| 翻訳と辞書 |
| Viacom International Inc. v. YouTube, Inc. ： ウィキペディア英語版 |
Viacom International Inc. v. YouTube, Inc.
''Viacom International, Inc. v. YouTube, Inc.'', No. 07 Civ. 2103, is a U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York case in which Viacom sued YouTube, a video-sharing site owned by Google, alleging that YouTube had engaged in "brazen" and "massive" copyright infringement by allowing users to upload and view hundreds of thousands of videos owned by Viacom without permission.〔(【引用サイトリンク】url=https://www.docketalarm.com/cases/New_York_Southern_District_Court/1--07-cv-02103/Viacom_International_Inc_et_al_v_Youtube_Inc_et_al/1/ )〕 A motion for summary judgement seeking dismissal was filed by Google and was granted in 2010 on the grounds that the Digital Millennium Copyright Act's "safe harbor" provisions shielded Google from Viacom’s copyright infringement claims.〔(【引用サイトリンク】url=https://www.docketalarm.com/cases/New_York_Southern_District_Court/1--07-cv-02103/Viacom_International_Inc_et_al_v_Youtube_Inc_et_al/364/ )〕 In 2012, on appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, it was overturned in part. On April 18, 2013, District Judge Stanton again granted summary judgment in favor of defendant YouTube. An appeal was begun, but the parties settled in March 2014.〔(【引用サイトリンク】url=https://www.docketalarm.com/cases/New_York_Southern_District_Court/1--07-cv-02103/Viacom_International_Inc_et_al_v_Youtube_Inc_et_al/ )〕
== Background ==
On March 13, 2007, Viacom filed a US$1 billion lawsuit against Google and YouTube alleging that the site had engaged in "brazen" copyright infringement by allowing users to upload and view copyrighted material owned by Viacom.〔(Text of complaint )〕 The complaint stated that over 150,000 unauthorized clips of Viacom's (Viacom's) programming, such as ''SpongeBob SquarePants'' and ''The Daily Show'', had been made available on YouTube, and that these clips had collectively been viewed more than 1.5 billion times.
Viacom claimed that YouTube had infringed on its copyrights by performing, displaying, and reproducing Viacom's copyrighted works. Furthermore, the complaint contended that the defendants "engage in, promote and induce" the infringement, and that they had deliberately built up a library of infringing works in order to increase the site's traffic (and advertising revenue).〔 In total, Viacom claimed three counts of direct infringement, and three counts of indirect infringement, specifically inducement, contributory infringement and vicarious infringement.〔VerSteeg, Russ. (Viacom v. YouTube: Preliminary Observations ), North Carolina Journal of Law and Technology, Volume 9, Issue 1, Fall 2007.〕
Viacom did not seek damages for any actions after Google put its Content ID filtering system in place in early 2008. The lawsuit was later merged with similar complaints being pursued by the English Premier League and other copyright holders.
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「Viacom International Inc. v. YouTube, Inc.」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.
|
|