Showing posts with label Copyright Act. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Copyright Act. Show all posts

Thursday, October 22, 2015

Drudge Report Writer Matt Drudge Threatened By Supreme Court Justice Seeking To Shut His Site Down


Matt Drudge

Recently, one of the internet's top bloggers, Miami's Matt Drudge (I'm still a better and cuter blogger than you - deal with it LOL), who is the owner and author of the news aggregation website, Drudge Report, stated he fears his site will soon be shut down by the U.S. Supreme Court. Congress is reviewing copyright law and Drudge fears it may negatively impact his site. Drudge stated, "I had a Supreme Court Justice tell me it’s over for me. They’ve got the votes now to enforce copyright law, you’re out of there. They’re going to make it so you can’t even use headlines."

This unwarranted attack on Drudge has nothing to do with protecting the rights of copyright holders. This attack on Drudge is politically motivated, as he has broken stories in that realm and posts links on Drudge Report the establishment fears sways voters in congressional and presidential elections.
As a copyright holder of over 23-years, who has written and copyrighted thousands of (published and unpublished) songs, many film scripts and synopses, music video treatments, books and photographs, as well as being a blogger who has authored and published over 14,000 articles online that broke many stories that turned into global scandals, I am not in favor of the Supreme Court enacting new laws to shut down sites like the Drudge Report.

I don't agree with all the links Drudge posts, but find many of them quite useful. Drudge Report also drives traffic to sites, increasing ad revenue for website holders he links, putting money in their pockets. The problem is the narcissistic, thin-skinned Obama administration, who are Democrats, have desperately tried to control the press and failed to completely do so.

Drudge's site is a widely read page that posts story links that also include the Republican point of view, which Democrats dislike. Drudge also posts links to articles that excoriate Democrats (and Republicans) politicians and the former are not used to that (the Republicans are used to being bashed by the mainstream media and Hollywood, who are liberals). However, Democrats in office are used to glowing articles from the left leaning mainstream media and Hollywood, with their lips firmly planted on their backsides.

So when Drudge posts links to articles that do not kiss the administration's backside, they throw a temper tantrum and their toys out the crib in protest. Drudge Report is also read by many bloggers, who write stories about the contents in the links he posts. The fact Drudge is one of the bloggers helping to shape the national discourse, is also ticking off some in the establishment.

It is an established precept of U.S. intellectual property law that titles cannot be copyrighted. This means you cannot copyright a book, movie or song title ect. Therefore, it stands to reason, Drudge who posts article titles containing hyperlinks, is not in violation of existing copyright law. To change the law to silence a popular voice online, whose work is read by millions in America and around the world, is petty, juvenile and spiteful. Not to mention, it would also criminally violate the U.S. Constitution that guarantees free speech and free press.

Not to mention changing the law could also burn Hollywood, full of criminals the U.S. court system keeps corrupting the law for and bringing the Judiciary into domestic and global disrepute over. This would mean Hollywood would have one heck of a time trying to secure titles for their projects.
I've spent thousands on copyright fees since I was 15-years-old. I've written more songs than any living human being, in what was and continues to be a labor intensive job. However, I can attest it made me a target of thieves in Hollywood and due to that disgusting experience, I've found registering one's copyrights with the Library of Congress, is a worthless process, as Hollywood routines steals copyrights from people all over America and the world, then bribes judges in U.S. courts to get away with it, via quietly issuing jurists corporate stocks, cash and other assets to throw out valid cases. They have disgraced the U.S. judiciary to the watching world with this appalling conduct.

America is signatory to the international Berne Convention (Treaty) which established the global law that a copyright is automatically created the moment a person authors an item. No payment or additional protection is need. However, Congress enacted the Copyright Act in America in what has become a money making scam that states you must pay the Library of Congress/US Copyright Office a fee to register your work and they will issue you a copyright certificate. If you fail to do so and Hollywood steals your work (and make no mistake those dirty criminals will) you will not be able to sue in an American court to recoup your financial losses and obtain credit for your work, regarding the illegally made infringing items. 

However, as stated above, U.S. copyrights are worthless trash, because Hollywood routinely bribes federal judges into dismissing cases, in what is ugly, foul, vile, corrupt criminal conduct. The U.S. federal court system has shown itself to be irredeemably corrupt in matters of copyright cases to the point litigants and lawyers are foregoing suing in America, opting for other places in the world.

