What is Digg?Sponsored by HowLifeWorks
New Food Sprinkle Convinces the Brain to Stop Over-Eating view!
howlifeworks.com - How sophisticated scents are helping people control their appetite and lose weight
115 Comments
- cg4et, on 07/19/2008, -1/+108Anyone who has the courage to go up against corporate America to stand up for the rights of individuals has my respect.
- and303, on 07/20/2008, -0/+92I was going to buy that CD today...but I find this short, distorted, low-bit, distant, and unrecognizable clip of it just as good. Stumbling upon this article saved me $12!
- snoop396, on 07/19/2008, -10/+90wow, universal must be getting desperate to file such a trivial lawsuit
- krnldmp, on 07/20/2008, -0/+73Get real Universal. If anything you owe this woman for accidentally reminding someone that Prince exists.
- Red1Delta, on 07/20/2008, -0/+44http://youtube.com/watch?v=N1KfJHFWlhQ
- Jforsyth89, on 07/20/2008, -1/+41I don't think you understood the article: Universal did not file the lawsuit. They sent the takedown notice to Youtube. The video owner then sued Universal.
- bdogm, on 07/20/2008, -0/+34Oh wow, you can barely hear the music. That is ridiculous.
- inactive, on 07/20/2008, -3/+33It's more Prince than Universal.
- NexAngelus, on 07/19/2008, -1/+31Nice going ms/mrs Lenz! One can only wonder how fast copyright-law would be revised if everyone started to sue the copyright-holders for denying "fair use" of copyrighted materials.
- feureau, on 07/20/2008, -1/+26Lawsuit? THIS… IS… YOUTUBE!!!!!
- AlanFang, on 07/20/2008, -1/+25You mean "Serious Test of the Sanity of Universal Studios".
- SifuMoKung, on 07/20/2008, -3/+23To protest Universal I will be pirating their music and films and giving it away to strangers. This is called "blowback". ***** idiots. This is what you get for making enemies of your clientèle.
- Mrdudeperson, on 07/20/2008, -0/+18Yup. Toughs are some hard core copyright infringers right there.
- christhechris, on 07/20/2008, -0/+15the case relates to her actions and if she had the right to post it. not anything to do with youtube other then it was posted there. She only has to prove she did not profit...
- imacmike, on 07/20/2008, -0/+15I just got bitchslapped by Dr Seuss Enterprises LLC for a video of my brother performing in "Green Eggs and Ham". Shouldn't there be a difference between posting an actual copywritten work such as an SNL clip, and posting an amateur video of a 5 year old retelling his favorite story?
I guess that doesn't qualify as a transformative use?
I want to send a counter notice, but if I loose, I couldn't afford the legal fees. And the good doctor's lawyers are a fair bit better than any I'd be able to hire. - Chainheart, on 07/20/2008, -2/+16"We're sorry, this video is no longer available"
I'm so sick of seeing this on every other video... - inactive, on 07/20/2008, -0/+13If I remember correctly, he went after his biggest fan site for copyright infringement..
- tomarocco, on 07/20/2008, -0/+13***** Prince.
- Jhiaxuz, on 07/20/2008, -1/+14This wouldn't even be relevant if hamburgers ate people and we wore shoes for hats.
- zephyr42, on 07/20/2008, -1/+13He is a pretentious douchebag.... or so it would seem
(**note: I don't actually know this for sure, but that's how it seems to come across 99% of the time) - JBabin3xB, on 07/20/2008, -0/+11that's *****
- objectivist, on 07/20/2008, -0/+11***** Universal
- tama00, on 07/20/2008, -1/+11Whoa some people are pretty greedy.
- alricsca, on 07/20/2008, -0/+10The trap for them is that if they win then they have basically said that whether a person's action in posting a content is a copyright violation or fair use is based on the poster's state of mind when they posted the content and if they lose then they will have to examine every posted bit of material and make a determination about its fair use merits. Notice they are trapped from trying to argue the existence of fair use here because it is so obvious. To do so in this case it would produce public outrage and risk an even more damaging precedent when they lose.
They have no way of really winning this. Their mistake was to go after this person's post at all. It has set up an ideal legal case against them where win or lose we gain a useful precedents against them. - KingGorilla, on 07/20/2008, -0/+9Keep on dancing little baby. Keep on dancing...
- paker, on 07/20/2008, -4/+13Prince's album must be doing pretty bad for a suit as trivial as this one.
- charm803, on 07/20/2008, -1/+9@ zephyr42-
He is a douchebag. One time during a performance, he requested that NO ONE make eye contact with him and that they are only to speak to him IF he speaks to them first..........
I don't know what gave him the grand idea people gave a fvck.....
