back to article GooTube cheers online gay porn ruling

Much to Google's delight, a federal judge has dismissed a porn infringement suit brought against online video site Veoh.com. Adult entertainment outfit Io Group sued Veoh in 2006, after noticing the site was streaming ten of its flicks. The YouTube-esque Veoh hosts videos uploaded by other people. But, like so many other old …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.

This post has been deleted by a moderator

As if our friends at Google are losing a fight any time soon?

Lets face it, porn IS the internet aside from codes, and cute fuzzy animals...

Only Napster will lose these types of cases in court (unless I'm mistaken, and I know someone will correct me on that). From a cheapskate's point of view, why pay for porn when I can get it for free?

0
0
Anonymous Coward

@Andrew Norton

man you suck.

0
0

@Dick

> man you suck.

Yep, and so do Chelsea. Your point was...?

0
0

This post has been deleted by its author

Silver badge

@@Andrew Norton

Hahahahaha.

0
0
Silver badge
Joke

re: @Andrew Norton

Aw, c'mon Glickman, be a good sport!

0
0
Thumb Up

@Dick

Chelsea suck hard at the top of the Premier League already. Yup we suck hard.

0
0
Alert

The "blinkered media outfits"...

just don't get it, do they.

It's FREE ADVERTISING, you bunch of fecking retards!

0
0
Paris Hilton

Paris Sucks Too

I found Veoh a while back after quicksilverscreen dropped below the radar... interesting site ... but when it comes to the "copyrite infringment" argument I think one is on rather 'dodgy' ground because the 'quality' is sufficient only to give the viewer a general 'feel' for the story. Streaming speeds are often lower than viewing speed too so it can be an enourmously frustrating experience. What it does do, however, is give me an excellent 'preview' of movies I might like to see or purchase at a later 'date'. As for Paris... obviously I'd like a 'date', a 'quality' 'feel' and a 'dodgy' 'preview'.

0
0
Thumb Up

Re:were my eyes decieving me?

Isn't it refreshing. Great work, Cade. Lets have more of this and less of the offensive name calling.

0
0
Coat

Poor choice

of artical to use the term "Yup we suck hard." anywhere near. :-)

0
0
AC
Coat

hang on ...

Is this another case of a judge making informed decisions ?!

is the common sense disease spreading ?!?!

mine's the one with the tinfoil hat.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

RE: Not much to see here.

This isn't really relevant to the YouTube case - one the main provisions of the Fair Harbor provision is that it doesn't apply if you actively police the network. Veoh doesn't. YouTube does (to take down porn).

Hence the defense Veoh have used isn't relevant for YouTube…

0
0
Gold badge
Joke

Re: Poor choice

Not when talking about Chelsea it isn't.

0
0
Paris Hilton

@ Chris Matchett

It's a marathon not a sprint as has been shown the last 2 seasons :-)

Paris: She prefers a marathon to a sprint

0
0
Go

@AC

"is the common sense disease spreading ?!?!"

I bloody hope so, it's about time!

0
0
Flame

There are loads of places to go

for plain-vanilla reporting. There is only one Register! (If you'll notice, the motto is still there... biting the hand etc., etc....) Reg, please do not let some boring coffin-dodgers unduly influence the reporting, thx =D

0
0

"Veoh doesn't."

Uh, unless Veoh scammed the judge and Io didn't pick up the lie either, Veoh definitely DO police their site and far more assiduously than the DMCA safe harbour requires.

Which was all in the fucking article.

But that would have slowed down your paytard rant against anything not of the Holy Blessed MAFIAA.

0
0
Paris Hilton

@Chris

"Paris: She prefers a marathon to a sprint"

Nah, she doesn't have snickers.

;-)

0
0
Paris Hilton

@Chris

Ah, but does she have nickers?

0
0
Paris Hilton

Rimshot!

(talking of rimshot...)

0
0
Coat

pics pls

mine's the one with the neatly folded navy blue handkerchief...

0
0
This topic is closed for new posts.

Forums