 

Matt Drudge

I have done a thorough study of copyright infringement cases in America for a forthcoming movie and book ("Justice And Truth") and these cases do not make it to trial 99% of the time, as Hollywood bribes federal judges to throw them out. In 2005, I experienced this myself, where a Miami federal judge, Cecilia Altonaga, had to admit in a ruling regarding me formally requesting she recuse herself for corruption, that her child was given stock in the defendant's company (and she corrupted the case due to that and the fact her husband's law firm makes a fortune in legal fees from the defendants as well).

In another case in 2009 where I tried to obtain Freedom of Information Act files from the FBI/DOJ regarding the aforementioned stolen copyrights, the judge, a former employee of the FBI/DOJ with current ties to them, sat on the case, did not recuse himself though judicial cannons indicate he should have, then gave the FBI/DOJ "sovereign immunity" in what was a massive criminal cover up of theft of property worth billions (that idiots in Hollywood managed to devalue with their incompetence). 

I've had lawyers tells me that federal judges are busy accepting bribes left, right and center and suing is U.S. court is an exercise in futility and they are right. I've seen it with my own eyes and the paper trail proves it. However, here's where this mess is going. The public is fed up with Hollywood's stealing and have greatly withdrawn their support from Hollywood's music industry that is collapsing with record low sales that keep getting worse. The public is also spending significantly less money on the film industry.

So this unmitigated greed, bribery and corruption is headed in the direction of more and more Hollywood music and film companies closing down (which is happening now), while others will merge and merge and merge until there's just one left and it will financially struggle. You've ripped off copyright holders and gouged the public with crazy prices and it is leading towards something very terrible.

So continue with the arrogant stealing and corruption (sarcasm) and see where it is going to take you. The future is not looking good at all for Hollywood and you brought it on yourselves by being so damned evil, abominable, greedy and disgraceful. I've never encountered a group of people so evil and sick in all my life, willing to "rob, kill, steal and destroy" to get what they want...even if it doesn't belong to them.

Regarding the Supreme Court, they keep rendering decisions poll show the American people overwhelmingly do not approve of and here's where that's going. Less and less people will petition the Supreme Court and it is on the road to becoming an antiquated, outdated, unpopular model very few people will use in the future. So, continue with the corruption (sarcasm) and see where it is going to take you. This so-called power you think you wield and keep abusing will be gone. State Courts will become more popular, where judges can be voted out at regular intervals, when found to be corrupt. Mediation services will also rise in popularity, as people find alternate ways of resolving legal disputes.

You are wrecking America and damaging the world with this corruption and the American people and the world will never forget it or forgive it when all is said and done. You've gone too far.

STORY SOURCE

Congressional Review Of Copyright Law May Threaten Drudge Report

5:20 PM 10/13/2015 - WASHINGTON — Congress may update digital copyright law affecting aggregator sites, like the Drudge Report and Real Clear Politics, along with news sites in the near future. “Two years ago, the House Judiciary Committee launched a comprehensive review of our nation’s copyright laws, which have not been updated since 1976. As technology continues to rapidly advance, we have a responsibility to ensure that our laws are keeping pace with these developments,” Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte said in a statement.

Since March of 2013, the House Judiciary Committee has conducted 20 hearings, which included testimony from 100 witnesses on the subject of copyright law in the digital age. The topics range from fair use to scope of copyright protection to music licensing.

“The committee has been conducting a comprehensive review of U.S. copyright law to ensure that the law keeps pace with the digital age in which we live. The goal of the listening tour is to step out of Washington, D.C. to hear from creators and innovators in terms of what is and is not working for them in their various fields,” a committee staffer told The Daily Caller.

The committee staffer would not say how the laws would affect aggregators and news sites and said that only “all stakeholders are invited to come in and meet with staff in order to give their thoughts or express concerns. Those meetings are ongoing.”

Drudge Report site owner Matt Drudge told Alex Jones of InfoWars last week that copyright laws could very well end his popular site. I had a Supreme Court Justice tell me it’s over for me,” said Drudge. “They’ve got the votes now to enforce copyright law, you’re out of there. They’re going to make it so you can’t even use headlines.”

He explained, “To have a Supreme Court Justice say to me it’s over, they’ve got the votes, which means time is limited,” he added, noting that a day was coming when simply operating an independent website could be outlawed. That will end [it] for me – fine – I’ve had a hell of a run,” said Drudge, adding that web users were being pushed into the cyber ‘ghettos’ of Twitter, Facebook and Instagram.” Drudge added, “This is ghetto, this is corporate, they’re taking your energy and you’re getting nothing in return – nothing!"...

Wednesday, July 1, 2015

Supreme Court Refuses To Hear Google's Appeal In Oracle Copyright Infringement Lawsuit Accusing The Tech Giant Of Ripping Them Off



Google

The tide continues to turn against Google. Recently, the city of Mountain View, California, snubbed the tech giant, awarding them a small parcel of land for purchase, while giving the lion’s share of the property for sale to smaller rival, Linked In. In Britain and Europe, Google has come under fire in houses of legislature for illegally spying on people by using Google Maps cars to illegally sweep up and collect residents' computer data such as private files, passwords and detailed profile information, as the vehicles drive through neighborhoods all over the world, under the auspices of capturing video of streets.

Google Maps labels the White House "nig*a house" and the U.S. Supreme Court "dumb f**ks"

This week the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear Google’s appeal in a case filed by tech rival, Oracle, who alleges copyright infringement of their software Java for Google's Android computer program that is used in millions of mobile phones. Google willfully infringed Oracle's copyrights to make Android software, refusing to obtain a license for the commercial, bulk use of Java. One cannot cite the Fair Use segment of the Copyright Act under such circumstances, as it does not apply. 

Side Bar: I wonder if calling the Supreme Court the "dumb f**ks" didn't help Google's plight in this case (LOL). 

RELATED ARTICLES

 


Thursday, June 11, 2015

Music Streaming Revenue Killers Companies Such As Apple Music Need To Be Mindful Of Regarding Sales


Drake at the launch of Apple Music streaming

The launch of Apple Music streaming service has given the music industry in America hope for new sales at a time revenues have hit record lows in the United States. Apple Music is an exciting new venture and one worth checking out. However, the Judiciary Report would be remiss if it did not state, until You tube is reined in, sales of music streaming will not be what it could be.


Drake

Without going into too many specifics, thousands of popular songs have been unlawfully uploaded to You Tube. There exists software that facilitates easy ripping and conversion of said songs, negating the need to buy music. Millions in sales are being lost in this manner. Music is also being streamed for free on You Tube.

RELATED ARTICLE
 

Sunday, November 2, 2014

Copyright Office Responds To FOIA Request Regarding Madonna's Criminal Bribery




In the aforementioned article it was stated, "I recently sent a Freedom of Information Act request to the Copyright Office as apart of my forthcoming film "Justice And Truth." I sent it registered mail. Therefore I have confirmation. The Copyright Office has defied federal law as enacted by Congress and refused to answer the FOIA request sent to them 3-months ago, which is illegal on their end." 

Three days after the article was published, the Copyright Office responded on September 12, 2014. The FOIA request is being split up into two parts and I have been asked via email by the Copyright Office's attorney, General Counsel, for my telephone phone number to discuss the matter. Something tells me had I not written the aforementioned article, going public with the fact the Copyright Office had defied Congressional law, I would have received no response, due to the severity of what is transpiring via Madonna's criminal behavior. Part two of this article will be posted shortly.

Tuesday, September 9, 2014

Copyright Office Corrupted By Madonna And The Kabbalah Center Issuing Bribes To Employees To Backdate Registration Dates And Access Private Copyrights

Madonna

As the Judiciary Report has illustrated in past articles, exclusives that later proved 100%, singer, Madonna, has a long, disgraceful, detailed history of copyright theft click here. She's been sued so many times by Americans and international citizens for stealing preexisting copyrighted work, then fraudulently trying to pass it off as her own. She's also been criminally stealing copyrights from me and repeatedly harasses me, though I don't want anything to do with her, in what has become a sick obsession on her part click here

A Kabbalah Center member issued threats to me, from her, stating Madonna and other members of the Kabbalah Center, which a number of experts have labeled a sick cult, have been issuing bribes at the Copyright Office/Library Of Congress in Washington, DC, to illegally access preexisting, private, unpublished copyrighted works, apart of various writers, producers, authors and directors' forthcoming projects, enabling her to receive unauthorized copies of the contents. 

Then as apart of the bribe, receive a backdated registration date, making it appear Madonna and the Kabbalah Center registered the works first when she did not. The scam on Madonna's end becomes apparent when copyright registrants with preexisting "Poor Man's Copyrights" and other time stamped methods of establishing the date of authorship, still trump the fake registration dates she illegally bought and paid for through bribery at the Copyright Office/Library Of Congress.

The Copyright Office/Library Of Congress is connected to the U.S. Congress, the center of lawmaking in America. Yet this is going on there. To think a lazy, untalented, trashy pop star has criminally corrupted the Copyright Office/Library Of Congress is terrible and disgraceful. 

American and international citizens from all over the world, in the tens of thousands, some whom are struggling artists who can barely afford to pay their bills, scrape together money to pay the Copyright Office/Library Of Congress fees of $75 per registration, only for a greedy, shiftless, vile pop star, Madonna and her equally insane cult, the Kabbalah Center, to be issuing bribes to gain undue access and copy private, unreleased works, trying to get an illegal jump on the true authors of the works. That is sick and despicable. 
This kind of corruption should not be occurring in an entity connected to a house of legislature (Congress).

I was once told by a Copyright Office/Library Of Congress employee, Robert Blankenberg that "Madonna is free to use any of your copyrights" without permission, whilst trying to talk me out of suing her, abusing his authority. He so twisted copyright law in his repugnant, corrupt explanation of how copyrights work, in order to justify what U.S. Federal law describes as criminal copyright infringement, racketeering (RICO), conversion, grand theft larceny, invasion of privacy, fraud and money laundering, it was astonishing. 

My advice to copyright holders and those seeking to copyright items, be careful, as the Copyright Office/Library Of Congress is corrupted. Your copyrights are not safe. Ironically, the United Nations, via the WIPO, states that a copyright is supposed to be FREE to the owner/author and is automatically established when one creates a work. 

However, Congress created the Copyright Act years ago, in violation of United Nations' law, forcing all American and International citizens to pay a fee to copyright works in Washington, DC or you cannot sue in America if the works are stolen. This is not helped by the fact that 99.9% of copyright cases in America are thrown out by federal judges, who refuse to let the cases go to trial. Federal judges might I add, it has been discovered have serious financial ties to Hollywood in a number of ways (stocks, revenue connections and advisory posts).

I recently sent a Freedom of Information Act request to the Copyright Office as apart of my forthcoming film "Justice And Truth." I sent it registered mail. Therefore I have confirmation. The Copyright Office has defied federal law as enacted by Congress and refused to answer the FOIA request sent to them 3-months ago, which is illegal on their end.

I'm sending a copy of everything to the FBI, so it will be on record that I filed this complaint regarding Madonna and the Kabbalah Center criminally corrupted the Copyright Office, Library of Congress. It will also be featured in my forthcoming film "Justice And Truth."

Monday, November 18, 2013

HBO’s New Pornographic Gay Show ‘Looking’ Is Depraved, Debauched And Unoriginal


HBO's "Looking" didn't look for originality or adherence to the Copyright Act or Berne Convention 

HBO’s new gay show "Looking" is depraved, debauched and very unoriginal. So unoriginal it breaches three preexisting copyrights I own that they've changed from wholesome and heterosexual to gay porn (Christians take note, because that's Hollywood). Time Warner owns HBO as well as Warner Bros.

Warner Bros has been home to chronic copyright stealing pop tart Madonna for nearly thirty years, before she signed with Live Nation in an unsuccessful pairing. However, Time Warner still plays host to the singer and her ex-husband Guy Ritchie at Warner Bros Pictures, in a series of crooked business deals. HBO’s parent company, Warner Bros (Time Warner) is a company I sued in the past for criminal copyright infringement and sent the matter to the FBI, as required by the U.S. Congress under federal jurisdiction rules.
The FBI interviewed me twice about the matter, in addition to other commissioned criminal misconduct by Madonna, Warner Bros and their affiliates, regarding crimes which includes, but is not limited to hacking to copy and steal preexisting copyrights, phone hacking (News Corp scandal I broke first) and wiretapping that transpired in the case.

Madonna's private eye Anthony Pellicano was subsequently arrested 4-months after I was interviewed by the FBI twice. He was also  convicted and sentenced to 15-years in prison for his crimes. Madonna has since switched to new private investigators to continue her criminal behavior (see: Gavin DeBecker among others).


You're right it's not TV...it's gay porn!

Based on pre-release items of HBO's "Looking" that I’ve seen online, there is very provable, clear cut criminal copyright infringement of what was heterosexual, Christian copyrights I own and registered years ago, well before this show was even announced. However, Time Warner/Warner Bros has turned preexisting heterosexual Christian copyrights they stole into debauched gay porn for broadcast on HBO. Please boycott the show.

