Viacom sues Google over YouTube clips

update Viacom on Tuesday slapped YouTube and parent company Google with a lawsuit, accusing the wildly popular video-sharing site of "massive intentional copyright infringement" and seeking more than $1 billion in damages.

The complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, contends that nearly 160,000 unauthorized clips of Viacom's entertainment programming have been available on YouTube and that these clips have been viewed more than 1.5 billion times. (PDF: Viacom's complaint.)

Viacom, an entertainment giant that owns Paramount Pictures, DreamWorks and a number of cable channels, said it has also asked the court for an injunction to halt the alleged copyright infringement.

"YouTube appropriates the value of creative content on a massive scale for YouTube's benefit without payment or license," Viacom said in its complaint. "YouTube's brazen disregard of the intellectual-property laws fundamentally threatens not just plaintiffs but the economic underpinnings of one of the most important sectors of the United States economy."

The lawsuit represents a serious escalation in the conflict with YouTube, and it is also the most significant legal challenge over intellectual-property rights to video sharing's No. 1 site. But some industry observers doubt that this will embolden other entertainment companies to mount their own court challenges.

Google downplayed the legal challenge and extolled the benefits to content creators that it sees in YouTube.

"We have not received the lawsuit but are confident that YouTube has respected the legal rights of copyright holders and believe the courts will agree," Google said in a statement. "YouTube is great for users and offers real opportunities to rights holders: the opportunity to interact with users; to promote their content to a young and growing audience; and to tap into the online-advertising market. We will certainly not let this suit become a distraction to the continuing growth and strong performance of YouTube and its ability to attract more users (and) more traffic, and (to) build a stronger community."

Google, which acquired YouTube last October for $1.65 billion, recognized the possibility that the video site would one day be forced to wage lengthy court battles. The company has reportedly set aside a sum of money to fund legal costs.

Meanwhile, Google has successfully negotiated licensing deals with many entertainment companies, including Warner Music Group, CBS and most recently, the BBC.

"This is Viacom and Google in a negotiation that hasn't gone so smoothly...Viacom is just really turning up the heat."
--Edward Naughton, partner, Holland & Knight

Some advocacy groups suggested that the "fair use" doctrine of copyright law, which allows the noncommercial reproduction of works for purposes like criticism, comment, news reporting and research, should protect YouTube users that post short clips or mainstream-media works.

"Simply (defining material as) 'unauthorized' does not make its use illegal," Gigi Sohn, president of the advocacy group Public Knowledge, said in a statement.

"I don't think this is the start of a whole series of litigation," said Edward Naughton, intellectual-property partner at Holland & Knight. "I think this is Viacom and Google in a negotiation that hasn't gone so smoothly, so it has gone to litigation...Viacom is just really turning up the heat."

Although legitimate copyright concerns come into play, Viacom's action is "probably about a large company that would prefer the old status quo, where they had most of the control (over their content distribution), and they didn't cede it to companies like YouTube and Google," said Jeffrey Lindgren, an intellectual-property lawyer at Morgan Miller Blair in San Francisco.

"I would expect some (suits from other companies to) follow," he added, "but I don't know (that) this is really going to lead to the onslaught that is the end of Google and YouTube."

Tech-related YouTube clips

Viacom isn't the only entertainment conglomerate yet to partner with the Google division. Some executives have been very critical of YouTube's practices, including Jeff Zucker, the CEO of NBC.

An NBC Universal representative declined to comment Tuesday on whether the company has plans for litigation against YouTube similar to that of Viacom. Twentieth Century Fox Film spokesman Chris Alexander, meanwhile, said the Viacom complaint is far more sweeping than any action his company has pursued against the video-sharing site.

Earlier this year, the News Corp. unit subpoenaed YouTube for the identities of two users who had allegedly posted as-yet-unaired episodes of the popular show 24 because it was "interested in protecting full episodes of our series that we have yet to monetize," he said.

"We take protection of our copyrights very seriously, and we look at them on a case-by-case basis," Alexander said, but he added that he was unaware of any companywide policy governing clips, as opposed to entire episodes, posted to video-sharing sites.

Viacom last month caused a stir by demanding that YouTube remove 100,000 infringing clips. Some observers shrugged, calling it a negotiating tactic by Viacom and predicted that the two would eventually become partners.

Nonetheless, Viacom says in its complaint that YouTube failed to prevent its users from posting pirated material to the site. San Bruno, Calif.-based YouTube will remove clips that feature unauthorized material only after it receives a takedown notice from the copyright holder, Viacom said.

This, many entertainment executives say, is unfair. YouTube's policy, which the company says complies with copyright law, forces many of the biggest studios to devote time and money toward policing someone else's site. Often, no sooner than a company asks YouTube to take down a clip, users post a new version of the same clip.

"YouTube has deliberately chosen not to take reasonable precautions to deter the rampant infringement on its site," Viacom said in its complaint. "Because YouTube directly profits from the availability of popular infringing works on its site, it has decided to shift the burden entirely onto copyright owners to monitor the YouTube site on a daily or hourly basis to detect infringing videos.

A source inside Viacom said the company would likely have not filed suit, had it not repeatedly found clips that it had already asked to be taken down.

"More and more of the company's resources are going to this," the source said. "The company basically is paying for an entire new department to watch YouTube."

Google lawyers said they are relying on a 1998 law called the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) to shield them from liability. One provision of that statute generally says companies are off the hook if they remove copyrighted content promptly when it is brought to their attention.

