翻訳と辞書 |
Capitol Records, LLC v Vimeo, LLC : ウィキペディア英語版 | Capitol Records, LLC v Vimeo, LLC ''Capitol Records, LLC v. Vimeo, LLC'' 〔''Capitol Records, LLC v. Vimeo, LLC'', ___ F. Supp. 2d ___, 2013 S.D.N.Y. Sept. 18, 2013). http://www.scribd.com/doc/169653011/vimeo (September 2013 Order); ''Capitol Records, LLC v. Vimeo, LLC'', ___ F. Supp. 2d ___, 2013 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 31, 2013). http://www.scribd.com/doc/195339213/Capitol-v-Vimeo-Reconsideration-and-Interlocutory-Cert-Opinion-and-Order (December 2013 Order)〕 was a 2013 copyright infringement case out of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The decision resolved cross-motions for summary judgment filed by a video-sharing service (Vimeo) and a pair of record labels.〔Law 360. How Capitol Records v. Vimeo Shapes The Content Stream. http://www.law360.com/articles/480010/how-capitol-records-v-vimeo-shapes-the-content-stream〕 Vimeo sought a ruling that, as a matter of law, it was entitled to safe harbor protection under the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA) as to a series of copyrighted videos that were uploaded to its platform; the record labels sought the opposite ruling.〔 == Facts ==
Vimeo began operating in 2004-2005 as an online video platform that requires its users to upload only material they have created or participated in the creation of. Vimeo does not pre-screen the uploaded material, and relies on community reviews to guarantee that users follow its Terms of service, which include a "Community Guideline" that sets restrictions on uploaded content. Vimeo also provides a web page for its copyright infringement policy regarding the DMCA. The policy is enforced by the "Community Team," which uses "Moderator Tools" to filter and remove videos that contain offensive or infringing content.〔September 2013 Order. pp 2-5.〕 In December 2009, record companies Capitol Records and EMI filed a lawsuit claiming that 199 videos on Vimeo’s platform infringed their music copyrights.〔September 2013 Order. p 5.〕 Vimeo did not dispute that it lacked authorization from the copyright owners and that the videos infringed the plaintiffs' copyrights. Nevertheless, Vimeo argued that it was entitled to “safe harbor” protection under (17 U.S.C. § 512(c) ) (information residing on systems or networks at direction of users) of the DMCA.〔September 2013 Order. p 6.〕
抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア(Wikipedia)』 ■ウィキペディアで「Capitol Records, LLC v Vimeo, LLC」の詳細全文を読む
スポンサード リンク
翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース |
Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.
|
|