<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:osnews="http://www.osnews.com/rss2#">
	<channel>
		<title>OSNews: </title>
		<link>http://www.osnews.com/story/23025/Google_s_Statement_on_the_YouTube-Viacom_Court_Case</link>
		<description>Exploring the Future of Computing</description>
		<language>en-us</language>
		<copyright>Copyright 2001-2013, David Adams</copyright>
		<webMaster>adam+nospam@osnews.com</webMaster>
		<lastBuildDate>Wed, 19 Jun 2013 05:21:15 GMT</lastBuildDate>
		
		<item>
			<title>Sick of not just Viacom, but WMG too</title>
			<link>http://www.osnews.com/thread?414155</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.osnews.com/thread?414155</guid>
			<description>If what Ms. Levine says is true, I think Viacom is just shooting itself in the foot.  Damned hypocritical and deceitful, if you ask me.<br />
<br />
I don't have a problem if Viacom (or Warner Media Group) discovers that there is demand for something, uploads the content (which is often of better video quality), and then has the inferior user uploads removed.  I don't have a problem if they require users include links to purchasable content, even if it be from the company directly.<br />
<br />
What I do have a problem with is them removing content that would not be available to users otherwise-- and then never providing an alternative.  They simply encourage darknets, file sharing networks et al that way, I believe... all the usual arguments against DRM and such definitely applies here.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 05:46:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (jaklumen)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>lol</title>
			<link>http://www.osnews.com/thread?414166</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.osnews.com/thread?414166</guid>
			<description><div class="cquote">.. In fact, some of the very clips that Viacom is suing us over were actually uploaded by Viacom itself. </div><br />
there's so much more.. uploading from Kinko's? lol<br />
<br />
While I understand why, I wish they wouldn't have given so much credence to the DMCA though.  Yes, do make use of the safe harbor provisions as one would use any kind of technical advantage in a legal battle, but I'm a little disappointed at the lip service given to how it's a 'good thing' passed by Congress that benefits society.. *rolleyes*</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 07:27:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (npcomplete)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE: Sick of not just Viacom, but WMG too</title>
			<link>http://www.osnews.com/thread?414280</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.osnews.com/thread?414280</guid>
			<description>It's way worse than that. If this is true, then Viacom could end of in criminal court for fraud and conspiracy.</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 17:56:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (FishB8)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