Internet services may only benefit from that so-called "safe harbor" if they also meet a four-pronged test. Those conditions include not being "aware of facts or circumstances from which infringing activity is apparent" and not receiving "financial benefit directly attributable to the infringing activity."

Viacom in its complaint argues Google and YouTube do not qualify for that relief, but Glenn Brown, an in-house product counsel for the merged companies, said he was confident their actions were on solid legal ground. "We meet those requirements and go above and beyond them in helping content providers identify copyright infringements," he said in a telephone interview Tuesday afternoon.

YouTube was also expected late last year to release a technology that would automatically weed out copyright content from the site. NBC's Zucker and others in Hollywood have accused the company of dragging its feet. Viacom said that only when an agreement is reached will YouTube begin safeguarding an entertainment company's copyright property.

"YouTube has deliberately withheld the application of available copyright protection measures in order to coerce rights holders to grant it licenses on favorable terms," according to the complaint.

CNET News.com's Elinor Mills contributed to this report.

More from News.com on this story's topics

Lawsuits

Create an email alert | RSS feed

Video

Create an email alert | RSS feed

See more CNET content tagged:
Viacom Inc., YouTube, entertainment company, Google Inc., intellectual property

Add a Comment (Log in or register) 52 comments (Page 1 of 3)
Subject line:
by Dr. B March 13, 2007 7:21 AM PDT
Didn't Youtube already take down all the Viacom clips they know
about when asked?
Reply to this comment View all 3 replies
Speculation!
by wbenton March 13, 2007 7:22 AM PDT
Anybody wanna bet that Microsoft doesn't have a back hand in here somewhere?

There is a bigger story here... but will CNET get to it first?

The suspense is killing me... (* CHUCKLE )*

FWIW
Reply to this comment View reply
Windfall
by TomMariner March 13, 2007 7:51 AM PDT
The first rule if you are going to sue someone is "do they have deep pockets?"

If the answer to rule one is yes, one does not need to even consider points 2 through 10 which deal with trivialities like whether anyone was harmed. The prospect of having a "jury of peers" consisting of housewives and retired sanitation workers (both honorable professions) located in Viacom's home town to make a decision on a billion dollar windfall to their local company would seem to motivate Google to consider a nuisance payment.

Of course, then everyone who has a home video on YouTube would ask for their piece of the action so one hopes that Qoogle is employing squads of lawyers to keep their company. Of course all of funds spent on attorneys against attorneys would never have been put to better use -- like new product development or hiring the best and the brightest.

A mediocre lawyer can beat a great techie hands down, any day!
Reply to this comment
Better get use too it Viacom
by kyle172 March 13, 2007 8:15 AM PDT
I've never seen such cry babies on my whole life. I don't think youtube is in violation of any degree. Most of the videos are centralized in one place it's not like people are sending them one to another such as like file sharing
Reply to this comment
How much
by Lindy01 March 13, 2007 8:17 AM PDT
will the purchase of youtube really cost Google in the end? Didnt Mark Cuban predict this???

Youtube and myspace are human garbage collections on the Internet.

I hope they win.....it could not happen to a better company.....save maybe Sony.
Reply to this comment
Viacom is full of it
by unknown unknown March 13, 2007 8:17 AM PDT
As usually content companies think that when someone doesn't do things exactly they way they want, it's illegal. Google as far as we know has fulfilled it's obligations under the DMCA to promptly remove material upon receiving a valid notice. Hell they even removed material that didn't belong to Viacom because Viacom could be bother to verify the stuff they wanted removed was actually infringing. They've even complied with requests to identify individuals who post material.
Reply to this comment View reply
I think Dvorak made the most appropriate comment about this...
by wfseube March 13, 2007 8:32 AM PDT
at http://www.dvorak.org/blog/?p=9584

Idiots.
Reply to this comment
Theft
by blmlwd March 13, 2007 8:35 AM PDT
What YouTube is trying to do is the same as if I stole my
neighbours stuff, and then said, "Look, all you had to say is that
you want it back..." YouTube is knowingly engaging in theft, hoping
that most companies and people won't know it's actually been
stolen.
Reply to this comment View all 2 replies
Free advertistment
by The Vanish March 13, 2007 8:49 AM PDT
Try to give Viacom free advertisement and what happens? You get sued for it. The cost of the ad is probably into the $100000 but over 1.5 billion that had seen the ad and the cost per person dropped into the pennies. Why stop it? However, its fine with me. I haven't seen the Ad nor do I know what they are selling. I guest I won't know... haha, I won't be buying anything from Viacom.
Reply to this comment
MMMhmm
by Phil_Canyon March 13, 2007 8:52 AM PDT
You tube is great when they want to hock their hokey wares for free but don't want anyone else to do put what they LIKE on you tube to share. I don't understand why we have to police everybody. How the hell are we to have an open expression free site when someone is always having to work at controlling everyone.
Reply to this comment
1 | 2 | 3 | Next 10 Comments >>
Powered by Jive Software
advertisement
RSS Feeds
Add headlines from CNET News.com to your homepage or feedreader.
Google
Yahoo
MSN
More feeds available in our RSS feed index.

Latest tech news headlines

Most Popular Stories
Google's search secret: It gets rid of you
Developer creates copy-paste tech for iPhone
Palm Treo Pro: Not digging it
Will Wright on the origins of 'Spore'
Intel says it has 'first silicon' for next mobile chip
Markets

Market news, charts, SEC filings, and more

Related quotes

  Symbol Lookup
advertisement
On The Insider: Is This the End of The Hills?
Advanced
search
Advanced
search
Visit other CBS Interactive sites