
YouTube Defense: Viacom "Secretly Uploaded" Content, And They Tried To Buy Us - fiaz
http://techcrunch.com/2010/03/18/youtube-viacom-secretly-uploading-content/
======
NathanKP
Viacom has already failed in this lawsuit. If YouTube can prove conclusively
that Viacom uploaded the videos then tried to sue YouTube then there is no way
they can win.

~~~
dschobel
At a company the size of Viacom it's not hard to imagine that one hand
(marketing) was not talking to the other (legal).

If it were the legal people uploading content to plant evidence, that's
another matter, but I don't think have one department out of sorts with your
legal position necessarily undermines the case (tenuous as it was to begin
with).

By analogy, think of a software company which has one dept. that steals its
tools, does that preclude the company from defending its own IP? Morally,
maybe, but I don't think you waive your legal rights by breaking the law by
default.

IANAL but I've never heard such of such a principle.

~~~
brown9-2
Even if one hand is not aware of the other, what they did goes far beyond
innocent and accidental uploading - it sounds like a pretty systemic policy:

 _It hired no fewer than 18 different marketing agencies to upload its content
to the site. It deliberately “roughed up” the videos to make them look stolen
or leaked. It opened YouTube accounts using phony email addresses. It even
sent employees to Kinko’s to upload clips from computers that couldn’t be
traced to Viacom. And in an effort to promote its own shows, as a matter of
company policy Viacom routinely left up clips from shows that had been
uploaded to YouTube by ordinary users. Executives as high up as the president
of Comedy Central and the head of MTV Networks felt “very strongly” that clips
from shows like The Daily Show and The Colbert Report should remain on
YouTube._

~~~
Nwallins
All of that can be explained by attempts at viral marketing. They don't want
be 'outed' as the source, not to sabotage YouTube but because the viral kids
won't promote BigCo.

I don't know if this will be Viacom's position, but it's one that Google
should be prepared for.

~~~
brown9-2
It wouldn't matter. Viacom is a single legal entity. It can't both willingly
participate in an act and then sue someone for allowing the act to happen.

~~~
mfr
IANAL, etc., but I believe you have it exactly right. The principle in
question is the Clean Hands Doctrine
(<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clean_hands>).

In short, an entity can not seek an equitable remedy if they themselves have
acted in bad faith.

------
xsmasher
Is that really a defense, outside the court of public opinion? Not every Daily
Show clip was uploaded by Viacom, and it's not infringement when Viacom does
it.

~~~
bobbyi
If they win the case, the amount of money they get will be highly related to
how much "damage" youtube did to them.

The fact that they found it valuable to have their content on youtube
undermines their arguments that youtube is causing them grievous harm.

~~~
modeless
Is that really true? Seems to me like the monetary awards in copyright cases
these days have very little to do with actual damages; see the recent P2P
filesharing cases where the damages were over a million dollars for a double-
digit number of files shared.

------
Periodic
I think what this case highlights best is the power of a little bit for free.
Viacom knew that user uploaded clips on YouTube was a valuable marketing
strategy, despite being at odds with current copyright law and potentially
hurting the strength of copyright in the long run.

------
hristov
I hope this lawsuit goes on because Hulu was obviously an created for the
purposes of the lawsuit. I.e., it was created to destroy the argument that the
content companies brought this on themselves because they are slow to innovate
and to bring their content to the net where their clients want to see it.

When this lawsuit ends, Hulu will likely switch to a pay model for many shows.

~~~
pavs
This has nothing to do with Hulu.

Two things.

1) Viacom removed its shows from Hulu earlier this month. [1]

2) Hulu is going under paywall, announced few months ago. [2]

[1] [http://paidcontent.org/article/419-viacom-taking-its-
laughs-...](http://paidcontent.org/article/419-viacom-taking-its-laughs-off-
hulu-march-9-last-day-for-stewart-colbert-/)

[2] [http://www.businessinsider.com/hulus-paywall-on-the-way-
afte...](http://www.businessinsider.com/hulus-paywall-on-the-way-after-
nbcucomcast-deal-2010-2)

~~~
rortian
Hulu isn't going behind a paywall. They are providing content that they do not
currently offer behind a paywall.

------
ashishbharthi
link to the document released by TechCrunch pertaining to the case
[http://techcrunch.com/2010/03/18/read-the-just-unsealed-
docu...](http://techcrunch.com/2010/03/18/read-the-just-unsealed-documents-
from-the-youtubeviacom-case-here/)

------
yanw
Apparently many of the videos Viacom is suing over were uploaded by them as a
marketing ploy. I don't see any merit in this lawsuit.

