Fire Alarms Systems

See update

end



The legal battle between Megaupload and Universal Music Group is more and more ... odd. After the court gave UMG basically a day to respond, the company filed its answer and made a rather surprising point: that an agreement with YouTube / Google, you can download videos not copyright. This seems strange, and many people screaming about a clause that allows UMG videos crazy censor anyone. But I think I understand what is happening here - and it's a very special situation, where UMG sorta used a fault - so read on for more details. UMG is still doubtful, poor quality and short-sighted ... but probably legal.

The key part of the company

legal the answer is correct chances and probably killed if MegaUpload. There are a few different ways that content can be downloaded from the claims of copyright on YouTube. The first is the ContentID, the automated system that matches fingerprints. One is through a DMCA notification. And the other is through the Content Management System from YouTube. It does not receive much attention and is not well known, but it is essentially midway between the other two (roughly), granting partners the ability to detect and block videos ContentID do not match, but sending a DMCA. If you're familiar with the details of the system (which appears MegaUpload and their lawyers were not), it was really easy to say it was a block of CMS message that appeared in the video blocked. He said: "This video contains content UMG, which blocked the copyright." This is the message that appears in the blocks of the CMS. DMCA takedowns that the video is "unavailable". So in that sense, UMG may be right in his presentation, which is not subject to sanctions because in reality this DMCA notice DMCA. It is a kind of apology low, frankly, and it really calls into question the functioning of the CMS YouTube, more than anything else. In theory, this also means that the compensation that can only happen by mistake UMG video shoot others is that separates them from Google. However, since Google has an excellent partnership with UMG to build and run Vevo, which is unlikely. It's a little scary, but more or less suggests UMG has a pass to close some videos that do not like without having to depend a lot (well, beyond public humiliation).

said, part of the explanation of UMG not

entirely clear, but I some assumptions about what what happened. UMG says its agreement with YouTube goes beyond copyright, and is authorized to make other videos (no name) reasons. What is new in a sense, because YouTube has always suggested that the CMS is the copyright - and, indeed, the original message in the video, it did indeed say it was a matter of author rights. YouTube later changed the message that this was a matter of service conditions. And this gives us a clue.

believe

this part of the agreement UMG Vevo is to "pull" videos of its artists YouTube order to put them in Vevo.

It is the intention anyway. I know when it launched Vevo, which was part of the agreement. All YouTube videos by artists from UMG magically jumped to Vevo. So I guess basically used this flaw UMG, which is supposed

taking
YouTube videos
to put them on Vevo
and realized he could "do YouTube videos", as long as UMG artists in them, without even putting on Vevo. stopped receiving the video blocked, and says he will stay for now.
Find best price for : --video----Vevo----DMCA----YouTube----Group----Music----Universal----Megaupload--