Neither side in the lesser-known and first YouTube lawsuit won a motion for summary judgment in court last week. Both sides presented their arguments for dismissing the other’s claims, and both were turned down by the judge, meaning Tur v. YouTube will move into the discovery phase.
This case will have a major impact, one would imagine, on all subsequent suits filed against the now Google-owned video sharing site.
As soon as Google bought YouTube, Viacom slapped them with a $1 billion lawsuit. But before that was made known to everyone, journalist Robert Tur filed suit months earlier after footing of the 1992 Los Angeles riots, which he owns, appeared on the site.
At issue in all of these cases is determining whether, as YouTube lawyers claim, the site is protected under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Defense attorneys have argued that YouTube is entitled to safe-harbor protection because it has no way to prevent users from uploading copyrighted material and removes copyrighted material upon notification.
The plaintiff doesn’t buy that argument however, noting advertising money earned disqualifies the site from safe-harbor protections.
The judge, as said already, denied both pleas for summary judgment, saying there needed to be a larger examination of the facts. Judge Florence-Marie Cooper also used the term “videotapes,” perhaps indicating she does, indeed, need some digital education.
At any rate, we’re not that much closer to a ruling, but we are on the road to discovery at least.
