Technology News NOW!

This highlights the problem of providing a distribution platform anarchic free access for other people to publish without control, under the pretext of fundamental YouTube. Anyone with access to a server or on your Web site can send a video, the difference is that they are responsible for what we publish. In the case of YouTube, Google does not know who the author or producer – is an imperfect model for the publication and, as noted in the article of a very flawed business model. This decision does not question the Internet.

It's my job. Some videos are simply too numerous to be aware of each topic. If you look at the staff of NIC on the website of your company, and certainly not spend all day looking at the site of my company. And YouTube is not a provider of "content" is a content hosting service. But again, this is not what happened here. Laws "safe harbor applies when Sat [And if it really was" top of the video of "funny", then this is an indictment against users who voted for this position, not Google.] I can not believe. @ Blur: You're wrong. That puts it in the same plane, for example, a service that hosts websites. Once again, Google has taken the video when alerted to it. I do not think he works for a company to ignore individual rights. If you do not have a situation like in China, where it is necessary to send a photo ID to a government bureaucracy to make a website at: / / news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi / world / Asia Pacific / 8530378. stmbananaontoast: Yes, I think Google has not seen the video before being notified. They, however, I can say to act "expeditiously" to remove the video within hours of receiving the notification.

Related Stories