<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: YouTube Gets a $799 Million&#160;Lawsuit</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.searchenginejournal.com/youtube-gets-a-799-million-lawsuit/7388/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.searchenginejournal.com/youtube-gets-a-799-million-lawsuit/7388/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 17:43:21 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ben Ligeri</title>
		<link>http://www.searchenginejournal.com/youtube-gets-a-799-million-lawsuit/7388/comment-page-1/#comment-1084183</link>
		<dc:creator>Ben Ligeri</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Aug 2008 22:17:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.searchenginejournal.com/youtube-gets-a-799-million-lawsuit/7388/#comment-1084183</guid>
		<description>YouTube&#039;s POLICY is no copyrighted material, but their PRACTICE is to allow it and thrive on it. No one looks at policies, they live by practice.


I love how YouTube sets up an infrastructure that allows for anyone to upload copyright material with no realistic penalties, and then hides behind their policy of not allowing copyrighted material.

Their practice is to allow copyright material, their success is a result of copyrighted material, yet they feel exonerated because they post a tiny advert that says &quot;dont upload copyrighted material.&quot;

I can&#039;t wait to see the first judge to think any of YouTube&#039;s defenses are plausible.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>YouTube&#8217;s POLICY is no copyrighted material, but their PRACTICE is to allow it and thrive on it. No one looks at policies, they live by practice.</p>
<p>I love how YouTube sets up an infrastructure that allows for anyone to upload copyright material with no realistic penalties, and then hides behind their policy of not allowing copyrighted material.</p>
<p>Their practice is to allow copyright material, their success is a result of copyrighted material, yet they feel exonerated because they post a tiny advert that says &#8220;dont upload copyrighted material.&#8221;</p>
<p>I can&#8217;t wait to see the first judge to think any of YouTube&#8217;s defenses are plausible.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Web Design Romania</title>
		<link>http://www.searchenginejournal.com/youtube-gets-a-799-million-lawsuit/7388/comment-page-1/#comment-1083634</link>
		<dc:creator>Web Design Romania</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Aug 2008 08:54:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.searchenginejournal.com/youtube-gets-a-799-million-lawsuit/7388/#comment-1083634</guid>
		<description>YouTube DON&#039;T PAY !!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>YouTube DON&#8217;T PAY !!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

