Comments on: Viacom destroys a $1B opportunity http://montaraventures.com/blog/2007/02/04/viacom-destroys-a-1b-opportunity/ Mike Harding's Blog Thu, 08 Jan 2009 00:22:45 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1 By: mike http://montaraventures.com/blog/2007/02/04/viacom-destroys-a-1b-opportunity/#comment-5557 mike Sun, 04 Feb 2007 20:29:26 +0000 http://www.montaraventures.com/blog/?p=304#comment-5557 Just keeps getting worse. I'm sorry you've gotten caught up in this Jim. Good luck in getting your video "unswept." Just keeps getting worse. I’m sorry you’ve gotten caught up in this Jim. Good luck in getting your video “unswept.”

]]> By: Jim Moore http://montaraventures.com/blog/2007/02/04/viacom-destroys-a-1b-opportunity/#comment-5554 Jim Moore Sun, 04 Feb 2007 19:43:50 +0000 http://www.montaraventures.com/blog/?p=304#comment-5554 I agree Mike, Viacom just destroyed a billion-dollar opportunity to coordinate with YouTube and create link-back to their sites! Viacom has also created NEGATIVE VALUE by truly harming thousands of innocent members of YouTube by mistakenly pulling their videos down. Viacom has given a new meaning to "Sweeps Week." In its "sweep" of 100,000 insurgent videos, it caught up a large number of legitimate vidoes. Mine included (see my site, above). I will tell you that it is a drag to have a video taken down, to receive a "DMCA Complaint" notice (actually, three for the same video) in your email box, and to be threatened with having all of your other videos destroyed. Here is what the notice said, "Repeat incidents of copyright infringement will result in the deletion of your account and all videos uploaded to that account. In order to avoid future strikes against your account, please delete any videos to which you do not own the rights, and refrain from uploading additional videos that infringe on the copyrights of others." Oh yes, and here is the "easy" way to contest the sweep and get your videos back: If you elect to send us a counter notice, to be effective it must be a written communication provided to our designated agent that includes substantially the following (please consult your legal counsel or see 17 U.S.C. Section 512(g)(3) to confirm these requirements): 1. A physical or electronic signature of the subscriber. 2. Identification of the material that has been removed or to which access has been disabled and the location at which the material appeared before it was removed or access to it was disabled. 3. A statement under penalty of perjury that the subscriber has a good faith belief that the material was removed or disabled as a result of mistake or misidentification of the material to be removed or disabled. 4. The subscriber’s name, address, and telephone number, and a statement that the subscriber consents to the jurisdiction of Federal District Court for the judicial district in which the address is located, or if the subscriberis address is outside of the United States, for any judicial district in which the service provider may be found, and that the subscriber will accept service of process from the person who provided notification under subsection (c)(1)(C) or an agent of such person. I agree Mike, Viacom just destroyed a billion-dollar opportunity to coordinate with YouTube and create link-back to their sites!

Viacom has also created NEGATIVE VALUE by truly harming thousands of innocent members of YouTube by mistakenly pulling their videos down.

Viacom has given a new meaning to “Sweeps Week.” In its “sweep” of 100,000 insurgent videos, it caught up a large number of legitimate vidoes. Mine included (see my site, above). I will tell you that it is a drag to have a video taken down, to receive a “DMCA Complaint” notice (actually, three for the same video) in your email box, and to be threatened with having all of your other videos destroyed. Here is what the notice said,

“Repeat incidents of copyright infringement will result in the deletion of your account and all videos uploaded to that account. In order to avoid future strikes against your account, please delete any videos to which you do not own the rights, and refrain from uploading additional videos that infringe on the copyrights of others.”

Oh yes, and here is the “easy” way to contest the sweep and get your videos back:

If you elect to send us a counter notice, to be effective it must be a written communication provided to our designated agent that includes substantially the following (please consult your legal counsel or see 17 U.S.C. Section 512(g)(3) to confirm these requirements):

1. A physical or electronic signature of the subscriber.
2. Identification of the material that has been removed or to which access has been disabled and the location at which the material appeared before it was removed or access to it was disabled.
3. A statement under penalty of perjury that the subscriber has a good faith belief that the material was removed or disabled as a result of mistake or misidentification of the material to be removed or disabled.
4. The subscriber’s name, address, and telephone number, and a statement that the subscriber consents to the jurisdiction of Federal District Court for the judicial district in which the address is located, or if the subscriberis address is outside of the United States, for any judicial district in which the service provider may be found, and that the subscriber will accept service of process from the person who provided notification under subsection (c)(1)(C) or an agent of such person.

]]>