TechCrunch:Expanded DMCA Still Has Limits

An anonymous reader writes "Last week, in a blow to the content industry, the Ninth Circuit granted Veoh a pyrrhic victory against Universal Music Group and clarified the scope of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act's safe harbor provisions for online service providers. By adopting a position taken by the Second Circuit in Viacom v. YouTube, the decision harmonized the law in two intellectually influential jurisdictions and set the standard in New York and California, national hubs for content creation and technological innovation. Going forward, tech startups will have more room to innovate while facing decreased risk of crippling financial liability. An article by two IP lawyers published today in TechCrunch simplifies and explains the scope of safe harbor protection in light of these rulings.

Re:Pyrrhic victory

[Warhawke]

Pyrrhus was an aggressor against Rome who spent exorbitant sums of money to achieve small victories that ultimately led to his losing the war. Veoh was not an aggressor and was bankrupted before the victory could be achieved. In fact, the RIAA and MPAA could be said to be Pyrrhic victors considering how much they spend in litigation without any profit from collection. The proper expression here would be "hollow victory."

Re:Legal system is broken, NOT DMCA.

[Anonymous Coward]

DMCA is completely fine.

The DMCA is what prohibits people from circumventing DRM, and what allows DMCA takedown abuses. DMCA takedown notices simply shouldn't exist.

One of the only good things about the DMCA is the safe harbor provision.

The DMCA is completely fine? Maybe if you're a sociopathic fuck.

Re:Pyrrhic victory

[Attila Dimedici]

While you are correct that Pyrrhus was, more or less, the aggressor against Rome (he initially began his campaign against Rome in defense of a city which Rome attacked), the term pyrrhic victory refers to any victory in which the winner of the battle ends up losing the war.