Viacom’s $1 billion lawsuit against Google over copyright infringement on YouTube is coming to a head, with a court battle likely to ensue sometime this year. For now, the accusations made by both sides have been released. And they pull no punches whatsoever.
A Brief History Lesson
can be traced right back to May 2005 before YouTube was under the protective wing of Google. A clip from Paramount Pictures’ Twin Towers was uploaded to the site, and Viacom demanded to know who the uploader was.
In October 2006 YouTube made a deal with Viacom to syndicate content. Then Google bought YouTube for $1.65 billion. February 2007 saw Viacom retract the previous deal and pull everything off the site.
March 2007 saw Viacom sue Google for 63,000 counts of copyright infringement, for which it was seeking $1 billion in damages. Google argues that YouTube is protected under the Safe Harbor provision of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.
BetaNews has the full timeline with many more twists and turns. But it all builds to this point when Google and Viacom’s documents pertaining to the court case have been released. And they make for interesting reading, to say the least.
Google’s Claims
Google claims that Viacom wanted it both ways, continuously uploading its content to YouTube while publicly rallying against it. Google claims Viacom uploaded roughed up versions of videos so they looked stolen, hiring marketing agencies to do the dirty work.
Google claims that Viacom even uploaded many of the clips which it is now suing over. And maintains that it is protected by the Digital Millennium Copyright Act as it removes videos suspected of infringing copyrights.
Google also makes the claim that Viacom was interested in acquiring YouTube at one point.
Viacom’s Claims
Viacom dismisses the DMCA defense as it insists YouTube is more than just a passive content host and is therefore responsible for what videos were being uploaded to the site.
What’s more, Viacom also accuses YouTube’s founders of at the very least turning a blind eye to copyright infringing clips, suggesting that traffic was sought by any means necessary in order to ensure a quick sale. Viacom also claims Jawed Karim (YouTube co-founder) himself uploaded infringing videos, using email correspondence between the founders as evidence.
In essence, Viacom argues that YouTube was “intentionally built on infringement,” and deserves no leniency in court despite the measures put in place to clean up the site since the lawsuit was issued.
Conclusions
The documents feel very much like each side is attempting to score points from the other. And it’s almost inevitable that the case will now end up in court.
The sides have until April 30 to file opposing arguments to each other’s motions, with a trial then set to take place later this year. And it’ll be a trial whose verdict could set a landmark in terms of copyright owners vs. online video sites.
