Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Piracy The Courts The Internet

Embedding of Copyright Infringing Video Not (Necessarily) a Crime 45

Posted by Soulskill
from the not-that-the-industry-will-take-the-judge's-word-on-it dept.
Social bookmarking site myVidster was the target of a copyright infringement case because it allowed its users to embed videos from other sites on its pages. Some of the videos infringed upon various copyrights, and the plaintiff in the case was granted a preliminary injunction against myVidster in 2011. Now, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals has overturned the injunction, saying that merely embedding copyright-infringing videos hosted elsewhere does not necessarily contribute to the infringement. Judge Posner wrote in the opinion (PDF), "myVidster is giving web surfers addresses where they can find entertainment. By listing plays and giving the name and address of the theaters where they are being performed, the New Yorker is not performing them. It is not 'transmitting or communicating' them. ... Is myVidster doing anything different? ... myVidster doesn't touch the data stream, which flows directly from one computer to another, neither being owned or operated by myVidster." However, the door is not shut on this issue: "Flava may be entitled to additional preliminary injunctive relief as well, if it can show, as it has not shown yet, that myVidster’s service really does contribute significantly to infringement of Flava’s copyrights." If myVidster was actively encouraging the sharing, hosting the videos itself, or profiting from their showing, the ruling likely would have been different.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Embedding of Copyright Infringing Video Not (Necessarily) a Crime

Comments Filter:
  • by Banichi (1255242) on Saturday August 04, 2012 @02:09PM (#40879251)

    >By listing plays and giving the name and address of the theaters where they are being performed, the New Yorker is not performing them. It is not 'transmitting or communicating' them.

    Now, if we can only get the Judge to see the same about torrents.

  • Tort, not crime (Score:4, Insightful)

    by ShanghaiBill (739463) on Saturday August 04, 2012 @02:36PM (#40879427)

    Copyright infringement is not normally considered a crime. It is a tort. People that don't understand the difference between criminal and civil law probably should not be writing headlines for stories about the legal system.

  • by ewanm89 (1052822) on Saturday August 04, 2012 @03:22PM (#40879799) Homepage

    Does the video use less bandwidth when embedded on YouTube.com vs. some other site? Or does the stream itself use identical bandwidth but the page load use less because its not loading all the rest of it like the logo and comments.

    Some video hosting services, youtube being the obvious example, actively encourage embedding as they still get the fees from the advertising embedded in the flash video player or video stream.

  • by rohan972 (880586) on Saturday August 04, 2012 @06:15PM (#40881211)

    Copyright infringement is a crime, no matter the way of committing it.

    In most cases of non-commercial infringement this is incorrect. Most non-commercial copyright infringement is a breach of civil law, not criminal law. If caught you may be sued, you will not be arrested, you will not be charged with a crime, you will not be convicted of a crime, you will not have a criminal record. You could be stripped of assets to pay for any judgements against you.

Thufir's a Harkonnen now.

Working...