Copyright and Privacy Issues May Affect YouTube

Who is responsible for copyright? That is currently the big question for different sites on the web. What if copyrighted material gets posted on a site like Facebook or YouTube? Is it the responsibility of the user who posted it? Or is it the site that it was posted on who will face the consequences? Or will the person who watches the copyrighted material be held responsible?

A July 1^st court ruling gave Viacom access to YouTube records of what people watch on the site. This could affect the privacy of YouTube’s users if Viacom seeks out those who are watching copyrighted material in order to sue them.

However, there are also larger scale problems for sites that allow users to post on them. Previously, if users for these types of sites posted copyrighted material, the user was the only one that could be held responsible. Now, however, the rights owner is being backed by the courts and websites with copyright infringement problems are being held responsible. This means that YouTube and other sites will be held responsible for their content, especially if it’s copyrighted. This would have adverse affects for these sites because they would have to greatly monitor content. Currently they are only responsible for taking it down in a timely manner after being notified of its copyright status.

Copyright is a hot topic for librarians. I’m not sure of the history of librarians and copyright, but I feel that we have appointed ourselves as the keeper of copyrights and laws of the libraries across the country. Basically we’re the Hagrids of the libraries when it comes to copyright. I suppose this guarding of people’s rights makes sense when you think about it, but sometimes it’s just interesting.

But despite this self-appointed role, or perhaps because of it, librarians may have to consider some interesting issues regarding copyright. Librarians are in an interesting juxtaposition. We seek to preserve patron’s privacy. We seek to follow copyright laws. We seek to provide free and equal access to information. Will we guard patrons’ privacy if they have been viewing copyrighted material illegally? Will be provide access to websites that provide material violating copyright laws?

If companies crack down on individuals viewing or posting copyrighted material on various websites, the library could be caught in the middle. Some patrons use the library computers as their only internet source. Copyrighted material may be able to be posted or viewed from library computer stations. As librarians, we would not provide access to physical materials that violate copyright laws. But we may be providing access to copyrighted material on the web. This problem begs the question: which do we value more: protecting patron privacy or upholding copyright?

Holahan, Catherine. “Viacom vs. YouTube: Beyond Privacy.” Business Week.com. (3 July 2008). 17 July 2008. <http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/jul2008/tc2008073_435740.htm?campaign_id=rss_tech>