Back from the dead! Take THAT, Viacom!

>> ^Skeeve:

Hank is his brother; they take turns posting videos to their YouTube channel "Vlogbrothers".
<div><div style="margin: 10px; overflow: auto; width: 80%; float: left; position: relative;" class="convoPiece"> EmptyFriend said:<img style="margin: 4px 10px 10px; float: left; width: 40px;" src="http://static1.videosift.com/avatars/e/EmptyFriend-s.jpg" onerror="ph(this)"><div style="position: absolute; margin-left: 52px; padding-top: 1px; font-size: 10px;" class="commentarrow">◄</div><div style="padding: 8px; margin-left: 60px; margin-top: 2px; min-height: 30px;" class="nestedComment box">Who is this guy talking to? Hank?
</div></div></div>
I thought it was like when Earnest calls me "Vern"

I hate you with the white hot intensity of a thousand suns.

In reply to this comment by blankfist:
Viacom has an official statement on the matter, and it ain't pretty!

Watch here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ

JoCo sez:

"Oops - turns out I gave iFilm permission to post flickr in 06 before they were Spike.com. Viacom does not owe me $37. Sorry Viacom!"

http://twitter.com/jonathancoulton/status/15804884261

Your video, Viacom Owes Jonathan Coulton 37 Dollars, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

>> ^Kevlar:

>> ^Gabe_b:
>> ^blankfist:
Viacom has an official statement on the matter, and it ain't pretty!
Watch here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ

Apparently the content of that video is far to valuable for us non-consumers in South Korea to view. Anyone care to summarize?

We're no strangers to love...
You know the rules, and so - do - I.
LOL, ok thx

>> ^Gabe_b:

>> ^blankfist:
Viacom has an official statement on the matter, and it ain't pretty!
Watch here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ

Apparently the content of that video is far to valuable for us non-consumers in South Korea to view. Anyone care to summarize?


We're no strangers to love...
You know the rules, and so - do - I.

>> ^blankfist:

Viacom has an official statement on the matter, and it ain't pretty!
Watch here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ


Apparently the content of that video is far too valuable for us non-consumers in South Korea to view. Anyone care to summarize?

>> ^blankfist:

Viacom has an official statement on the matter, and it ain't pretty!
Watch here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ


Well played.

Viacom has an official statement on the matter, and it ain't pretty!

Watch here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ

>> ^ctrlaltbleach:

Anyone see the comment about how he gave accidental permission to Viacom without even knowing it? How nice for Viacom legal loopholes are the shit right?


Nope, can't find it. Could you reproduce it on this site, perhaps?

Anyone see the comment about how he gave accidental permission to Viacom without even knowing it? How nice for Viacom legal loopholes are the shit right?

It turns out that this video was actually found a short while later on Viacom's Spike.com covered in ads. Viacom owes John Green 60 cents.

They might follow up on their threat to sue Viacom.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCBLmhh2qPE

Hank is his brother; they take turns posting videos to their YouTube channel "Vlogbrothers".
>> ^EmptyFriend:

Who is this guy talking to? Hank?

>> ^cybrbeast:

I highly doubt if it's fair to blame Matt Stone and Trey Parker from South Park for caving in. I think Viacom wouldn't allow them to air the episode like they wanted to. Also I doubt they had anything to do with the take-down notice, because they have said from the start they don't mind people using their stuff, only Viacom does.


I don't think he's blaming Stone and Parker, I understood it as 1/10 because Viacom employed them, otherwise it would have been 0/10. His comment was a bit vague though and I could see how it could also be interpreted from your angle as well.