AFM231project
Tort of Copyright Infringement - Full TV Series on YouTube
LEC 005
Group Members: Tiffany Harriott (20556451), Jennifer Li (20561173), Janece Boersma (20569679), Sheldon Seepersad (20578863), Sravya Seemakurti (20558224)
Introduction/Background:
Our picture is an example of the tort of copyright infringement. In this specific example, a full episode of the TV show 6teen, produced by Fresh TV Inc., was uploaded to YouTube by a general YouTube user who has no affiliation to the show or the creators. In fact, within the description it states “This video is not mine!! I do not claim any rights to this video. All rights belong to creators and copyrighted owners.”
Upon research of the Fresh TV copyrights, it states the following regarding the use of their information and content: “All information, content, software, data, text, music, sound, photographs, graphics, diagrams, images, animation, avatars, video, messages, ideas, opinions, suggestions or other materials displayed or otherwise exhibited, are protected by copyright or other intellectual property rights and are either owned and controlled by Fresh or its licensors,”.
Copyright infringement is a reoccurring issue on Youtube, Youtube has many systems in place to minimize copyright infringement, including a notification system where users can submit any copyright takedowns, copyright strikes (warnings to users posting copyrighted material), and loss of access to certain Youtube features. Despite Youtube’s efforts to minimize copyright infringement and removing videos that violate the tort of copyright infringement, you will still find many copyrighted videos on Youtube.
This is an important issue, especially when you consider all of the independent creators that use YouTube as a means to distribute their content and subsequently monetize it. Having users repost their works could be detrimental if the money they receive from those videos is necessary to support the most basic of lifestyles.
Tort Risk(s):
When Youtube does not exhibit a duty of care to remove copyrighted videos, the owners/creators of the content can sue Youtube for infringement. Copyright infringement is not a strict liability tort but a secondary liability tort. This occurs when a party (in this case Youtube), contributes to or facilitates indirect infringement, contributory infringement and/or vicarious infringement. This means that although Youtube did not personally copy any of the material, they have vicarious liability through indirect infringement and can be sued just the same.
In March 2007, Viacom sued YouTube for allowing users to post/view copyrighted material such as SpongeBob SquarePants and The Daily Show. This case ended with a settlement in March 2014.
“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.”
Damages:
The copyright owner has the right to sue for damages and lost profits, or could elect statutory damages of up to $5,000 for non-commercial infringements and up to $20,000 for commercial infringement. In addition, the infringer may be subject to up to five years in jail and fines of up to $1 million. In this case, however, it is unlikely the infringer will be subject to jail time and fines given the nature of the infringement. If Fresh TV Inc. were to pursue litigation, they would likely file against YouTube itself, and not the individual who posted the video. While they could sue the individual, it is unlikely they would recover much in terms of damages from the individual. Fresh TV Inc. would likely be granted injunction, for the copyrighted information to be removed, and there is potential to recover damages.
Potential Defence:
As aforementioned, Youtube consistently makes an effort to take down content that poses copyright infringement risks. However, their special business of enabling anyone, anywhere, to post any content does make it difficult to mitigate the risks completely. This problem becomes exponentially more challenging when the sheer volume of content Youtube facilitates is considered. For example, in 2014, it was estimated that 300 hours of new video content was uploaded onto Youtube every single minute.
Therefore, if Youtube can highlight that the systems they have in place effectively mitigate these copyright risks to the best of their abilities - like their world-class referencing database (with over 35 million files available for cross-referencing) - this may provide a basis for defense.
Sources:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=v46VB8VZF1g
www.theverge.com/2014/7/21/5924405/youtube-star-michelle-...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viacom_International_Inc._v._YouTub....
sbinfocanada.about.com/od/insurancelegalissues/a/copyrigh...
www.statisticbrain.com/youtube-statistics/
intellectual-property.legalhelp.org/copyrights/defenses-a...
Tort of Copyright Infringement - Full TV Series on YouTube
LEC 005
Group Members: Tiffany Harriott (20556451), Jennifer Li (20561173), Janece Boersma (20569679), Sheldon Seepersad (20578863), Sravya Seemakurti (20558224)
Introduction/Background:
Our picture is an example of the tort of copyright infringement. In this specific example, a full episode of the TV show 6teen, produced by Fresh TV Inc., was uploaded to YouTube by a general YouTube user who has no affiliation to the show or the creators. In fact, within the description it states “This video is not mine!! I do not claim any rights to this video. All rights belong to creators and copyrighted owners.”
Upon research of the Fresh TV copyrights, it states the following regarding the use of their information and content: “All information, content, software, data, text, music, sound, photographs, graphics, diagrams, images, animation, avatars, video, messages, ideas, opinions, suggestions or other materials displayed or otherwise exhibited, are protected by copyright or other intellectual property rights and are either owned and controlled by Fresh or its licensors,”.
Copyright infringement is a reoccurring issue on Youtube, Youtube has many systems in place to minimize copyright infringement, including a notification system where users can submit any copyright takedowns, copyright strikes (warnings to users posting copyrighted material), and loss of access to certain Youtube features. Despite Youtube’s efforts to minimize copyright infringement and removing videos that violate the tort of copyright infringement, you will still find many copyrighted videos on Youtube.
This is an important issue, especially when you consider all of the independent creators that use YouTube as a means to distribute their content and subsequently monetize it. Having users repost their works could be detrimental if the money they receive from those videos is necessary to support the most basic of lifestyles.
Tort Risk(s):
When Youtube does not exhibit a duty of care to remove copyrighted videos, the owners/creators of the content can sue Youtube for infringement. Copyright infringement is not a strict liability tort but a secondary liability tort. This occurs when a party (in this case Youtube), contributes to or facilitates indirect infringement, contributory infringement and/or vicarious infringement. This means that although Youtube did not personally copy any of the material, they have vicarious liability through indirect infringement and can be sued just the same.
In March 2007, Viacom sued YouTube for allowing users to post/view copyrighted material such as SpongeBob SquarePants and The Daily Show. This case ended with a settlement in March 2014.
“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.”
Damages:
The copyright owner has the right to sue for damages and lost profits, or could elect statutory damages of up to $5,000 for non-commercial infringements and up to $20,000 for commercial infringement. In addition, the infringer may be subject to up to five years in jail and fines of up to $1 million. In this case, however, it is unlikely the infringer will be subject to jail time and fines given the nature of the infringement. If Fresh TV Inc. were to pursue litigation, they would likely file against YouTube itself, and not the individual who posted the video. While they could sue the individual, it is unlikely they would recover much in terms of damages from the individual. Fresh TV Inc. would likely be granted injunction, for the copyrighted information to be removed, and there is potential to recover damages.
Potential Defence:
As aforementioned, Youtube consistently makes an effort to take down content that poses copyright infringement risks. However, their special business of enabling anyone, anywhere, to post any content does make it difficult to mitigate the risks completely. This problem becomes exponentially more challenging when the sheer volume of content Youtube facilitates is considered. For example, in 2014, it was estimated that 300 hours of new video content was uploaded onto Youtube every single minute.
Therefore, if Youtube can highlight that the systems they have in place effectively mitigate these copyright risks to the best of their abilities - like their world-class referencing database (with over 35 million files available for cross-referencing) - this may provide a basis for defense.
Sources:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=v46VB8VZF1g
www.theverge.com/2014/7/21/5924405/youtube-star-michelle-...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viacom_International_Inc._v._YouTub....
sbinfocanada.about.com/od/insurancelegalissues/a/copyrigh...
www.statisticbrain.com/youtube-statistics/
intellectual-property.legalhelp.org/copyrights/defenses-a...