Linking to Copyright videos on veoh, dailymotion...

I would also ask the owner of the video to remove the place where it says embed... or they don't have a case
I get this all the time... if they take off the embed part of a video then the video doesn't work... easy as that. (unless I go onto DL'ing it another way, then I'm just asking for trouble)

they can remove the embed option by going into their videos and editing them. Once they do that, they probably will have a case but honestly, I doubt it. Youtube is a public site, are they paying youtube to host their video? If they are then they have a case.

1 more thing, I had a complaint and a guy asked me to remove his video, I told him I would and I did, I later wrote him and said..
if you don't want people to link to your video go in and take out the embed part... he was happy and apologised to me.... he then went on to say he doesn't mind now if I link to him it makes his video more popular with backlinks...

people are strange I tell you.

 

I think you are missing the point. Someone other than the copyright owner is taking their content and uploading it to various sites. This is being done without their permission.

Just because you may not have been the one who stole it and posted it, you can still be held liable for contributing to the infringement. The OP's has been notified that their copyrighted material is not legally being posted on youtube and other sites, however, he keeps linking to the videos - perhaps when one copy gets deleted, he puts up a new link to another stolen copy. This is what is subjects him to legal liability.

 

oooo thats a whole new can of worms

 

Move to Panama

 

I wont repeat myself.
It becomes a "yes or no" game.
As Jacob and i mentioned, we can truly tell you for now that there is nothing to be afraid of, in the current situation, if you host it in The Netherlands.
I am a private person here and Jacob have a hostingcompany (or is involved).
I have nothing to do with Jacob, its just we both are Dutch.

We just tell you the truth here, and when i talk about myself, i would NEVER advise anyone in a bad way!
I wont bring anyone into problems but just give an honest comment.

And please @MJEWEL and people like him, dont start talking about USA law.
I can talk hours about the mistakes, stupidness etc. about the USA law.
But thats offtopic and i might be banned if i spit the truth here.
Thats right... no one like the truth if it hurts them

 

I love Panama because of their anonymous Trusts

 

I don't care where you are from - every place has stupid people who make stupid posts. Every post you make gives bad advice - you sound like someone who is very young and is just throwing up nonsense and hoping you get something right. US law certainly applies if that is where the infringement took place. You can't skirt what you did after the fact.

 

If there is one who's stupid here and acting gay then it must be you.
It seems you cant bring up any respect for others opinion and other experience.
Its the typically USA behave, "We are the best, We have everything, I have it more nicely than my neighbour, I know it better" and so on...
Your post doesnt even make ANY sense so you better search a job or go back to school.

 

It is not a matter of a personal superiority complex. It's just that your answer is incorrect. If you can provide evidence to the contrary please do so, but personal attacks won't get you anywhere.

 

Who's starting personal attacks here?
Well, the OP ask anyones opinion and a few people reply.
2 members who reply are Dutch, and say their vision and things about the Dutch law.
But it seems you USA guys knows everything better, even you dont know anything about our law.
Probably you guys know more about the Dutch law than Dutch lawyers, so i suggest you to start an own law consultancy here.

Its really sad to see people acting like this here, posting useless comments.
Also very sad that a guy who have over 3000 posts doesnt show any respect for someone else's opinion and thoughts.
I feel so sad for you man......

 

By the way, im out of here.
These useless discussion wont help the OP at all.
God bless you all!

 

The OP isn't under the jurisdiction of Dutch law, he is under jurisdiction of American law. The nationality of the posters is irrelevant to any discussion.

 

what is that???

 

search g00gle or Wikipedia "trust company".

Well, for all those wiseguys here i have a special present

Here the paper of the court case between Veoh and IO:

www.docstoc.com/docs/1081864/Veoh-vs-IO

That means:

ITS NOT ILLEGAL TO EMBED/LINK TO VIDEO'S

thats spoken by a USA judge, so all those wiseguys who like to argue with me better read this!!!

 

OK. So, now that the flame war seems to be over, the OP still needs a definitive answer. Here it is.

