I second that "Brilliant website"...good find Deputy Dog!

...and there's a nice little link to VideoSift on the right.

thanks!
In return:
http://www.jonhs.net/freemovies/documentaries.htm

Nice one mauz.

Need.....more............time...

Oh wow thanks guys...

And uhh, aren't these illegal?

As if that stopped MP3s.

Heh.

It's against the websites policy to post (and may breach copyright) by the original submitters to Google Video/YouTube etc...but as they're just links - it's not illegal for anyone other than the original submitter.

For instance, where's your image from Ant (the Avatar?) As that maybe someone elses Intellectual Property, and therefore a Copyright infringement to use/post elsewhere etc (same thing, as neither is for a commercial purpose).

Check out this: http://digg.com/tech_news/Fox_Forcing_Site_to_Sell_or_Shut_Down_for_Linking_to_TV_Shows

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

This is a very contentious issue benjee. I do believe that you can get into trouble in the US for linking to copyrighted material. Also the definition for "host" needs a lot of qualification, and has a thin line dividing it from "linking". VideoSift is a prime example of that.

Dag: Show Benjee the blog that with the link yanked.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

here ya go:
http://www.videosift.com/story.php?id=22313

U.S. district courts have gone both ways on the issue of whether mere "linking" to an infringing source is a copyright infringement that may be enjoined under DMCA.

There is a somewhat strong argument that simple linking does violate the DMCA's anti-circumvention provisions, particularly if the link leads to the source material being copied on the RAM of your computer.

Yet, there is an equally compelling argument that a link to a general blog with some infringing material does not necessarily lead to an infringement. And that barring such links infringes upon Constitutional speech rights.

I would advise you not to link directly to copyrighted material on VS such as distributing the direct links to the infringing documentaries, but merely provide helpful search terms to locate the blogs so that each individual may make their own decision.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

That example you give Ant is pretty blatant infringement. He is linking *only* to copyrighted complete commercial TV shows, nicely ordered by seasons. It's a bit harder to make a defense for that one.

Thank god I live in a country more concerned with spying on it's population, than enforcing the archaic IP laws of corporate entities (a good example being the refusing of extending music Copyright beyond 50 years).

As far as I know, the legality issue resides soley with the legal department of the original host, IE: YouTube/GoogleVideo is entirely responsible, under our (mine and DeputyDog's) legal system. Therefore any links (such as this blog) is entirely legitimate...as it's linking to content which isn't under their own control (it isn't an offence to not report copyright issues...) - if it was, we'd all be guilty by default (whether we know the intricacies of it's law or not!)

What Benjee said.

DailyMotion seems to be a haven for shady content - full episodes of shows/movies..

winkler1: Yeah, and FOX is trying to take them down.