|  | ||||||||||||||||||||
| | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Chilling Effects Clearinghouse > Piracy or Copyright Infringement > Weather Reports > YouTube Threatens Legal Action Against Host of Video Download Tool | Location: https://www.chillingeffects.org/piracy/weather.cgi?WeatherID=571 |
In an ironic twist, YouTube demandsTechCrunch remove tool which allows users to downl, Samuelson Law, Public Policy and Technology Clinic, November 17, 2006
Abstract: As part of its efforts to reduce copyright infringement of its site, YouTube sends TechCrunch a Cease and Desist notice demanding that owner Michael Arrington remove a tool that enables users to download streaming videos hosted by YouTube.
In an ironic turnaround, YouTube, the internet’s premiere video sharing website which lets users upload, view, and share video clips has sent a Cease and Desist letter to TechCrunch, a weblog dedicated to “obsessively profiling and reviewing new Internet products and companies.” TechCrunch, run by Michael Arrington, recently created a tool that allows users download videos from YouTube onto a computer and transfer them onto an iPod or similar device.
The Cease and Desist letter, sent by YouTube’s attorneys at law firm Wilson Sonsini, accuses TechCrunch’s Video Download Tool of violating YouTube’s Terms of Use as well as a number of state and federal laws – most notably, copyright infringement. YouTube alleges that the making of unauthorized copies of the videos on its servers infringes the copyright of YouTube users’ videos. The letter also alleges that TechCrunch’s tool constitutes an “unfair business practice” under California law, and that TechCrunch’s unauthorized use of the YouTube trade name constitutes false advertising under the Lanham Act.
A number of other sites, such as Save YouTube, GooTube FLV Retriever, and KeepVid provide tools similar to TechCrunch’s download tool. It is unclear whether similar Cease and Desist notices have been sent to these sites or whether YouTube intends to pursue legal action against such companies. As Arrington notes, "Cease and Desist letters are often sent with no intention of follow up legal action, even if they are ignored. They are simply a way to show that you have made a good faith effort to protect your legal rights."
YouTube is no stranger to allegations of copyright infringement; numerous clips have been removed from the site over the past couple of months in response to notices of infringement sent by copyright holders. Earlier this year YouTube was sued by Robert Tur, a Los Angeles journalist, for copyright infringement of his video footage of the 1992 Los Angeles riots that subsequently found its way onto YouTube. And in October of this year, YouTube removed nearly 30,000 files from its site after receiving a notice of infringement from the Japan Society for Rights of Authors, Composers and Publishers. Recently, YouTube placed a ten-minute length limit on most videos uploaded to its site in an effort to reduce copyright infringement.
In his blog, Arrington maintains that his tool doesn’t violate YouTube’s Terms of Use, which states: “If you download or print a copy of the content for personal use, you must retain all copyright and other proprietary notices contained therein.” YouTube’s attorney sent Arrington a follow-up email clarifying its position, noting that YouTube is a streaming-only service and that their Terms of Use do not permit users to download the videos hosted on its site. Despite his belief that his tool does not violate YouTube's Terms of Use, Arrington states that he is “likely to remove the tool to preserve my relationship with the company.”
TechCrunch's blog entry on the notice, including a copy of the Cease and Desist letter can be found at http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/11/15/huh-youtube-sends-techcrunch-a-cease-desist/
|
|
