Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Google argued that since Viacom and its lawyers were "unable to recognize that dozens of the clips alleged as infringements in this case were uploaded to YouTube" with Viacom's express authorization, "it was unreasonable to expect Google's employees to know which videos were uploaded without permission." [16] [17]
Just as the three-year-long Viacom (VIA) lawsuit against YouTube/Google (GOOG) has reached a crucial decision moment, the case has burst into public view with the public release of the briefs each ...
Gonzalez v. Google LLC, 598 U.S. 617 (2023), was a case at the Supreme Court of the United States which dealt with the question of whether or not recommender systems are covered by liability exemptions under section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934, which was established by section 509 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, for Internet service providers (ISPs) in dealing with terrorism ...
In November 2015 this issue was highly publicized when a review of the film Cool Cat Saves the Kids by the channel "I Hate Everything" was removed by YouTube, [30] along with videos on Channel Awesome and Markiplier. This led to a large number of complaints against YouTube and on social media sites like Twitter.
Sometimes a hyperlink can be displayed as an AOL link in an email when in fact the destination URL is to a malicious domain. • Be careful when authorizing an app to access your account or when providing any third-party access to your account info.
Honey, a popular browser extension owned by PayPal, is the target of one YouTuber's investigation that was widely shared over the weekend—over 6 million views in just two days. The 23-minute ...
Google Spain SL, Google Inc. v Agencia Española de Protección de Datos, Mario Costeja González was a decision by the Court of Justice of the European Union holding that an internet search engine operator is responsible for the processing that it carries out of personal information which appears on web pages published by third parties.
The tech companies claim their platforms are merely message boards and are therefore protected by the Communications Decency Act.