About 10 years ago, in order to listen to one or two tracks, consumers should buy the CD with entire tracks. According to these needs, Napster had started to provide p2p services. Today, in order to watch the 2 or 3 minutes part of big star, consumers should buy the whole digital contents - music, television programs or movies.
In fact, these issues result from the lack of company’s business model which can meet consumer’s various preferences and needs. The related laws tend to follow the new business model with some time gap. Thus, unless and until the related laws are established, it is likely to be hot issue whether or not the new model is legitimate.
Like Napster and similar cases, YOUTUBE case is also likely to be in favor of the copyright holders, in that companies such as YouTube increasingly cannibalize the revenues of content creators like Viacom. However, since 1998, DMCA has enacted. Therefore, the new issue is whether or not YOUTUBE can be protected under the safe harbor of DMCA provision. The one thing that we can predict with substantial probability is that court cannot declare the YOUTUBE’s services illegal easily in pursuit of Napster or Grokster cases.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment