Mark's day in Congress

After reading this article:

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2128537,00.asp


...I felt compelled to write the following:

==============================

I struggle with the question about sites

like YouTube needing to be proactive (or not) in pulling down videos and/or submitted content. DMusic, for example, is very proactive in keeping users from posting stuff they don't own. The staff (and even more-so, the regular DMusic users) constantly keep vigil on the new songs that are uploaded. Whenever someone tries to upload copyrighted tunes that they clearly don't "own", DMusic's staff & regular users immediately catch it. Then, the tunes are zapped (and often, the offending person's account too.) But, should YouTube operate in a similar fashion? Sometimes, I think so. However, if sites like YouTube were to become more proactive and restrictive, I fear it would hamper legitimate free-exchange of thoughts and ideas. ========== Who knows? I'm still struggling with this issue myself. Cuban MIGHT be right in saying YouTube needs to be more proactive... HOWEVER, he is wrong to say Google/YouTube doesn't "have the right to hide behind the DMCA" (Isn't it possible that Cuban only wants to hobble YouTube so his own HDTV venture can benefit from the would-be-then-created artificial scarcity?) ============= Folks, look at the big picture and always remember that these squabbles over copyright issues are really about the big names trying to monopolize. Copyright was NEVER intended to be a tool of corporate control over what the people can see/do/exchange with thoughts, ideas, and expressions. But that's pretty much what it has become over the past century. I'm probably never going to see it in my lifetime, but I want total COPYRIGHT REVISION! Let's put copyright back in it's place! As originally intended, "copyright" was supposed to protect the artist/creator FROM the industry so that we COULD freely express and exchange intellectual thoughts, music, and ideas (etc.)