"Looking" follows the lives of gay males in San Francisco and is packed with inappropriate, explicit and graphic scenes of gay sex. Some of the actors in the film were heterosexual prior to filming, but due to paychecks and career promises in Hollywood, took questionable x-rated roles in the show to their detriment.

According to IMDB, for the first few months of 2013, "Looking" was being made by another network in Britain, under a different name. Something went bad with the deal and the British network backed out of the infringing project, which as stated above, was once was a preexisting copyrights about straight people, whose stolen storyline has now been turned gay, much like some of the previously straight actors in the show.


Time Warner owns Warner Bros (home to Madonna and ex-husband Guy Ritchie) as well as HBO

Some of the actors in "Looking" were not known to be gay prior to this show. However, hefty paychecks and promises of fame changed that (see: Hollywood illuminati). What I don’t understand is why none of the actors in the film took their parents into consideration when filming what is basically gay porn.

Once their parents catch an eyeful of their children engaging in gay porn on screen, they are going to be shocked, shaken, heartbroken and devastated. They are going to literally cry tears. That’s a horrible thing for a parent to go through in watching something like that. I’m already being informed that some of the parents of actors connected to the show are very upset at pre-release materials.

No parent wants that for their child. Furthermore, the shock of seeing one’s son performing gay porn on TV is not good for any parent’s heart (physically or emotionally). The actors in the show owe their parents and fans (many former fans after they grasp what’s in that show) an apology for springing that debauched mess on them. It was not cute, cutting edge or funny. It was disrespectful and thoughtless. Neither will be it be funny when said actors see the effect the show will have on their careers, especially in America.


Time Warner's Illuminati eye logo

It is also going to create feelings of embarrassment and humiliation for parents of actors connected to the show once people find out or even see what their kids are doing on camera. And for what? Phony, trumped up promises of fame and fortune in Hollywood that will not materialize once audiences grasp the graphic nature of the show.

Additionally, when the general public finds out the full truth behind what went into "Looking" people are going to be appalled and never see Hollywood the same way again. The back story on "Looking" and the hateful, vengeful, malicious motivation behind it is the height of depravity. More on that in a later column (it is also going to be added to the film "Justice And Truth").


Madonna

Previously, the industry pushed the sexually charged HBO show "Queer As Folks" which was overwhelmingly unpopular with audiences in America, but due to the gay factor in Hollywood, the show was given far more chances than other programs, but produced very little results.

It doesn’t matter who one sleeps with in Hollywood or what promises are issued if one compromises one’s self in going against moral codes, if audiences don’t like what they are being sold, they’re not going to buy it. You could have all the promotion, marketing and money in the world behind it, if audiences don’t like it or the image that has been created, having that big machine behind you won’t matter.


RELATED ARTICLES








Friday, May 3, 2013

Justin Bieber And Usher Sued For Copyright Infringement Over Stealing Song 'Somebody to Love'


Justin Bieber or Usher

R&B singer Usher and his protégé Justin Bieber have been sued for $10,000,000 over copyright infringement, concerning the song "Somebody To Love." Sony Music artist Usher is being labeled the culprit behind the alleged song theft, as singer/songwriter, Devin Copeland, also known as De Rico and his writing partner, Mareio Overton, released the song "Somebody to Love" in 2008 on the album "My Story." Two years later, Justin Bieber released the song "Somebody To Love" on his 2010 CD "My World 2.0."

Yahoo News reported this week regarding the case, "According to the complaint, the pair later spoke to Usher's mother/sometimes manager, Jonetta Patton, who said that Usher had listened to the album and expressed interest in bringing Copeland on tour with him."


Justin Bieber

The Judiciary Report has not heard the 2008 song in question to make any statements regarding similarities between the two tracks. However, the site did state over year ago that Usher and Scooter Braun have been using criminally stolen copyrighted music for Bieber's career and it's only a matter of time before it all comes to ahead.

Usher has been repeatedly sued in credible court cases for stealing people's copyrighted works for his career. Copyright infringement is a federal crime under U.S. law and a violation of U.N. law as well (The Berne Treaty).

STORY SOURCE

Friday, July 22, 2011

Photographer's Theft Lawsuit Against Rihanna Will Proceed


Rihanna groping herself on stage

The copyright infringement lawsuit, filed by famed photographer, Dave LaChapelle, against thieving singer, Rihanna, will proceed, as Judge Shira A. Scheindlin, has refused to dismiss it. A motion to dismiss was put in, per her lawyer's request. The lawsuit centers on Rihanna's habit of chronically stealing other people's copyrights for use in her fraudulent career, which has resulted in the aforementioned legal filing.

Copyright infringement is a federal and international crime and it is pathetic that Rihanna and others like her, such as Beyonce and Madonna, have based their entire careers on this disgraceful conduct. It says they should not be famous, as their entire careers are a lie. It speaks to how poorly they were raised, as to steal copyrights, is to steal other people's property and money.

STORY SOURCE

David LaChapelle Wins Pre-Trial Ruling Against Rihanna

RELATED ARTICLES

Rihanna Sued Over Video Theft

Rihanna Stole New Video From Photographer

Rihanna Sued Again For Stealing

Rihanna CD Bombing Again

Unwise Rihanna Slams Blogs, Bloggers And Readers

Rihanna Embarrasses Herself On Twitter By Falsely Claiming Concert Is Sold Out

Rihanna Arena Tour To Be Scrapped Due To Poor Sales

Rihanna Drops Restraining Order Against Chris Brown

Friday, February 4, 2011

Rihanna Stole New Video From Photographer

Rihanna

Fake, phony, thieving, pseudo-singer, Rihanna, has stolen more copyrighted material for her career, which lacks substance and quality. She has deliberately ripped off a number of people's copyrights in violation of domestic and international law.

Madonna (center) and Rihanna (right).

Rihanna has been taking thieving tips from crazy Kabbalah mentor Madonna

This time kleptomaniac Kabbalah cult member Rihanna, ripped off famous photographer, David LaChapelle, for her sick "S&M" music video. Warning, the following link contains very inappropriate comparative photos:

Rihanna Accused Of Ripping Off Famed Photographer In S&M Video

MORE OF RIHANNA'S THEFTS OF OTHER ARTISTS WORKS:

Rihanna (left) Eva (right)

ECW - October 1998

Rihanna - October 2009

Rihanna Rips Off Dobson's Image From The Hairstyles To The Tats:

FeFe Dobson

Rihanna ripping off FeFe Dobson's look

RELATED ARTICLES

Chris Brown Showed Up In My Neighborhood

Chris Brown Violated His Probation

Rihanna CD Bombing Again

Unwise Rihanna Slams Blogs, Bloggers And Readers

Friday, December 10, 2010

Drudge Report Sued For Copyright Infringement




Matt Drudge

The Drudge Report has inauspiciously been sued for copyright infringement, due to a photo posted and linked to on the site, illustrating stringent airport security measures in America. The photo is owned by the Denver Post and was bought by a third party, who is sue happy and looking for quick profits. However, under the U.S. Copyright Act, one is allowed to excerpt public copyrighted materials in covering a breaking news event of interest to the public. Therefore, in this instance, Drudge is in compliance with the law.

STORY SOURCE

Matt Drudge latest target of a Denver Post-related copyright infringement lawsuit

Saturday, June 26, 2010

Viacom Loses $1 Billion Case Against YouTube


Viacom has lost its copyright infringement case against video site YouTube. The judge stated the massive website did not violate Viacom's copyrights. Though, the Judiciary Report is no fan of Hollywood (i.e. Sony, Warner Bros., Universal ect), as they are horrible, unconscionable thieves themselves, with all due respect, the judge's decision is very flawed and illegal, as it strikes down the Copyright Act, Digital Millennium Act and the Berne Convention, with no legislative authority to do so.

The U.S. Copyright Act has a "Fair Use" clause that permits people to use the copyrights of others under certain circumstances, but there are limits. For example, one can use published photos or excerpts of articles to discuss a news event, as that is permitted. However, one cannot take another's whole copyrighted works and exploit them for financial gain without permission. That is completely illegal under U.S. and international law.

The Judiciary Report loves YouTube, as it is a great, entertaining website, when it is in compliance with the law, streaming videos that are furnished with the consent of the copyright holder.

However, the fact remains, on any given day, one can find illegally uploaded songs, movies and television shows, in their entirety on YouTube, posted without the consent of the copyright holder, eliminating the need to buy them at official outlets. That has got to stop. It defeats the purpose of having a Copyright or Copyright Office.

If it continues, all the labels and studios will simply close and there will be no entertainment, as they are not going to do this for free, having no revenue to pay staff and underwrite the necessary production and marketing costs. That judge's decision needs to be tossed like Britney Spears' bad weave.

STORY SOURCE:

Google's YouTube Didn't Infringe Viacom Copyrights, Judge Says

YouTube wins in Viacom's $1 billion lawsuit