[Foundation-l] They do make or break reputations

[Andre Engels]

On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 10:49 AM, Krinkle <krinklemail at gmail.com> wrote:

> I haven't fully read the context of this thread, but something that
> did cross my
> mind recently, why do we treat YouTube-links different from other
> links here?
>
> Aren't most of our sources and external linked websites atleast as
> copyrighted
> as YouTube ?
>
> Consider links to IMDb for example, the content we link to, through
> that, is all copyrighted!
>
> Or just a good old "Official website"-link on an article about person
> X or
> organization Y, likely also "All rights reserved."
>
> YouTube atleast is partially (and soon more) under a CC-license.
>

There's a big difference - those are copyrighted _by the person who put the
material on the web site_. On YouTube the videos are often uploaded by
people who do not own the copyright, nor are connected to them. It's not
copyright that is the problem, it is copyright violations.

-- 
André Engels, andreengels at gmail.com