MPAA's stance on recent court rulings here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8qcccZy03sReally that's a way of life for them.
Less than two weeks ago, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals handed down an important ruling in Viacom's lawsuit against Google for massive alleged copyright infringements on the YouTube network...
...Late last week, in the midst of a battle with cyberlocker Hotfile, the MPAA delivered its own interpretation. The studio's reading then got a response from Hotfile's attorneys, who wrote that the plaintiffs were attempting to put a "brave face" on what was said at the Second Circuit.
I think the thrust of all this centres around the DCMA 'safe harbour' provision and that providers are not entitled to it's protection if they have knowledge of the infringement. The MPAA's arguments put forward that Hotfile is deliberately unaware
"while service providers have no freestanding duty to monitor for infringing material, a service provider can be found willfully blind where it was aware of a high probability of the fact in dispute and consciously avoided confirming that fact.”
Check it out here
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/viacom-google-youtube-hotfile-mpaa-lawsuit-312410 Theres a few more points they make about the viacom/google ruling.
