster the Supreme Court said that some of the main reasons for finding the peer-to-peer site Grokster liable were that it did not sufficiently police infringement when they were responsible for doing so, and the owners of the site continued to receive a financial benefit from the infringing material in the form of ad revenue. YouTube does remove copyrighted materials from its website as an act to avoid being the target of a copyright infringement lawsuit. In a more recent lawsuit, Viacom claimed that YouTube was knowingly using its copyrighted materials to earn revenue from advertising and from driving customers to its site (Mackrell, 2010). The judge found in YouTube’s favor, and noted that their current system for removing media that infringed on
Cited: Laudon, K., & Traver, C. (2009). E-Commerce. Leiberman, D. (2010, June 24). Judge sides with Google, YouTube in Viacom 's $1B suit . Retrieved October 22, 2010, from USA Today: http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2010-06-23-google-viacom-copyright-lawsuit_N.htm Mackrell, F. (2010, July 19). YouTube finds a safe harbour. Retrieved October 22, 2010, from ArtsHub: http://www.artshub.com.au/au/news-article/opinions/publishing-and-writing/y%20outube-finds-a-safe-harbour-181725?sc=1