Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Moving Pictures Capitol Records Sues Vimeo for 'Lip-Dubbing'
Posted by D Patrick Rodgers on Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 1:02 PM
The complaint states that Vimeo "induces and encourages its users to upload...audiovisual works," which it then disseminates virally throughout the Internet. According to Capitol Records, the company's staff actively participates in "making, selecting, commenting on, and at times choosing to delete" audiovisual works, including those featuring its own copyrighted recordings. [...] The difference, according to Capitol, is that not only has Vimeo not tried very hard to protect copyright owners, but it actively encourages infringement.A similar suit was launched against video site Veoh by UMG not long ago, but Veoh came out on top of that one. The record industry takes another great big swing at the Internet.
Comments (13)
Showing 1-13 of 13
hilarious-yeah viral dissemination is the new word of mouth, horrible business model because people buy music because an RIAA approved marketing technique showed it to them and convinced them to, not because they enjoy it
like
dislike
While I agree 100% that this lawsuit is absurdly stupid - there is some legal merit behind it, no? I am no Recording Industry major so someone please set the record straight but shouldn't there be some royalties paid somewhere?
Hey Nashville Cream- are you going to post about the death of Chris Feinstein? Just askin'...
@Askin': That's in the works right now.
@Michael: You have a point. Though I personally find the suit totally outlandish, that video was made by the Vimeo folks themselves, who encourage users to do the same. In the Veoh suit, Veoh pulled it out because of a stipulation stating that, whenever they were made aware, they'd take copyrighted material down immediately. I'm guessing Vimeo never thought they'd be in a position to be a target of the record industry's litigious pursuits. But Youtube & others are trying their best to play by the rules, so they (RIAA, Capitol, UMG, et al.) probably feel they have to go after someone in order to set the precedent.
I only took one media law class and got a C, so could someone please explain Fair Use to me?
Just kinda sad that things like this make it harder for indie musicians to actually make a few bucks to do things like eat and pay rent. People hear about this and think all musicians are part of the greed machine.
Fucking retards. It's streaming. Sure you could bring up the argument that the royalties aren't being collected, but a 'viral' video that's disseminated to thousands, if not millions of people is free advertising. Work out a deal with Vimeo for a link to purchase the track. End of argument. Man, the industry is made up of a bunch of fucktards. Why fight the only tools that can really help you?
Anon, 100% agree. It's insane that the obvious end solution is exactly what you're recommending. I was just trying to wrap my head around their rationalization.
I swear, Tobin, I knew you were going to say that.
How did I know? Oh right, because she looks like Zooey Deschanel and every other adorable, stock, indie-chic young urban professional the Internet has ever seen.
Yeah, I'm pretty fucking predictable.
ps. there are no adorable, stock, indie-chic young urban professionals at my workplace. :(
Vote here for best Band of the Week
Slideshows
Top Commenters