He's old news. - whatknight, on 07/19/2008, -0/+7hey now. lets be optimistic.
- bjornski, on 07/20/2008, -0/+7Idiot.
- NavS, on 07/20/2008, -0/+6Why don't they sue prince for being in the video?
- alricsca, on 07/20/2008, -1/+7Are you just posting for a flaming?
When schools put videos of class room seminars on line globally where some copyrighted material is displayed or used, is that not supposed to be fair use? South Park, for example, uses parody and public commentary that uses persons' names and their personas and has even gone so far as to describe and comment on the the big alien cult secret of Scientology. Last I checked it was globally televised. Is that not a fair use based right to you? Are you saying it is okay for the media company's to use other peoples work but not a mom? For that matter, without fair use one could not legally quote a person. If something is fair use, how distributed it is should not matter.
You are letting a example of popular media being posed to cloud you to the ramifications of your mode of thinking. What if this where not a video of a baby dancing to a bit of a popular song but a major news event like a shooting at a dance where Prince happen to be playing in the background. Where do you draw the line in your draconian outlook? - cmapes2, on 07/20/2008, -0/+6Thank god the two posters above me have such a great sense of sarcasm...
- DeathRay2K, on 07/20/2008, -0/+6Talk to a lawyer. They can tell you whether you are likely to win or not, and then you can proceed with the assurance that you have a good chance at it.
- norman619, on 07/20/2008, -0/+5You make it sound like YouTube created to clip. It was a clip made my a private citizen for entertainment purposes only. Unless they can make show youtube was somehow paying her they are pissing in the wind. The person who actually made the video does not stand to make anything from it. I predict the little guy will win and then Universal will turn around and try suing youtube using the reasoning you just shared.
- motorpurrr, on 07/20/2008, -2/+7Sue happy people are ruining everything for everyone.
When are they going to make a law against all the excesive sueing? - charm803, on 07/20/2008, -0/+5Prince is such a whiny little b!tch.
If it wasn't for his fans, he would not be where he is....
It's no wonder his former fans turned on him. - cmapes2, on 07/20/2008, -0/+5*kicks copyright infringement lawyer into pit of death*
- charm803, on 07/20/2008, -0/+5Youtube is full of it.
They let Avril's ridiculous song get replayed over and over until it reaches 92,000,000 views and don't want to take it down because they made ad revenue on it.....
Avril has a two million dollar check waiting for her. - tuh2, on 07/20/2008, -0/+4Then why isnt youtube being sued since they are making the money.
- paker, on 07/20/2008, -3/+7I guess his album is doing pretty bad if he files a lawsuit over such a trivial thing as that video.
- tkr2099, on 07/20/2008, -0/+4Negatory, Mom took Universal to court because Universal requested Youtube to remove the video.
- bluesman3535, on 07/20/2008, -1/+5As if that stupid old 80's song still makes money anyway.
- zimmermans, on 07/20/2008, -0/+4Read it over a few times and use a thesaurus if needed.
- ortucis, on 07/20/2008, -0/+4So, the usual eh?
- flashback99, on 07/20/2008, -0/+31.When digg simply doesnt agree with you, there's no need to call 90% of digg users liberal facists.
2. While I agree with your point about Universal, McCain is a bonafide retard so it's highly unlikely people will start blowing his trumpet over here.
3. The RIAA and MPAA has a factual track record of being asshats.
4. Most digg users (let alone people) have NEVER stepped foot in China and hence they don't have a balanced picture and hence associate China solely with human rights abuse (or whatever the biased media writes over here (biased BOTH ways). Pretty much like every non-western country associating America with invading other countries, and installing dummy presidents and general foreign policy douchbaggery.
5. If you'd like to be more objective, don't presume ANYTHING about ANYONE and you'll be fine. - netcropolis, on 07/20/2008, -0/+3I used to like Prince's music... now, he's just a petty little musician living in the dark ages, along with his dinosaur major label that can smell its own extinction is extremely f^cking nigh.
- wexmajor, on 07/20/2008, -0/+3That's... probably the most disgusting thing I've heard all day. Who the ***** are these scumbags?
- diggydougie, on 07/20/2008, -0/+3IP is a farce.
- vacax, on 07/20/2008, -0/+3Someone didn't read the article
- slider121, on 07/20/2008, -0/+3People, there is more than just Prince at stake here. If Universal wins that means ANYTHING copyrighted on You tube can be removed. That means if I wear Nike shows and post a video to You Tube. Nike can claim copyright infrigment and have it removed. There is a BIG difference of posting a clear copyrighted clip of Prince, (A music video) or fair use, Prince playing on the radio in the background.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 120 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is