1. Viacom: “Viacom is home to the world's premier entertainment brands that connect with audiences through compelling content across television, motion picture, online and mobile platforms in over 160 countries and territories.” YouTube: “Founded in February 2005, YouTube allows billions of people to discover, watch and share originally-created videos. YouTube provides a forum for people to connect, inform, and inspire others across the globe and acts as a distribution platform for original content creators and advertisers large and small.” In March of 2007, Viacom sued Google for the amount of $1 Billion for over 60,000 counts of copyright infringement. YouTube’s Argument: YouTube argued that they were under protection of the “Safe Harbor” provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. YouTube’s Argument: YouTube argued that they were under protection of the “Safe Harbor” provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Viacom’s Argument: YouTube knew what was happening and allowed it, making them money. Viacom’s Argument: YouTube knew what was happening and allowed it, making them money. A Service Provider qualifies under Safe Harbor if: -They have no knowledge of, or financial benefit from, infringing activity on its network -They have a copyright policy and provide proper notification of that policy to its subscribers -They list an agent to deal with copyright complaints The case was opened in 2007 and was ruled in favor or YouTube in 2010 under “safe harbor.” Viacom appealed. In April 2012 the Second Circuit again ruled with YouTube. After a second appeal, YouTube still won. Since the original 2007 case, YouTube has taken steps to make sure they more fully fall under “safe harbor.” They make it very clear that uploading copyrighted content is illegal and have put in place a system that allows copyright holders to claim their work and have it taken down. "YouTube's decisions to restrict its monitoring efforts to certain groups of infringing clips... do not exclude it from the safe harbor, regardless of their motivation. Plaintiffs' remaining evidence of control goes no further than the normal functioning of any service provider, and shows neither participation in, nor coercion of, user infringement activity.“ -Judge Louis Stanton "We've already achieved a number of things with this lawsuit. It took a long time, but because of our actions, YouTube has moved in the right direction. They're where they should have been all along.“ -Phillippe Dauman (Viacom CEO)

2. Works Cited http://www.youtube.com/yt/about/ http://www.viacom.com/about/pages/default.as px http://www.viacom.com/about/pages/default.as px http://www.chillingeffects.org/dmca512/ https://www.eff.org/cases/viacom-v-youtube http://business.time.com/2013/04/19/how- google-beat-viacom-in-the-landmark-youtube- copyright-case-again/ http://business.time.com/2013/04/19/how- google-beat-viacom-in-the-landmark-youtube- copyright-case-again/ http://betanews.com/2010/03/19/viacom-and- youtube-timeline-of-pertinent-events/ http://betanews.com/2010/03/19/viacom-and- youtube-timeline-of-pertinent-events/