In the US, Title 17 USC Section 512 Limitations on liability relating to material online is the applicable law. It states, in part:

"(d) Information Location Tools. — A service provider shall not be liable for monetary relief, or, except as provided in subsection (j), for injunctive or other equitable relief, for infringement of copyright by reason of the provider referring or linking users to an online location containing infringing material or infringing activity, by using information location tools, including a directory, index, reference, pointer, or hypertext link, if the service provider —

(1)(A) does not have actual knowledge that the material or activity is infringing;

(B) in the absence of such actual knowledge, is not aware of facts or circumstances from which infringing activity is apparent; or

(C) upon obtaining such knowledge or awareness, acts expeditiously to remove, or disable access to, the material;

(2) does not receive a financial benefit directly attributable to the infringing activity, in a case in which the service provider has the right and ability to control such activity; and

(3) upon notification of claimed infringement as described in subsection (c)(3), responds expeditiously to remove, or disable access to, the material that is claimed to be infringing or to be the subject of infringing activity, except that, for purposes of this paragraph, the information described in subsection (c)(3)(A)(iii) shall be identification of the reference or link, to material or activity claimed to be infringing, that is to be removed or access to which is to be disabled, and information reasonably sufficient to permit the service provider to locate that reference or link."​

What this means is that as a "service provider" (a provider of content to others via the internet), you're only liable for content or LINKING to content, if you have notice that the content is infringing and you don't remove the content/link.

So, while you're not the actual host of the content, you have now received notice of the copyright violation and need to remove the links to the content to avoid liability. Sounds weird to some, I'm sure, but that's the so-called "black letter law". No court needs to rule on this to get clarification.

As for moving your site host to somewhere offshore, you still will have the problem that YOU are based in the US and thus must comply with US law since you can be sued here. Sure... the server might stay up forever since some foreign jurisdictions won't enforce a US court judgment, but that will just increase the financial penalty that you have to pay.

Oh, and for the record, Denmark and Norway (and all of the other Nordic countries: Iceland, Sweden, Finland) are members of the Berne Convention. Which means that they have agreed to enforce the Copyright laws of other Berne Convention countries within their borders.

"Works originating in one of the contracting States (that is, works the author of which is a national of such a State or works which were first published in such a State) must be given the same protection in each of the other contracting States as the latter grants to the works of its own nationals (principle of “national treatment”)."​

So, moving your content to a server in one of those countries isn't going to do you much good at all, regardless.

Sorry if this isn't the answer you want to hear.

~Jeff

 

YES but only because they didnt go out and find the links themselves, they are like youtube users agree to there policies and then liability is taken off them, google mpaa win and see what comes up....

 

I think you might want to re-read your own "evidence" as to why Veoh had no liability... IO didn't provide the take-down notice as required by the act (page 3, lines 19-21; page 20, lines 22-27 and page 21, lines 1-2).

Since the OP received a take-down notice, this case won't help him.

In fact, if the OP follows your advice and they don't take "timely appropriate action" to remove the links, they're going to be potentially liable.

So, while it's nice and easy for you to tell the OP that they're fine and to ignore the take-down notice, that ease comes with the knowledge that you're not going to be liable regardless of what the OP actually does in response.

~Jeff

 

I repeat to you Americans now for the last time, our Dutch law is different than the American law. It is different in a way that it is the place that HOSTS the files that is responsible. NO ONE ELSE:

You can link to whatever you want, Youtube has to take care of taking it down as they now also mingle their normal videos with copyrighted content. We cannot act as the law for Youtube and we cannot decide for Youtube wich videos they keep up. According to what you people say we are required to screen every link to Youtube 24/7?

Youtube must react, they have got the 1000s of people working on staff there. They can also do a search term, but instead they waste their time on removing the little bit of free speech that is still on there. Like the censorship scandal of the Ron Paul comments and videos.

 

If thats the case then why has the mpaa sued owners of movie linking sites hosted in dutch???

 

If you sue someone it does not mean people are instantly convicted. Once again, we are not PRO copyright theft, but we believe first the SOURCE must be taken down. Don´t hate the player, hate the game!

There are also 1000s of servers, literally moving 100s of terrabytes of warez every day using BINARIES on newsgroups. Ever heard of NZB´s? They should take the source first, not the small users.

Much regards,